What will happen if this congestion continues - page 2.

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: Who is John Galt? on May 12, 2023, 03:53:16 AM

In another topic, it was proposed to introduce a quota for old payments so that they are included in the block, regardless of the size of the commission. But what if we introduce a quota not for old payments, but for Ordinals? Aren't they typical transactions? We can, perhaps, allocate a quota for them, let's say, in the same 25%, over which they can only be the last in line.

We can't reliably identify what exactly is an Ordinals transaction and what is not because with all the different ways of storing junk data inside a Taproot output, the format of what an Ordinal might look like can mutate like a virus strain.

The only way to avoid something like that is to impose a quota on ALL transactions involving Taproot outputs, which is not ideal at all.

bettercrypto

sr. member

Activity: 1358

Merit: 268

★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!

As for what's happening now, if I compare it to last week, it's pretty good in terms of fees. Unlike last week, the fees are a headache because of the spam transactions made by ordinals and brc20.

At least somehow, we can breathe a little easier. Unlike for the past few days ago, there was really exploitation due to the hype of the ordinals and that brc20, now their hype is over, so the fees are gradually decreasing for each of our bitcoin transactions.

Renampun

sr. member

Activity: 2324

Merit: 362

★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!

Quote from: serveria.com on May 10, 2023, 03:44:45 PM

Quote from: Oshosondy on May 09, 2023, 03:15:30 PM

Ordinals Inscriptions is the cause of increase in mempool congestion. After Ordinals NFT, there is now ways to create fungible tokens called BRC-20 which led to the more in the rise of mempool congestion. BRC-20 marketcap has surpass $1 billion.

Some people call it another scam. But during the days when Ethereum blockchain started ERC20 and ERC721 (NFTs), some people were saying that it is the beginning of scam. Yes many people were scammed and many people lost money, but there are many of these altcoins tokens that are surving now.

The mempool is far from getting less congested. Bitcoin transaction fee is too much and becoming unbearable.

What do you think can solve what is happening? How can the mempool become not congested again. More miners needed or what?

Ban ordinals and BRC20 and any other NFT/non-financial data on blockchain. Some of my customers already contacted me saying they can't pay me because of the ridiculous fees. They have to pay in fees more than the invoice sum on some occasions. Everything depends solely on core devs now. Just let me remind you that inaction (not only action) also can be an offense. If you see some crime or attack going on and refuse to prevent it you can be called a criminal as well.

it's up to people what to say, but I 1000% support the btc dev must be banned all kinds of tokens / NFTs that ride on the bitcoin network (such as vitalik which offers a smart contract feature on bitcoin) if congestion continues to occur the impact will be bad for bitcoin in the future ahead, just imagine in el salvador, people start using bitcoin as a transaction but is it fair if they are required to pay a fee of $ 10 for the coffee or food they buy.

pooya87

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 10611

Quote from: darkv0rt3x on May 12, 2023, 06:24:39 AM

Seems that this opinion is not shared among all devs, right? Like, who considers this an attack and/or an exploit and who doesn't.
Also, who sees a fix as a censorship move and who doesn't. In my view, this is an exploit and as with any other software, exploits needs to be fixed.

I believe everyone considers this an exploit considering that it was created because of an oversight in the Taproot implementation. There is nothing to dispute there. But some don't consider this an attack which in my opinion is weird considering that when someone exploits a protocol and abuses it, that's the literal definition of an attack Tongue

Who is John Galt?

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 280

Quote from: Stalker22 on May 12, 2023, 03:21:28 PM

Quote from: Who is John Galt? on May 12, 2023, 03:53:16 AM

In another topic, it was proposed to introduce a quota for old payments so that they are included in the block, regardless of the size of the commission. But what if we introduce a quota not for old payments, but for Ordinals? Aren't they typical transactions? We can, perhaps, allocate a quota for them, let's say, in the same 25%, over which they can only be the last in line.

While I agree that a quota system could be a potential solution, there are a few things to consider. First, implementing a quota system for Ordinals could create a backlog of other types of transactions that are also important for the network. There could be potential issues with determining what qualifies as an Ordinal transaction and how to allocate the quota fairly.

Another challenge would be to achieve a consensus among all miners regarding this matter. Given that transaction fees are a significant source of income for them, it is unlikely that they would be open to any efforts to limit or regulate them. Perhaps incentivizing miners in other ways, such as rewarding them for including a certain number of low-fee transactions in each block, could be a potential solution. However, I do not know where to get the funds for such a reward.

It seems to me that miners are also interested in the stable operation of the network, and ever-increasing fees will only lead to an increase in the requirements for the amount of computing equipment that they need. Therefore, I think they are also interested in the balance, so that there is an interest in commissions, and most of the usual payments also take place in a reasonable time.

Z-tight

hero member

Activity: 854

Merit: 1031

Only BTC

Quote from: WillyAp on May 12, 2023, 04:15:41 PM

People will find a way around it using other coins.
As always Litecoin wins, even with faster coins like USTD. Due to the higher fees and being a subchained coin.

If people want to use other coins, it is a free market. If transaction fees can make one choose shitcoins over BTC, then they are weak hands, and the fewer weak hands in the network, the better for the long term. I would rather hold and use BTC even if i have to pay a few more Satoshis as transaction fees, than hold a centralized stable coin that can even be frozen in my own wallet.

WillyAp

member

Activity: 672

Merit: 16

Looking for guilt best look first into a mirror

People will find a way around it using other coins.
As always Litecoin wins, even with faster coins like USTD. Due to the higher fees and being a subchained coin.

Stalker22

legendary

Activity: 1526

Merit: 1359

Quote from: Who is John Galt? on May 12, 2023, 03:53:16 AM

Quote from: Stalker22 on May 09, 2023, 04:01:55 PM

From my understanding, the only way miners can help is by not prioritizing transactions solely based on the transaction fees, but I doubt that will ever happen.

In another topic, it was proposed to introduce a quota for old payments so that they are included in the block, regardless of the size of the commission. But what if we introduce a quota not for old payments, but for Ordinals? Aren't they typical transactions? We can, perhaps, allocate a quota for them, let's say, in the same 25%, over which they can only be the last in line.

While I agree that a quota system could be a potential solution, there are a few things to consider. First, implementing a quota system for Ordinals could create a backlog of other types of transactions that are also important for the network. There could be potential issues with determining what qualifies as an Ordinal transaction and how to allocate the quota fairly.

Another challenge would be to achieve a consensus among all miners regarding this matter. Given that transaction fees are a significant source of income for them, it is unlikely that they would be open to any efforts to limit or regulate them. Perhaps incentivizing miners in other ways, such as rewarding them for including a certain number of low-fee transactions in each block, could be a potential solution. However, I do not know where to get the funds for such a reward.

suzanne5223

hero member

Activity: 2646

Merit: 651

Want top-notch marketing for your project, Hire me

Quote from: tromp on May 11, 2023, 02:16:34 AM

Quote from: suzanne5223 on May 10, 2023, 08:30:07 PM

without doing the right analysis if it will lead to the congestion of the BTC network.

Remember that congestion is the end-goal for Bitcoin in a future with insignificant block subsidy, which is only a few decades away.

An uncongested blockchain will never raise enough fees to provide decent security and be subject to cheap 51% attacks. So a fee market must develop where people fight for the right to have their transaction processed swiftly.

So before long, congestion must be celebrated rather than criticized. It's crucial for Bitcoin's long term future.

Or any PoW coin with a capped supply. Which is why I think Bitcoin Cash is doomed long term. It would take an insane amount of low fee (a fraction of a cent) transactions to pay for their security when their subsify effectively runs out. Their current tx volume of ~10k/day provides under $100 in fees.

You have a point about the congested network providing some sort of decent security in terms of 51% attack but excess of everything will lead to something unhealthy.
Having said that, I was talking about the situation where it's affecting the price of the Bitcoin market cause people are switching to alternative means of making payments. I also hate the fact that I make payments for my internet network which is 0.001BTC and I have to pay 0.0013BTC for a fast transaction fee and you're telling me to celebrate that? Of course, I am celebrating.

Findingnemo

hero member

Activity: 2310

Merit: 757

Bitcoin = Financial freedom

Quote from: hugeblack on May 12, 2023, 07:00:24 AM

I don't know, but the bet that block congestion will continues is a losing bet. The only thing that developed the NFT technology is the cheapness of the fees. No one will pay $140 to upload a photo, and he does not guarantee that he will sell it ---> projects will not continue like this for a long time.

The bad side of the story is that we will not go back to those low fees soon, as we will not see, for example, fees less than 10 sat/vb, and therefore the use of bitcoin for daily payments will be the problem.
There are solutions to this problem, such as the Lightning Network, but solutions such as Hardfork, due to the increase in fees, is similar to increasing block size, which has proven to be a failed solution.

In short, let the economy talk and you'll see fees stabilizing soon.

The number of those spam transactions gradually decreasing in just a week hopefully it won't be a big issue to concern that is Bitcoin ordinals, the one who hyped the brc20 is on the losing side now. As you said LN is the only option for now to transaction Bitcoin cheaper or else have to wait until it correct after this chaos ends.

Increasing the block size limit can be solution too cause in future if there are actually more incoming btc transactions because of more people started to use Bitcoin and by that time if we have same mempool congestion then it act as a barrier for further growth of Bitcoin.

hugeblack

legendary

Activity: 2506

Merit: 3645

Buy/Sell crypto at BestChange

I don't know, but the bet that block congestion will continues is a losing bet. The only thing that developed the NFT technology is the cheapness of the fees. No one will pay $140 to upload a photo, and he does not guarantee that he will sell it ---> projects will not continue like this for a long time.

The bad side of the story is that we will not go back to those low fees soon, as we will not see, for example, fees less than 10 sat/vb, and therefore the use of bitcoin for daily payments will be the problem.
There are solutions to this problem, such as the Lightning Network, but solutions such as Hardfork, due to the increase in fees, is similar to increasing block size, which has proven to be a failed solution.

In short, let the economy talk and you'll see fees stabilizing soon.

darkv0rt3x

hero member

Activity: 1232

Merit: 666

I rather die on my feet than to live on my knees

Quote from: tromp on May 11, 2023, 02:16:34 AM

Quote from: suzanne5223 on May 10, 2023, 08:30:07 PM

without doing the right analysis if it will lead to the congestion of the BTC network.

Remember that congestion is the end-goal for Bitcoin in a future with insignificant block subsidy, which is only a few decades away.

An uncongested blockchain will never raise enough fees to provide decent security and be subject to cheap 51% attacks. So a fee market must develop where people fight for the right to have their transaction processed swiftly.

I'm not sure "congestion/congested" is the most appropriate wording. Congestion, in a very simplistic way means that something is not working as it should. Something working now, but not working in the moment after. And then working again and later not working again.
In traffic, congestion is not good. Flow without congestion is good. I think the same can be applied here. Mempool full but not congested. A little bit before congestion!

Of course that empty mempool is not good either, but it's the mid term we need to seek and this Ordinals and BRC-20 and ORC-20 are congesting the mempool which in my opinion is not good.

Quote from: pooya87 on May 12, 2023, 12:32:05 AM

It is a scam but that's not even the thing people are arguing about.
All the problems that the Ordinals Attack is creating is because they are abusing Bitcoin and are exploiting the protocol.
As I've said many times in the past, even if people were using Ordinals to store cure for cancer on bitcoin blockchain, Ordinals still would be considered a malicious attack.

Seems that this opinion is not shared among all devs, right? Like, who considers this an attack and/or an exploit and who doesn't.
Also, who sees a fix as a censorship move and who doesn't. In my view, this is an exploit and as with any other software, exploits needs to be fixed.

Who is John Galt?

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 280

Quote from: Stalker22 on May 09, 2023, 04:01:55 PM

From my understanding, the only way miners can help is by not prioritizing transactions solely based on the transaction fees, but I doubt that will ever happen.

In another topic, it was proposed to introduce a quota for old payments so that they are included in the block, regardless of the size of the commission. But what if we introduce a quota not for old payments, but for Ordinals? Aren't they typical transactions? We can, perhaps, allocate a quota for them, let's say, in the same 25%, over which they can only be the last in line.

pooya87

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 10611

Quote from: Oshosondy on May 09, 2023, 03:15:30 PM

After Ordinals NFT, there is now ways to create fungible tokens called BRC-20

To be clear you can NOT create any kind of tokens on Bitcoin blockchain. The protocol simply doesn't support that. Any other alternative centralized network can decides to interpret any of the bitcoin transactions in any way they like.

Quote from: bittraffic on May 09, 2023, 05:04:58 PM

~~ there are altcoins cheaper and faster.

I disagree with this part for a couple of reasons:
1- Altcoins are only cheaper because nobody uses them and their price is very low. As a matter of fact if usage of majority of them increased by a small percentage (a tenth of bitcoin usage increase) their fees would rise a lot more than bitcoin's.
2. They are not faster. Most of them produce more blocks per 10 minutes on average but that doesn't make them "fast" simply because they don't provide the same level of security. In simple terms 1 bitcoin confirmation is usually equal to tens of confirmation on an altcoin chain and in some cases tens of thousands and in a couple of case no matter how many confirmations you get on that altcoin chain it will never be secure (due to being centralized or having mutable blockchains).

Synchronice

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 792

Watch Bitcoin Documentary - https://t.ly/v0Nim

Today I spent some hours to truly understand what is ordinal NFT and how it spams bitcoin blockchain. If anyone wants to understand it, here it is: https://docs.ordinals.com/introduction.html
If I want to inscribe an ordinal NFT, I can visit gamma.io. I tried that, uploaded an 50kb image and it costs me around $143 with 60 sat/vB and $250 if I sent it with 107 sat/vByte that is a high priority fee according to mempool.space

So, people were paying almost ten times more these days in these NFTs but there is a thing that I don't understand. Why does someone pay money to create an NFT and why does someone really buy an NFT? If you want an image, just take a screen and that's all. I don't really understand why someone pays millions of dollars to get a status of official holder of ape that's draw in pixels? I just don't get it, is there something magic behind NFT? What's the purpose to buy them, to just pay hundreds of dollars to create meaningless thing? And then someone buys this meaningless thing. I don't really get it, I couldn't really imagine that bitcoin blockchain would get flooded by a group of people who pay tons of money to create the dumbest thing and they have people around them who pay tons of money to buy the dumbest thing.

Flexystar

full member

Activity: 1092

Merit: 227

Have you seen ERC20 and it’s historical progress. It was highly congested, and there was literally no limit to the number of coins that were getting added every time on the blockchain. The gas fees was so high it used to take days for the single confirmation even if you had paid the desired gas fees. This was the major reason behind ETH got upgraded and they literally switched from PoW to PoS.

I am not sure if same is possible with the bitcoin or not but bitcoin should not be changed. The scam projects like Ordinals and NFT should be taken down. But again since we are in the decentralised world we can not touch it as long as every investor ignore the ordinals.

Sad to see blockchain getting burdened with such projects.

tromp

legendary

Activity: 984

Merit: 1091

Quote from: suzanne5223 on May 10, 2023, 08:30:07 PM

without doing the right analysis if it will lead to the congestion of the BTC network.

Remember that congestion is the end-goal for Bitcoin in a future with insignificant block subsidy, which is only a few decades away.

An uncongested blockchain will never raise enough fees to provide decent security and be subject to cheap 51% attacks. So a fee market must develop where people fight for the right to have their transaction processed swiftly.

So before long, congestion must be celebrated rather than criticized. It's crucial for Bitcoin's long term future.

Or any PoW coin with a capped supply. Which is why I think Bitcoin Cash is doomed long term. It would take an insane amount of low fee (a fraction of a cent) transactions to pay for their security when their subsify effectively runs out. Their current tx volume of ~10k/day provides under $100 in fees.

suzanne5223

hero member

Activity: 2646

Merit: 651

Want top-notch marketing for your project, Hire me

I don't much about the team behind the Bitcoin Ordinals protocol but I wonder what they are trying to prove and why they choose to create a protocol that enables the minting of NFT on the Bitcoin blockchain because no one has done it before without doing the right analysis if it will lead to the congestion of the BTC network.
I would like the idea if it doesn't lead to negative effects on the BTC blockchain since the idea was not to create something innovative but something that will impact the price and transaction of BTC.

Quote from: bittraffic on May 09, 2023, 05:04:58 PM

who knows the government may be behind all this.

I supported your opinion because no dev that wants the progress of BTC will choose to create a project that makes BTC users seek alternatives for transactions due to fees.

TryNinja

legendary

Activity: 2758

Merit: 6830

Quote from: bitmover on May 10, 2023, 05:33:16 PM

I believe consensus rules are being exploited now.

At some point the network will be forked with new consensus rules which will not allow those ordinals to do that , which are only spamming the bitocin network.

Everything will be back to normal. There is not need to panic, imo.

Hi, bitmover. Since you suggested that I should debate this over here...

Could you explain how the consensus rules are being exploited and which changes to the consensus rules will or should not allow the ordinals to work?

And since the Bitcoin network is free and open, one could argue that there is no spamming. If people are willing to pay to have a shitcoin inserted into the global network of nodes that we call Bitcoin, shouldn't they? If you think otherwise, please let me know why.

I'll wait, read and answer your inquiries/points, thanks!

edit: nevermind, read his last post on the Portuguese board and it's full of ad hominem. He doesn't want a debate.

tromp

legendary

Activity: 984

Merit: 1091

Quote from: serveria.com on May 10, 2023, 03:44:45 PM

Ban ordinals and BRC20 and any other NFT/non-financial data on blockchain.

This is as silly a thing to say as people imploring the government to "ban bitcoin" because they don't like it.

Bitcoin is is designed to be ban-proof. You can harass the onramps and off-ramps but you can't stop bitcoin
itself in its tracks.

Similarly, ordinals are pretty ban-proof. By the time you get a significant fraction of nodes to try filter them out from the mempool, they have already adopted a different encoding scheme bypassing the filter. The more you filter, the more ordinals encoding will become indistinguishable from financial transactions, and the more collateral damage you cause. In the worst case, they will just use fake output addresses for embedding data.
That may be a little less efficient but at these fee levels they're willing to pay it obviously doesn't matter much.

Not only is there no plausible approach to banning them from the mempool, but doing so wouldn't even suffice. Miners are very keen on processing these transactions which raise overall fee levels. So they'll make it easy to have these transactions routed directly to them.

So please stop with the knee-jerk proposals without thinking things through...

Topic: What will happen if this congestion continues - page 2. (Read 485 times)