Why did this transaction confirm? - page 2.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: amaclin on July 08, 2014, 10:00:23 AM

There are a lot of dust and spam transactions in the blockchain. We should live with them and think about future, not about past

Well the pool operator decided to include the txn not the individual miners. Miners have a right to use another pool. If they agree with the decision to include this txn well they obviously wouldn't change pools would they. However if they don't agree with that stupid decision then they are free to use a pool they find more responsible.

Quote

There are a lot of dust and spam transactions in the blockchain. We should live with them and think about future, not about past

That is the whole point isn't it. Most of the dust in the UTXO (forget the blockchain the critical resource is the UTXO) is from BEFORE the dust limits. Since the dust limits were put in place most miners intentionally DO NOT include these dust outputs because they are unspendable and they will bloat the UTXO and increase the cost of all nodes forever. So it is thinking about the future. Miners who don't want to see the UTXO bloated IN THE FUTURE should probably choose another pool. Right?

amaclin

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1019

Quote

If you don't like this then really there are only two things you can do:
a) if you are a miner, then boycott bcpool.io as they are either idiots of malicious.

Slow down, man. The miner had a right to mine this transaction. And the whole bitcoin network agreed that block is valid.
There are a lot of dust and spam transactions in the blockchain. We should live with them and think about future, not about past

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

As pointed out dust is allowed. That miner just massively bloated the UTXO and those outputs will very likely never be spent. The protocol tries to make this difficult by making dust non-standard and it assumes that miners are at least moderately intelligent. Miners have to parse the UTXO to verify txn so including this dusty garbage only makes their future work more difficult. In a logical world with rational miners wouldn't be cutting their own throat.

You may want to ask bcpool.io why they included this txn knowing that nobody will ever use those outputs and thus they will bloat the UTXO (increasing memory pressure for every node both now and in the future) probably for perpetuity. Are they malicious or are they just ignorant and still feel competent enough to run a pool?

If you don't like this then really there are only two things you can do:
a) if you are a miner, then boycott bcpool.io as they are either idiots of malicious. If they have no hashpower they can't mine any more stupid txns.
b) Push to make txn with outputs below the dust limit invalid. This would be a hard fork but it could be done. One option would be to have a lower threshold for valid. i.e. min fee is 10,000 satoshis, dust limit is 5,430 sat, valid limit is 543 sat (1/10th dust limit).

gmaxwell

staff

Activity: 4284

Merit: 8808

Quote from: Satosh¡ Slot on July 08, 2014, 08:47:31 AM

Yes, but I saw earlier transactions take a long time to be included in a block and blockchain lists this as received and included in a block at the same time. So I guess it had problems being brodcasted properly, but still got included in a block? Or was it mined the same minute it was created?

The times reported on bc.i are just whenever they saw it. Because this is a dust transaction that wouldn't have generally been relayed (and because bc.i themselves suppress these when unconfirmed) it wouldn't have been seen by bc.i until it ended up in a block.

Satosh¡ Slot

full member

Activity: 164

Merit: 100

Indie Developer

Quote from: amaclin on July 08, 2014, 07:29:04 AM

Quote

Re: Why did this transaction confirm?

1) because it is valid
2) because one of miners decided to include it to a block

Yes, but I saw earlier transactions take a long time to be included in a block and blockchain lists this as received and included in a block at the same time. So I guess it had problems being brodcasted properly, but still got included in a block? Or was it mined the same minute it was created?

gmaxwell

staff

Activity: 4284

Merit: 8808

I've already nagged the miner in question about the wad of dust floods they just mined.

If you've received some of this 1e-8 dust to a bitcoin-core wallet, https://github.com/petertodd/dust-b-gone is a good way to get rid of it.

amaclin

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1019

Quote

Re: Why did this transaction confirm?

1) because it is valid
2) because one of miners decided to include it to a block

Quote

Isn't the 1 satoshi outputs present in this transaction supposed to be considered dust?

Dust outputs are allowed. Standard clients disallows to send dust values without fees, but this transaction was not created by standard client, but some kind of bot-software

Quote

The transaction fee is only 0.0001 for a 26kb transaction, it appears very low so I assume this transaction had very low priority.

Yes. But if you are miner you are able to put in block whatever you want while it is valid.
Another way - is to find a miner with old (but still not obsolete) software

Satosh¡ Slot

full member

Activity: 164

Merit: 100

Indie Developer

https://blockchain.info/tx/ee61b911610f66f539832699fbbf4ab3955c8bd5ad0cfa570ff500dedcde5bf8

Isn't the 1 satoshi outputs present in this transaction supposed to be considered dust?

The transaction fee is only 0.0001 for a 26kb transaction, it appears very low so I assume this transaction had very low priority.

What am I missing?

Topic: Why did this transaction confirm? - page 2. (Read 2623 times)