lwat (u/lwat) - Readit News

Dead Comment

lwat commented on Bitcoin will soon block small transaction outputs github.com/bitcoin/bitcoi... · Posted by u/fdm

srdev · 12 years ago

No its not. When faced with a scalability problem, they decided to ban certain uses rather than fix the root cause. Bitcoin isn't going to be able to grow beyond a niche currency if Satoshi Dice's level of activity causes such large problems.

lwat · 12 years ago

I don't see any suggestions from your side?

lwat commented on Bitcoin will soon block small transaction outputs github.com/bitcoin/bitcoi... · Posted by u/fdm

consz · 12 years ago

>here's no good reason to make a transaction that small on the blockchain.

You don't have the right to say that, it should be my right to decide whether my transaction size is appropriate or not. This sounds like regulation to me.

lwat · 12 years ago

That's like saying I have no right to stop email spammers and that they should have the right to decide if their email volume is appropriate or not.

Making sub-cent transactions is a waste of MY resources because every transaction gets duplicated to everyone's copy of the blockchain. That's spam. If we don't stop this then the blockchain will become so unwieldy that it makes Bitcoin all but useless for everyone, and that's not good for anyone.

lwat commented on Bitcoin will soon block small transaction outputs github.com/bitcoin/bitcoi... · Posted by u/fdm

tocomment · 12 years ago

But true micro payments do need to be a lot smaller than that. It's kind of the idea if every web browser could load a dollar a week into their browser and have it evenly paid to each site they visit.

It doesn't seem like a lot of money but if everyone did it I'm guessing it would probably beat Adsense.

There are hundreds of other applications as well for micropayments.

lwat · 12 years ago

You can aggregate those and pay them out when they become big enough. Bitcoin stores every transaction on every computer on the Bitcoin network. It's not suited to transactions that small, you're just wasting everyone's resources.

lwat commented on Bitcoin will soon block small transaction outputs github.com/bitcoin/bitcoi... · Posted by u/fdm

trevelyan · 12 years ago

Yeah, I do actually.

lwat · 12 years ago

Why

lwat commented on Bitcoin will soon block small transaction outputs github.com/bitcoin/bitcoi... · Posted by u/fdm

waterlesscloud · 12 years ago

Maybe I do, yes.

A handful of developers shouldn't be deciding acceptable business models for bitcoin. That's not going to lead anywhere good.

lwat · 12 years ago

If you're making transactions smaller than 1 cent, keep them off the blockchain. You're just wasting everyone's resources. Aggregate them until they're big enough to matter and THEN commit them to the blockchain.

lwat commented on Bitcoin will soon block small transaction outputs github.com/bitcoin/bitcoi... · Posted by u/fdm

stormbrew · 12 years ago

What if I have need to send $0.10c tomorrow if BTC is then worth $1000?

Placing the constraint right on the edge of the current value seems like it will just cause a lot of problems as the value continues to fluctuate.

lwat · 12 years ago

The limit will be adjusted if BTC becomes worth thousands.

lwat commented on Bitcoin will soon block small transaction outputs github.com/bitcoin/bitcoi... · Posted by u/fdm

tocomment · 12 years ago

This sucks. I thought one of the killer apps for bitcoin was going to be micropayments. Oh well maybe the world will switch to litecoin.

lwat · 12 years ago

No this is awesome. Only transaction smaller than about half a cent is blocked. There's no good reason to make a transaction that small on the blockchain. Satoshidice sends thousands of transactions of one satoshi each every day and it adds gigabytes of data to to millions of computers worldwide. What a waste of resources.

lwat commented on Running PostgreSQL on Compression-enabled ZFS citusdata.com/blog/64-zfs... · Posted by u/cwsteinbach

nemothekid · 12 years ago

If I'm reading this right, with ZFS compression enabled I am seeing 1/3rd disk usage and 3x increase of speeds in query times just from switching the filesystem. Stats like that make me very skeptical. Does this mean that I can get a 3x increase in speed while cutting my disk space down by a third just by switching to ZFS? If so, why isn't everyone doing this?

lwat · 12 years ago

The way I make sense of this is that you need fewer (slow) disk reads to get the same amount of data into RAM, so that might explain the speedup?

I agree that it sounds too good to be true though.

u/lwat

KarmaCake day1224November 24, 2010View Original