Pages:
Author

Topic: You Mad Bro? - page 3. (Read 3350 times)

legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
February 19, 2016, 10:11:37 PM
#53
How is it unyielding when they are increasing blocksize via segwit soft-fork,

many people and devs would prefer no increases now (because they are not really needed despite FUD) but they compromised.

They said it themselves segwits capacity increase is a side effect, the segwit SOFT-FORK is so complex they couldn't anticipate this side effect until someone spent weeks implementing it. 

the point here isnt so much 1MB limit, its the idea that Core has no intention, infact intent NOT to scale the main chain.
sr. member
Activity: 294
Merit: 250
February 19, 2016, 10:00:20 PM
#52
How is it unyielding when they are increasing blocksize via segwit soft-fork,

many people and devs would prefer no increases now (because they are not really needed despite FUD) but they compromised.

Central committee decided no needed bigger blocksize limit  Roll Eyes.

This is another FED or new decentralized currency where free market decides its future and not a centralized organization Huh
sr. member
Activity: 277
Merit: 257
February 19, 2016, 09:41:41 PM
#51
How is it unyielding when they are increasing blocksize via segwit soft-fork,

many people and devs would prefer no increases now (because they are not really needed despite FUD) but they compromised.
sr. member
Activity: 294
Merit: 250
February 19, 2016, 09:26:12 PM
#50
we are at maximum capacity and two more months of stagnation, there's your road map!
Wrong. We are definitely not at maximum capacity. Take a look at the last 30 blocks. If I have counted this correctly (up to block 399230), there have been only 16 blocks that could be considered full (900kb+). There is still adequate room to deploy solutions. Classic is a joke. Gavin insists on a very foolish and short grace period. Even Garzik is suggesting a 3 to 6 month grace period. You can't deploy a HF with proper rules as quickly as you can deploy Segwit (if it arrives in April).

Miners are free to set small size of blocks, so if someone preffer small blocks you cant do anything with this. What matters is at peak times transaction backlog of not spam transactions goes up. Fortunatelly at off peak times transaction backlog tend to clear slowly so far, but if Bitcoin adoption continues it wont be this way for long and the people experience with Bitcoin transactions can only get worse.
The problem is miners cannot make block bigger even if they preffer with these benefits: 1) collect more fees 2) make people experience with Bitcoin much better with faster 1st confirmations

Without any Core plan when and how to increase blocksize limit, it is pretty shame to argue with "You can't deploy a HF with proper rules as quickly as you can deploy Segwit". Because it seems Core doesnt see the problem what happens when more people try to use Bitcoin than is even possible to serve - thats why there is no HF plan and no panic about the transaction backlogs - so my question is: just stupidity or plan to hurt Bitcoin?
 

BTW who is on the OP picture, because to me it looks like one of the controversial Core dev PT, but I might be wrong
full member
Activity: 154
Merit: 100
February 19, 2016, 07:20:50 PM
#49
There's no such thing as proper fee, even if everyone paid 1 bitcoin as fee there's simple not enough room, a good percentage of transactions will take hours or days to confirm, plus no more growth,
Yes there is. If you include a fee that is smaller than the recommended fee then you risk the transaction not being included in the first blocks. You can't blame Bitcoin for this. Usually when people complain about transactions that take a unusually long time, it is because of an low fee (or worse: no fee at all).

Dude, this is not rocket science, if you have 10 spots and the cost is 1 to fill a spot and you have 100 people paying 1 there's still only 10 spots available, if 50 people pay 2 to get a spot still 10 spots available, if 30 pay 3, still 10 spots, it means there's always 90 people waiting, it doesn't matter how big the fee is.

I think he would argue that all but the top 10 "blind auction winners" are poors, thus spam, thus don't deserve to be included in the block.
If you want to make sure that your tx is included, make your fee astronomically high, which would probably, albeit not certainly, guarantee that your tx will be included in the next block.
Not like boring fiat money, more like gambling.
legendary
Activity: 2786
Merit: 1031
February 19, 2016, 06:51:52 PM
#48
There's no such thing as proper fee, even if everyone paid 1 bitcoin as fee there's simple not enough room, a good percentage of transactions will take hours or days to confirm, plus no more growth,
Yes there is. If you include a fee that is smaller than the recommended fee then you risk the transaction not being included in the first blocks. You can't blame Bitcoin for this. Usually when people complain about transactions that take a unusually long time, it is because of an low fee (or worse: no fee at all).

Dude, this is not rocket science, if you have 10 spots and the cost is 1 to fill a spot and you have 100 people paying 1 there's still only 10 spots available, if 50 people pay 2 to get a spot still 10 spots available, if 30 pay 3, still 10 spots, it means there's always 90 people waiting, it doesn't matter how big the fee is.

we are at maximum capacity and two more months of stagnation, there's your road map!
Wrong. We are definitely not at maximum capacity. Take a look at the last 30 blocks. If I have counted this correctly (up to block 399230), there have been only 16 blocks that could be considered full (900kb+). There is still adequate room to deploy solutions. Classic is a joke. Gavin insists on a very foolish and short grace period. Even Garzik is suggesting a 3 to 6 month grace period. You can't deploy a HF with proper rules as quickly as you can deploy Segwit (if it arrives in April).

And if bitcoin never scales it will be always like that, because people will stop using it because the system is not reliable.

Like I said, damage is already done, block size increase should have happened months ago, people wanted to show who's in charge by pushing their way no matter the cost, it's done, they're the bosses now, good for them.

BTW, transaction fees are actually lower now, the struggle is for fast confirmations because there's no space in blocks.

https://chain.btc.com/en/stats/fee
legendary
Activity: 888
Merit: 1000
Monero - secure, private and untraceable currency.
February 19, 2016, 06:46:11 PM
#47
Well I'm a Bitcoin newbie, but I'm getting pissed off by the stroppy 2Mb people who are trying to force an apparently simplistic solution that isn't needed yet. I have yet to see a compelling argument that provides a justification for an immediate blocksize increase.

god help you
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
February 19, 2016, 06:40:43 PM
#46
There's no such thing as proper fee, even if everyone paid 1 bitcoin as fee there's simple not enough room, a good percentage of transactions will take hours or days to confirm, plus no more growth,
Yes there is. If you include a fee that is smaller than the recommended fee then you risk the transaction not being included in the first blocks. You can't blame Bitcoin for this. Usually when people complain about transactions that take a unusually long time, it is because of an low fee (or worse: no fee at all).

we are at maximum capacity and two more months of stagnation, there's your road map!
Wrong. We are definitely not at maximum capacity. Take a look at the last 30 blocks. If I have counted this correctly (up to block 399230), there have been only 16 blocks that could be considered full (900kb+). There is still adequate room to deploy solutions. Classic is a joke. Gavin insists on a very foolish and short grace period. Even Garzik is suggesting a 3 to 6 month grace period. You can't deploy a HF with proper rules as quickly as you can deploy Segwit (if it arrives in April).
hero member
Activity: 1022
Merit: 538
February 19, 2016, 06:33:32 PM
#45

Deal with it
Very true. A lot of people don't understand this though. They think you can just change Bitcoin with a click of a button.
legendary
Activity: 2786
Merit: 1031
February 19, 2016, 06:32:45 PM
#44
If everyone had an IT degree I'll be out of work.

You shouldn't and you can't expect everyone to spend hours learning how some particular system works, if it was like that Linux would be a fraction as big as it is and bitcoin would be restricted to a small highly skilled community.
So you're telling me that one needs an IT degree to be able to include the proper fee? Roll Eyes I never talked about understanding the system in detail which the majority does not need to know (and they don't). If you want it really simple, use Bitcoin Core and push the fee slider to the right and keep it there. It is as simple as that. The last time that I've used this setting for a transaction the fee was about ~10 cents.

There's no such thing as proper fee, even if everyone paid 1 bitcoin as fee there's simple not enough room, a good percentage of transactions will take hours or days to confirm, plus no more growth, we are at maximum capacity and two more months of stagnation, there's your road map!
sr. member
Activity: 294
Merit: 250
February 19, 2016, 03:35:54 PM
#43
Hmm, how big of a backlog does warrant attention?  Perhaps we should focus on confirmation times?

So far backlogs are cleared when the number of new transactions drops under 3/s, but we are on the edge of Bitcoin useability. If Bitcoin continues getting new users thus increased transactions per second, it will become very hard and inconvient to use Bitcoin - unconfirmed transactions become common problem and average times to get 1st confirmation will increase.

I wonder whether Bitcoin Core developers just want move users out of Bitcoin to other alts, or they have no clue of basic economy principes. Either way, it does not look good for Bitcoin in short term, unless people wake up whats going on here.
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
February 19, 2016, 03:29:14 PM
#42
~50% are pissed

legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1002
February 19, 2016, 03:25:58 PM
#41
lmao, the poll's results.. Grin Grin





~not tonight dear...
newbie
Activity: 33
Merit: 0
February 19, 2016, 03:22:13 PM
#40
That's double the amount of coins! Cool
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
February 19, 2016, 02:41:25 PM
#38
If everyone had an IT degree I'll be out of work.

You shouldn't and you can't expect everyone to spend hours learning how some particular system works, if it was like that Linux would be a fraction as big as it is and bitcoin would be restricted to a small highly skilled community.
So you're telling me that one needs an IT degree to be able to include the proper fee? Roll Eyes I never talked about understanding the system in detail which the majority does not need to know (and they don't). If you want it really simple, use Bitcoin Core and push the fee slider to the right and keep it there. It is as simple as that. The last time that I've used this setting for a transaction the fee was about ~10 cents.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

there you go problem solved.  right!?
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
February 19, 2016, 02:37:46 PM
#37
If everyone had an IT degree I'll be out of work.

You shouldn't and you can't expect everyone to spend hours learning how some particular system works, if it was like that Linux would be a fraction as big as it is and bitcoin would be restricted to a small highly skilled community.
So you're telling me that one needs an IT degree to be able to include the proper fee? Roll Eyes I never talked about understanding the system in detail which the majority does not need to know (and they don't). If you want it really simple, use Bitcoin Core and push the fee slider to the right and keep it there. It is as simple as that. The last time that I've used this setting for a transaction the fee was about ~10 cents.
legendary
Activity: 2786
Merit: 1031
February 19, 2016, 02:33:42 PM
#36
No. You can't blame the product (i.e. Bitcoin) because the user does not know how to use it (i.e. include proper fees). I've never had any problems with this.

If everyone had an IT degree I'll be out of work.

You shouldn't and you can't expect everyone to spend hours learning how some particular system works, if it was like that Linux would be a fraction as big as it is and bitcoin would be restricted to a small highly skilled community.

Aren't hoping for mass adoption?
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
February 19, 2016, 02:29:14 PM
#35
Hmm, how big of a backlog does warrant attention?
It really depends on multiple factors (e.g. how many of those are spam). I've seen it at around 10 000 and more and the network was not experiencing any issues. However, you'd need to ask someone who has been keeping track of this data for a while.

just wait till the backlog is much bigger
It was and now it really isn't. The backlog just keeps going up and down, nothing surprising there.

I can't be bothered with this shit anymore personally, I will just wait and see it become irrelevant like XT and the rest of hard fork attempts with coders that never did anything relevant for Bitcoin.
Exactly. Some of these posters are just really hopeless and time should not be wasted on them. Almost all of the developers behind the HF's so far have been barely contributing to Bitcoin Core in the recent times.

User experience is not fine, you can see the amount of post in these forums by new users when this happens.
No. You can't blame the product (i.e. Bitcoin) because the user does not know how to use it (i.e. include proper fees). I've never had any problems with this.
legendary
Activity: 2786
Merit: 1031
February 19, 2016, 02:27:52 PM
#34
With a backlog like that, shouldn't every block be full all the time until the backlog is processed?
I have no idea why you would complain about a backlog of 4000 transactions. We've seen much bigger backlogs in the past and everything was fine? However this is interesting:
Quote
Total Fees   64.31924776 BTC

User experience is not fine, you can see the amount of post in these forums by new users when this happens.

Bitcoin.org should be edited to "Fast peer-to-peer transactions sometimes" and "Low
processing fees sometimes".
Pages:
Jump to: