Block size limit controversy - Bitcoin Wiki

"To those arguing that Bitcoin Core fees are no longer "through the roof". It only reached this point because you destroyed your user base with an artificial 1MB block size limit. The data speaks for itself - transactions/block down to 2 year lows with dominance at all time lows."

submitted by MemoryDealers to btc [link] [comments]

"To those arguing that Bitcoin (BTC) fees are "through the roof". The 1MB block size limit has not destroyed the user base. The data speaks for itself - transactions/block recently hit ATH and dominance hasn't been higher since December, 2017.

The last year has been good for BTC.
Average number of transactions per block set a new ATH a little over a month ago.
BTC dominance by market cap has reached a level not seen since December of 2017.
Estimated hash rate just hit an all time high, surging above 70 EH/s. Difficulty just underwent one of the largest % increases in the modern era.
Fees remain a bit high but haven't yet reached the same rates as the 2014 bull run.
submitted by NotGonnaGetBanned to btc [link] [comments]

Bitcoin's 1MB Block Size Limit ‘Starting to Fade Away’, Data Shows

Bitcoin's 1MB Block Size Limit ‘Starting to Fade Away’, Data Shows submitted by Suberg to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin block size analysis using real data + future projection

Bitcoin block size analysis using real data + future projection submitted by ITwitchToo to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Data on Block Size Debate in /r/Bitcoin

UPDATE 5
SinnyCal has posted his own analysis...no data, just results and code. Self-proclaims he has "confirmed" sockpuppets but nearly everyone who was claimed to be one proves they aren't. Also he's weeks too late.
END
UPDATE 4
Bitcoin_Error_Log has paid the bounty! If everyone could give him a huge thank you, it'd be appreciated.
END
UPDATE 3
A new data set and analysis has arrived!
TL;DR: Same conclusion as me. No clear sockpuppeteering going on.
END
UPDATE 2
Since the Python pickle files were useless to everyone, I've uploaded a CSV of the 2nd run, and got rid of the first, since many people weren't happy with the amount of results.
There is also a CSV with 768 threads about block size from /Bitcoin.
You can find these in the Materials section.
Enjoy!
END
UPDATE
A second run was done. There are now 2467 suspects. Go to the bottom for code and data.
Difference from the first is we're no longer filtering by accounts from the last 6 months. We now track all accounts age pertaining to the submissions with certain keywords.
END
So because I'm not a statistician and I actually want this done properly for the greater good, I'm releasing the information I've scraped from this sub-reddit. Since each reddit comment take AT LEAST 1 second to fetch, it took like 12 hours to fetch the comment and submission data. More on that later.
Below is my methodology, links to code and data.
At first I wanted the whole she-bang of the bounty but I realized fuck it. Greed is going to fuck up results and we don't want that. I would be grateful to split the reward 50/50 with anyone or 3 ways or get ANYTHING for spending a day doing this.
I REPEAT THIS IS NOT AN ANALYSIS. I WANT YOU THE USERS OF /BITCOIN TO ANALYZE THE DATA FOR YOURSELVES.
I believe that's the only way we'll get a fair analysis.
Here we go!
Abstract:
As of writing there is a debate about increasing the size of blockchain blocks from 1MB to 20MB. /Bitcoin is a community on Reddit that acts as one of the many fronts of Bitcoin. There is suspicion that "astroturfing" or "sockpuppets" are being used to manipulate the readers of this sub-reddit. The goal of this analysis is to discover hints of manipulation occurring. A hybrid of automatic and manual data scrapping is used.
Method:
So the idea here is that if someone is using multiple accounts to upvote and comment, we'll see accounts with a high score but low presence. If the manipulator is trying to instill manipulation via commenting too, we should see many accounts with low presence and low score. Accounts are only tracked if their creation date is less than half a year ago today. There are no posts analyzed past June 10th 2015, the start date of the bounty.
Phase 1:
PRAW is used to fetch data from Reddit.
Every user is tracked for presence, score (both comments and posts), 1mb score and 20mb score.
Only submissions with "block size", "blocksize", "confirmation time", and "full block" are scraped.
Our sample size is approximately 1700 submissions, along with all their comments.
If the words "1" or "20" are mentioned in a post or comment, the counters for that user will increase by 1.
Phase 2:
After data has been scraped and sorted, we need users to check the users in the suspects list. Since a lot of data is still lost due to natural language, I think this is the next step to get more interesting data.
Limitations:
Reddit doesn't allow you to fetch data in a certain time frame. The only way to fetch data date-wise is to sort by "new", and then keep fetching data until you reach the date you want.
Our access to comments also significantly slows down the analyzing process, whereas to fetch 4000 or more submissions takes a fraction of time.
Issues:
I ran into a few issues while doing this. First was how the heck would I get the votes for a post? Well a user can publically expose what they up and down vote, but it is by default private, so that was a no go.
PRAW would also shit out on me because I was making too many requests to reddit or it would return something I totally didn't expect. After a few tries I got everything working though.
Lastly I didn't realize how much fucking time it would take. God it takes so long to scrape data from reddit. I was using one of my servers situated in New York so that definitely wasn't the problem - it was just reddit in general.
Material:
I've "signed" all the pastebin material with my BTC address. If you encounter a pastebin with the BTC address that DOESNT MATCH THE ONE IN THIS POST, IT HAS BEEN MODIFIED.
The data file material can't really be signed, but if it ever mysteriously goes down, comment and I can re-upload and update the link in this post. I've generated a SHA1 so you may verify.
Source code!
1st run: http://pastebin.com/KtkiTX8L
2nd run: http://pastebin.com/NqYKx5tH
Pretty printed data:
1st run: http://pastebin.com/w5G5v7U4
2nd run: http://pastebin.com/RsrQCqXX
CSV files for analysis:
1st run:
  • will generate upon request -
2nd run:
http://www.filedropper.com/suspects2
Block size threads:
http://www.filedropper.com/blocksizethreads_1
Early Conclusion
A quick glance at the data shows there appears to be no sockpuppet master or accounts. I trust the persistent users here in /Bitcoin will NOT TAKE MY WORD for it, and verify that.
A huge thanks to bitcoin_error_log for initiating a good bounty. This is how shit gets done.
BTC Address: 16KEqAbG3BonNM47A9hbQJWEgNpKqbTLPn
Peace out! BTC for life.
  • a bitcoin lover
submitted by _just_a_programmer_ to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

LongHash Releases New Shock Value Worthy Report on BTC vs Bitcoin Cash Block Size and Data

" The average block size of Bitcoin Cash has been 171 KB "

https://www.longhash.com/news/bitcoin-blocks-are-over-30x-larger-than-bitcoin-cash-blocks
submitted by suchwowe to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

LongHash Releases New Shock Value Worthy Report on BTC vs Bitcoin Cash Block Size and Data /r/Bitcoin

LongHash Releases New Shock Value Worthy Report on BTC vs Bitcoin Cash Block Size and Data /Bitcoin submitted by ABitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Is Bitcoin's block size "empirically different" or "technically the same" as Bitcoin's block reward? [animated GIF visualizing real blockchain data]

Is Bitcoin's block size submitted by Peter__R to btc [link] [comments]

ELI5 or 6: Why is the Bitcoin full block issue being addressed by increasing the block size rather than increasing the block frequency, which would increase transaction data throughput while simultaneously reducing confirmation time?

ELI5 or 6: Why is the Bitcoin full block issue being addressed by increasing the block size rather than increasing the block frequency, which would increase transaction data throughput while simultaneously reducing confirmation time? submitted by Barkey_McButtstain to btc [link] [comments]

ELI5 or Six: Why is the Bitcoin full block issue being addressed by increasing the block size rather than increasing the block frequency, which would increase transaction data throughput while simultaneously reducing confirmation time?

ELI5 or Six: Why is the Bitcoin full block issue being addressed by increasing the block size rather than increasing the block frequency, which would increase transaction data throughput while simultaneously reducing confirmation time? submitted by Barkey_McButtstain to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin's 1MB Block Size Limit Starting to Fade Away, Data Shows

Bitcoin's 1MB Block Size Limit Starting to Fade Away, Data Shows submitted by ABitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

"To those arguing that Bitcoin Core fees are no longer "through the roof". It only reached this point because you destroyed your user base with an artificial 1MB block size limit. The data speaks for itself - transactions/block down to 2 year lows with dominance at all time lows."

submitted by HiIAMCaptainObvious to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

The reason that increasing the block size isn't a magic "fix it" button is Tragedy of the Commons: infinite throughput means that people will start using the network for data messages and other such unintended uses and clog the blockchain for everyone else /r/Bitcoin

The reason that increasing the block size isn't a magic submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

ELI5 or Six: Why is the Bitcoin full block issue being addressed by increasing the block size rather than increasing the block frequency, which would increase transaction data throughput while simultaneously reducing confirmation time? /r/Bitcoin

ELI5 or Six: Why is the Bitcoin full block issue being addressed by increasing the block size rather than increasing the block frequency, which would increase transaction data throughput while simultaneously reducing confirmation time? /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

poll: what's the best block-size/security tradeoff? too small reduces reachable users vs huge security slips towards data-centre only validation: too centralised already, 2-4MB (segwit+lightning), 4-8MB (HF/ext-blocks), 8-32MB (big onchain now) /r/Bitcoin

poll: what's the best block-size/security tradeoff? too small reduces reachable users vs huge security slips towards data-centre only validation: too centralised already, 2-4MB (segwit+lightning), 4-8MB (HF/ext-blocks), 8-32MB (big onchain now) /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

ELI5 or 6: Why is the Bitcoin full block issue being addressed by increasing the block size rather than increasing the block frequency, which would increase transaction data throughput while simultaneously reducing confirmation time? /r/btc

ELI5 or 6: Why is the Bitcoin full block issue being addressed by increasing the block size rather than increasing the block frequency, which would increase transaction data throughput while simultaneously reducing confirmation time? /btc submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Is Bitcoin's block size "empirically different" or "technically the same" as Bitcoin's block reward? [animated GIF visualizing real blockchain data]

Is Bitcoin's block size submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Bitcoin block size analysis using real data + future projection

Bitcoin block size analysis using real data + future projection submitted by coincrazyy to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Blockchain Grows to 300 Gigabytes in Size

Bitcoin Blockchain Grows to 300 Gigabytes in Size submitted by SaneFive to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

BTC blockchain with SegWit

I have seen some videos and have read a lot of posts about SegWit and still don't understand how it operates, with SegWit nodes don't record signatures on Blockchain?
Signatures are being recorded separately from the blockchain? If yes, how the blocks are being verified? Is SegWit compatible with SPV nodes that Satoshi described in whitepaper 7, 8 section?
If with SegWit, signatures are recorded in separate blocks / files from the blocks with transactions, and signatures data is not recorded on Blockchain, which makes the node lighter, how can such a network be secure?
If with SegWit, signatures are recorded in separate blocks but all the data is still recorded on a single Blockchain, what's the point of SegWit if the node still records all the data and the weight is the same as if it would be with simply increased block size.
submitted by walerikus to btc [link] [comments]

"Blockstream and CoreDevs ruined Bitcoin BTC. The blockchain doesn't scale. Liquid is bugged (or has backdoors as you prefer). LN is bugged. Segwit made everything more complex and already found buggy. This is why BCH exists: BCH is Bitcoin without bloating and corruption".

submitted by ojjordan78 to btc [link] [comments]

A single global economy of FAIL

I had a lot of fun with Jo_Bones insane vomit yesterday, that retarded chimp is a special one for sure. He inspired me to write some satire of his delusional CSWesque rant. I list some hilarious quotes from him at the end as well from the comment chain.
The original delusional rant

If all governments could agree on any single thing at any point in time, it would be an unprecedented moment in history. A "unicorn moonshot" so to speak. If the unicorn moonshot were to manifest as every government suddenly desiring to throw their already digital currencies into complete disarray and chose a technically inferior and non-compliant product in the process, then you can bet your ass they would use BSV for their fiscal policies. At the moment, here is what came up when I googled Central Banks for the first time today. Here's what came up when I googled fractional reserves. I then googled what reconciled means, and after my eyes rolled back in to my head out of sheer inability to digest the information I was reading, I decided BSV was the blockchain to solve all of this because I personally think this thing is an awesome high-school comp sci project.

If every central bank suddenly decided to relinquish state control of their monetary policy, and instead decided that the security model of 7 amateur software developers paid by an ex-felon hiding in Antigua who controls the #11 cryptocurrency on coinmarketcap was the answer, we could have the opportunity to use a strictly worse version of our current banking software and IT infrastructure. Instant transactions between bank accounts you own? Screw that, welcome to 10 minute block times! Did you fat finger that bill payment to the wrong sender? Too bad, it's gone forever! Welcome to immutability! It's a feature not a bug!

If you extrapolate how bad this is, suddenly taxes would be lower because digital monetary transactions would come to a screeching halt. Can't pay taxes on money you don't have, right? Suck that statists! The world would benefit from one giant economy of scale even though that phrase makes no sense in this context, and in reality is another buzzword I just simply don't have the time to try to understand. I forgot to Google that one I guess. This means prices around the globe would be out of control because we'd have to revert to a primal barter system! My chicken for your box of peaches! The possibilities to fuck over literally the entire world are endless!

Additionally, there would now be a high degree of transparency to how poorly BSV scales, since blocks take hours to propagate at 1GB sizes and that would only represent the hourly transactions of a town of 10,000 people, which would inevitably lead everyone to understand what 99.99% (AKA the non-mentally retarded "subset" of the population) already know.


In the comments I decided to change potential use cases from the utter nonsense I listed above to a couple different things.
https://www.reddit.com/bsv/comments/j9u2jt/a_single_global_economy_of_scale/g8ppeq7/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
Here I am demonstrating that I know currency lives in a database today:
The point is that they centrally issue and control their own tokens on the bitcoin network. I don’t see what’s so hard to understand about this. They already issue tokens on their own network. It’s just a different database.
Here I am 7 comments later saying those databases don't allow for digital cash when I just stated they did.
Your SQL databases don’t really allow for digital cash.
Shit maybe token issuance on BSV won't work time to pivot to:
But bank transfers still take days between Europe and Asia and have high fees precisely because all the banks maintain their own networks.
Think of the possibilities guys. You totally can't do this today, right?
so they can (for example) sell a YouTube video directly to the whole world, for their native national token... on the bitcoin network.
Crap, maybe there are some good points there. At least Bitcoin can push transactions out in seconds despite having a 10 minute block time! And wait until you see the block times if anyone ever does try to send a billion tx in a second!
These hashes cost bitcoin, but you can sell billions of them per second.
What do you mean risks of minority hash rate on BSV? Nobody has ever done a 51% attack and not been arrested! THEY'LL LOSE THEIR MINING EQUIPMENT!
Except that it’s illegal to attack another chain, and it’s public, and traceable and the punishment would be your company loses all its mining equipment.
I'm running out of use cases since they're getting shot down so fast. Here's a good one. Why pay $80 a month for internet in 1 transaction, when you can pay for internet 1.7trillion times every month for every data packet you get?
And the advantage of sending 0.0011p to someone might be that they’re providing a service to you, like a data packet.
But think of all the UnIqUe AnD gReAt FeAtUrEs on BSV. Really cutting edge stuff that SQL Server doesn't have due to being obsolete in the 90s, like the ability to append only instead of modify data elements! Also, watch the blockchain desync if you ever tried 1billion tx/sec!
The network scales to handle billions of TX/sec and the ledger is append only so it matches the criteria for keeping accurate records and/or updating them as needs be.
Time to pivot again since I'm being dismantled at every turn. What haven't I mentioned yet?
you haven’t solved the issue of the US dollar being the worlds default currency on which global trade relies.
Here is me doing my best Craig Wright technobabble nonsense impression. I know this is technically English but the words being strung together make no sense!
Once again you’ve really missed the point of all this. A data commodity that comes about through consensus of the network on ‘what value is’ contains a fraction of every part of the global economy.
Time to revert to some Craig Wright technobabble bullshit again:
Those in charge of producing dollars ultimately have an unfair advantage over those who don’t and they can game the system.
That’s a peer to peer internet model where producers get paid directly by consumers for the data they consume and miners get paid according to how fast and how efficiently and how accurately they can deliver the data.

Have I mentioned the fact I don't understand that blockchains are literally distributed databases?
Finally, you can send any kind of data in a bitcoin transaction. Not just fiat currencies issued by a government but audio, video, text, a webpage, etc.
And finally:
It’s very smart. Unlike you.
My transformation is complete.
submitted by pointedpointything to bsv [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Q&A: Scaling and the block size debate - YouTube How Blockchain Transactions Work (Adding Data to Blockchains) Ethereum's Fork & Bitcoin's Block Size: Different Dramas ... Price Discovery, Block Size Caps, & Fractional Reserve... Bitcoins? Chat w/ Justus Ranvier The Origin of the Maximum Block Size

Block size of Bitcoin mining []. No issue in the history of cryptocurrencies has been debated as passionately, as often, or as forcefully as the bitcoin block size. To an outsider, it must be quite comical to witness folks debating a consensus parameter within the bitcoin network — no joke — as if it were a matter of life or death. Bitcoin Cash is a Bitcoin hard fork that raises the Bitcoin (Cash) block size to 32MB, allowing the BCH network to process around 65 transactions per second. The Bitcoin Cash hard fork took place in August 2017, just before the conclusion of the SegWit and SegWit2x debacle. In many ways, the Bitcoin Cash movement and hard fork was a result of the lack of direction by the latter project. Miners collect Bitcoin Core (BTC) transactions into distinct packets of data called blocks. Each block is cryptographically linked to the preceding block, forming a "blockchain." The size of these blocks is currently restricted to below the average daily demand, making transaction fees for Bitcoin Core (BTC) a competitive marketplace. Since miners earn the fees from transactions included in ... Explorer Live Data, Charts & Transactions. Buy Bitcoin Trade. Sponsored Content. Currency Statistics. Block Details. Blockchain Size (MB) Average Block Size (MB) Average Transactions Per Block. Total Number of Transactions. Median Confirmation Time . Average Confirmation Time. Mining Information. Network Activity. Wallet Activity. Market Signals. Sponsored Content. Blockchain Size (MB) The ... The storage size of the Bitcoin Cash (BCH) blockchain is increasing with every additional block, at a rate of: (size of the last block) / (time to mine the last block) Tools. Link to Chart. Markdown / Reddit Link. Embed Chart. Download Data Download CSV File BCH BTC ...

[index] [29260] [19342] [45471] [3859] [2474] [35598] [6245] [40444] [34599] [10849]

Bitcoin Q&A: Scaling and the block size debate - YouTube

Stephanie, Andreas and Adam speak first with Bitcoin Foundation Chief Scientist Gavin Andresen about the Bitcoin Block Size debate, where it came from, why it matters and what he thinks we should ... Price Discovery, Block Size Caps, & Fractional Reserve... Bitcoins? Chat w/ Justus Ranvier Amanda B. Johnson. Loading... Unsubscribe from Amanda B. Johnson? Cancel Unsubscribe. Working ... The highly-charged debates around both Ethereum's potential hardfork and Bitcoin's block size appear different on the surface, but are caused by the same des... Blockchain Overview - Duration: 12:02. Systems Innovation 15,530 views. 12:02. Best marketing strategy ever! Steve Jobs Think different / Crazy ones speech (with real subtitles) - Duration: 7:01. ... Whether the block size should be increased to 20MB has created more controversy than any other question in Bitcoin's recent history. For some, it is an urgent and necessary step in Bitcoin's ...

#