The Bitcoin.com Forum is closing on July 23rd 2020. Thank you for using forum.bitcoin.com.

https://forum.bitcoin.com/announces/the-bitcoin-com-forum-is-closing-on-july-23rd-2020-t130936.html
iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Tue Dec 13, 2016 7:31 pm

Is it normal to have an unconfirmed transaction a few hours later ? Should I just wait it out ?
"Status: 0/unconfirmed, in memory pool

Debit: -0.03209661 BTC Transaction fee: -0.00024641 BTC Net amount: -0.03234302 BTC

using bitcoin core.. did I do something wrong? should I take action or just assume it will work at some point today?" - LifeIsGoodHotS
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Wed Dec 14, 2016 12:53 am

Greg Maxwell u/nullc says "The next miner after them sets their minimum [fee] to some tiny value ... and clears out the backlog and collects a bunch of funds that the earlier miner omitted" - like it's a BAD THING. Greg is proposing a SUPPLY-LIMITING AND PRICE-FIXING CARTEL, like it's a GOOD THING.
"https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5i ... o/db4jb2a/

The more Greg Maxwell talks about economics, the deeper he digs himself into a hole.

He has become so blinded and corrupted by his own power, that now he has everything upside-down:

He is now bad-mouthing Nakamoto Consensus, calling it:

"a majority hashpower cartel undermining the decentralization of the network" (?!?)

He doesn't see that the only one creating a cartel is Greg himself, in collusion with certain miners who want to induce artificially high fees by preventing more efficient / cheaper miners from entering the market, when he says:

"They can turn their nose up at fee paying transactions. Then the next miner after them sets their minimum to some tiny value 10nanobitcoin/byte, clears out the backlog and collects a bunch of funds that the earlier miner omitted."

This is the smoking gun where Greg proudly shows the world that he is anti-competition.

This is why Greg's views are tolerated only on a (heavily) censored forum like r\bitcoin - while on a (lightly) censored forum like r/btc his views are considered repugnant by most sane people.

Because:

Greg does not understand economics;

Greg has become the corrupt enabler of a cartel, artificially inflating fees by artificially limiting the supply of blockspace.

Greg (and the miners who support him) seized power by exploiting an accident of history.

As we know, due to a series of unfortunate historical accidents, Greg (and the miners who support him) became a "de facto" centralized influence on a certain vital aspect of the world's emerging dominant cryptocurrency, Bitcoin - namely:

its money velocity

This has given Greg a weird kind of power, which he is relishing (perhaps unconsciously) for who-knows-what unsavory reasons.

And so here we are, several years into the "blocksize debate"...

still arguing with Greg; and

still allowing Greg, one of the most economically ignorant dipshits the world has ever known, to centrally dictate Bitcoin's money velocity...

...via his unfair exploitation of certain accidental, temporary, "contingent", historical imperfections in Bitcoin's exising codebase and governance process.

Satoshi would be ashamed of Greg.

As the initial developer of Bitcoin, Satoshi certainly could have exploited (or even introduced) a bunch of "accidental, temporary, "contingent", historical imperfections in Bitcoin's codebase and governance process" - for his own advantage.

But Satoshi made extra efforts to not exercise centralized influence over the economic aspects of Bitcoin.

Satoshi made sure that the system he created was as minimal and clean as possible, confining itself to providing only what was needed:

a permissionless decentralized time-stamping (global sequentialization) service

based on a worldwide hashing competition for an economically valuable token.

Actually, as Greg pointed out at the time, such a system is indeed "mathematically impossible".

That was the first historical example of Greg's economic ignorance.

When Greg thought that Bitcoin would never work because he could prove that it was "mathematically impossible" - he was right - but only about the mathematics, not about the economics!

Bitcoin works because of certain subtle and clever economic incentives which Satoshi built into the system - incentivizing miners to build on the longest valid chain, where the value of switching to another chain becomes stochastically, vanishingly small as more blocks are appended to the "main" chain.

It is important to understand Greg's fundamental error there...

because it's also the same fundamental error which many centralized "banksters" commit when they misunderstand and inevitably mis-implement their "blockchain technology"...

when they just can't bring themselves to endow their "blockchain" with its own valuable token...

which is the essential thing providing the economic incentives for mining, which holds the whole system together...

because they just can't bring themselves to let go of the immense awesome Olympian power they get from being able to centrally print up unlimited quantities of their debt-based "fiat" currency.

Now, Greg just can't bring himself to let go of the immense awesome Olympian power he gets from being able to:

centrally control Bitcoin's minimum fees...

by centrally controlling its maximum blocksize...

by exercising "undue influence" over certain historical accidental imperfections in Bitcoin's codebase and governance.

It all comes down to the same thing: power corrupts.

Central bankers became corrupt due to certain historical accidents giving them undue influence over our "fiat" money supply.

Greg has become corrupt due to certain historical accidents sgiving him undue influence over our Bitcoin transaction supply.

It is also worth noting that it is an insurgent miner, u/ViaBTC, who is most outspoken in support of Bitcoin Unlimited, which decentralizes the decision about blocksize - away from would-be central planners like Greg, and away from any miners who run Greg's less-efficient code.

https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/search?q=au ... rict_sr=on

https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/search?q=vi ... =top&t=all

It's a good thing Satoshi and not Greg had control over Bitcoin's original codebase and governance and economics.

Bitcoin will prosper much more when Greg no longer has control over Bitcoin's current codebase and governance and economics.

Greg didn't understand the economics of Bitcoin when Satoshi first explained it to him - and he still doesn't understand certain key aspects of the economics of Bitcoin as explained these days by people such as JohnBlocke, ForkiusMaximus, awemany, tsontar, pecuniology, ferretinjapan, Capt Roger Murdock, jtoomim, Peter R - and the many, many others who have been repeating the same simple and well-known economic axiom for these past few years:

The market determines demand (transactions), supply (blockspace), price (in CNY, USD, EUR etc.), and fees.

Note, in the above scenario, that "supply" in this case corresponds to "blockspace" or "space on the blockchain" - ie, the supply of transactions, which is a commodity (a generic good or service) provided by miners, in return for fees and new coins.

This number has grown continuously throughout the history of Bitcoin - determined in decentralized fashion, by the market - as miners make their own decisions on fees versus space, trying to maximize their profits and minimize their orphans.

(Meanwhile, is has been observed that the square of Bitcoin's throughput or transactional supply - which could be taken as a rough proxy for adoption - has historically corresponded to the price - which may be an interesting instance of Metcalfe's law. Conversely, this would mean that suppressing the Bitcoin blocksize is a way of suppressing Bitcoin adoption, which in turn is a way of suppressing Bitcoin price.)

The supply of space on the blockchain is the number Greg now wants to control by imposing his own artificial, arbitrary, centrally planned limit.

It doesn't matter what the "specific" number is (currently it's 1 MB every 10 minutes) - what matters is that Greg wants to centrally limit this number - a number which should be set by the market, not by Greg.

Central planning is damaging - making BitcoinCore vulnerable to competitors not limited by central planning.

Attempting to centrally control Bitcoin's blocksize could lead to the following scenarios:

At the appropriate time (eg, a "Schelling point", perhaps motivated by one or more crisis events involving network congestion, transaction delays, unacceptably high fees, falling market cap), Bitcoin may fork to another implementation (such as Bitcoin Unlimited) where supply is determined by the market and not by Greg; or

An alt-coin could take over Bitcoin's market dominance.

In other words, "Bitcoin maximalism" could be threatened if we let Greg centrally control the blocksize, instead of letting the decentralized market control the blocksize.

Yes, it really is that simple, folks.

And, yes, Greg really is that stupid (about economics) to the point where he is now actually publicly and proudly declaring that he should be able to centrally impose a maximum on the supply of space on the blockchain - and thus also centrally impose a minimum on the fees for space on that blockchain.

Plus he also has stated elsewhere that he recognizes that he is actively suppressing price and adoption - and he thinks it's ok for him to have have that power also!

Greg Maxwell has now publicly confessed that he is engaging in deliberate market manipulation to artificially suppress Bitcoin adoption and price. He could be doing this so that he and his associates can continue to accumulate while the price is still low (1 BTC = $570, ie 1 USD can buy 1750 "bits")

https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4w ... d_that_he/

Power corrupts - and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Whether it's a "constitutional blindspot" - or whether Greg is personally (perhaps unconsciously) relishing the vast power he now enjoys by being able to control the "transaction supply" (and the "transaction price") for the world's first major cryptocurrency - it's irrelevant.

Greg should not have all this power.

The market should have this power.

If Greg continues to have this power, it could seriously hurt Bitcoin.

Let the market decide.

Of course, maximums for blocksizes - and minimums for fees - will inevitably be determined by somebody (or "somebodies).

In this debate, we need to decide who that "somebody" should be:

Greg Maxwell, or

the users of Bitcoin

Economics is an area where Greg displays extreme ignorance.

Greg is apparently ignorant about economics than the average person who has a cursory understanding of basic economic concepts such as markets, competition, supply, demand, pricing and elasticity.

Greg does have a "constitutional gift" for understanding the mathematics of cryptography and the dynamics of C++ programs running on computers.

But he also seems to have a "constitutional blindspot" when it comes to understanding the dynamics of free markets made up of real human beings competing in terms of supply and demand, price and fees.

This is easy for anyone to see!

You don't need a degree in Economics to understand economics better than Greg!

This is why it can be said that Greg displays "extreme economic ignorance".

And this is why he has become very unliked in the free parts of the Bitcoin ecosystem now: because of his "extreme economic ignorance" - and his general lack of empathy and self-awareness where he has actually come to think that he likes "shreaking [sic] masses" which he can ignore.

People are starting to realize how toxic Gregory Maxwell is to Bitcoin, saying there are plenty of other coders who could do crypto and networking, and "he drives away more talent than he can attract." Plus, he has a 10-year record of damaging open-source projects, going back to Wikipedia in 2006.

https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4k ... c_gregory/

Wikipedians on Greg Maxwell in 2006 (now CTO of Blockstream): "engaged in vandalism", "his behavior is outrageous", "on a rampage", "beyond the pale", "bullying", "calling people assholes", "full of sarcasm, threats, rude insults", "pretends to be an admin", "he seems to think he is above policy"…

https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/45 ... ow_cto_of/

In other words (in his own words) he is so accustomed to being generally disliked due to his anti-social, anti-free-market behaviors, that he has now come to accept and embrace this as his lot in life, and he now wears it perversely and proudly.

Greg should instead try to wrap his head around some of the writings of John Blocke:

John Blocke: Bitcoin Economics in One Lesson

https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5i ... ne_lesson/

Or some of the writings of guys like u/ForkiusMaximus - who understands the "market dynamics" of Bitcoin in a way which Greg will never be able to.

Unfortunately, Greg seems to think that "economic stuff" is irrelevant - as it's based on stuff involving the "shreaking [sic] masses" - but that's just because Greg doesn't get stuff involving economics.

Economics is largely a social science, an area where Greg's skills are woefully inadequate - to the point where the epithet "idiot savant" perhaps really does apply to him.

In this latest display of his profound ignorance of market dynamics:
Greg is openly proposing a supply-limiting and price-fixing CARTEL.

And cartels are so frowned upon by people who understand society and economics that they are often made illegal.

That statement from Greg linked at the start of this OP is seriously one of the most ignorant things ever publicly uttered in the history of economics.

Greg has become so breathtakingly arrogant, so accustomed to "centrally planning" all the code for this cryptocurrency, that he has somehow fallen into believing that he should be able to centrally dictate parameters that depend on factors outside the code, in the marketplace.

Greg is in an incredibly powerful position - due to his prominence, he really is able to exert a vast amount of (undue) influence over certain parameters of the world's emerging dominant cryptocurrency which should be market-based, not centrally planned.

Satoshi would be ashamed of Greg's cartel creation and currency manipulation.

Satoshi wisely understood that the role of the coder is merely to provide a certain minimal framework.

Satoshi never specified any centrally planned blocksize that would override the market-based blocksize.

Satoshi understood that the only function of the Bitcoin network was to provide:

a permissionless decentralized time-stamping (global sequentialization) service, based on a hashing contest for a valuable token

The system that Satoshi had designed was bigger than what Greg could wrap his mind around.

Greg is "constitutionally gifted" to be able to understand things like:

the (deterministic) mathematics of cryptography

the (deterministic) behavior of a von Neumann architecture computer executing C++ programs

And Greg does possess enough "game theory" understanding to be able to understand:

the (largely non-deterministic) behavior of a peer-to-peer network running crytpocurrency mining and validating nodes under Nakamoto Consensus

But Greg is apparently "constitutionally blind" about certain other things too - and generally those are things involving more "social" sciences, including economics.

A toxic feedback loop has developed between Greg's central planning and certain miners' natural greed for higher fees - and their natural tendency to desire to prevent additional, more efficient miners from competing with them by offering lower fees.

Where we are now

Greg Maxwell is imposing a cartel and engaging in centralized artificial supply-limiting and price-fixing...

by imposing his own centrally planned, artificially high minimum price for fees...

by imposing his own centrally planned artificially low blocksize...

by unfairly taking advantage of a "random" (accidental) accident in Bitcoin's legacy code: the "friction" induced by a legacy, temporary 1 MB anti-spam kludge...

which by the way, let us recall, Satoshi said we should have eliminated by now via an ultra-simple & safe fixed-flag-day hard fork.

Central planner Greg Maxwell has colluded with the centralized mining cartel for so long, he now thinks that competition is a bad thing - and limiting supply and doing price-fixing is a good thing!

He was already an economic idiot who knew nothing about markets - now as the corrupt enabler of a centralized cartel, Greg wants to prevent more-efficient miners from out-competing less-efficient ones.

Please, for the sake of Bitcoin, Greg: Stick to mathematics and coding, which is what you do best. And let the market continue to do what it does best.

The miners should determine the blocksize. Not Greg Maxwell." - ydtm
I can't believe you didn't comment on Maxwell trying to remove Satoshi from history,
"by not using the common convention ("satoshis per byte")." - lifeboatz
Greg has a fundamental misunderstanding of bitcoin's threat model.
"The bitcoin system assumes that the majority of hashpower is honest. If the majority of hashpower isn't honest, then bitcoin is already broken." - timepad
His hypocrocy is boundless. His real solution is that every decision should be made by "developers"
"and by that he means himself." - Helvetian616
Greg and the rest of Core seem to want to be the ones to set these numbers,
"rather than letting the miners do their own market research" - ForkiusMaximus
Studying cryptography does not mean he knows a thing about economics,
"which he has proven repeatedly." - jeanduluoz
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Wed Dec 14, 2016 7:36 pm

Complaints from users, Day 130 (14/12/2016):

Vitalik: "The Internet of Money should not cost 5 cents per transaction"
"https://vid.me/f8nB" - BiggerBlocksPlease
My local bakery started accepting bitcoin, but it doesn't make sense to pay 5% more. The average order is $3 and the transaction fee (https://bitcoinfees.21.co/ right now) is 15¢.
"In my opinion, small bitcoin transactions shouldn't cost more than 1¢ - at least until there are >20 transactions per second." - bitdoggy
I remember back when Bitcoin was started, you didn't even need to include transaction fees.
"it is absurd that small transaction are now being phased out of mainstream Bitcoin transactions." - rshorning
If the world's 7 billion people all got in line to make a single on-chain transaction,
"it would take us a minimum of about 76 years to work our way through that line if the network were operating with the current capacity limit." - Capt_Roger_Murdock
There are payment processors to handle zero conf, and zero conf works just fine so long as the core devs aren't actively hostile
"and attempting to destroy it." - discoltk
the software should serve the needs of the its users,
"and if it doesn't, the community can use other software." - greeneyedguru
He is very conservative with 5¢.
"you will likely pay more around 10¢ per transaction." - Zyoman
I don't know what the Internet of money should cost, but I sure as hell don't trust some C++ coders to know.
"the prices in Bitcoin need to be set by the free, unhampered market." - ForkiusMaximus
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Thu Dec 15, 2016 2:38 am

Bitcoin transactions ought to cost less than PayPal and credit card transactions. Here's why...
"With the present trust-based system for commerce on the Internet, "completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot avoid mediating disputes. The cost of mediation increases transaction costs, limiting the minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions" [1][1] S. Nakamoto. "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System." No Publisher (2008) https://bitcoin.com/bitcoin.pdf (first paragraph)" - Peter__R
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Thu Dec 15, 2016 5:29 am

GBminers abandoned
"Bitcoin Core" - gr8ful4
GBminers (now mining Bitcoin Unlimited) has about 3.5% of the global hashrate. That will bring the total support for bigger blocks up to about 15%.
"And Segwit adoption is dropping." - BiggerBlocksPlease
GBMiners
"mines Bitcoin Unlimited" - Egon_1
The cracks in the stream-blocking dam begin to
"widen." - BeijingBitcoins
I think this is proof enough miners are not just going along with whatever Adam Back and company
"are telling them to do" - reddaxx
Wow. These guys have around 3 to 4% hash power. Not bad at all. Unlimited is making real inroads. An emergent hard fork leading to an emergent blocksize in the consensus rules is how the hard fork should happen. The sooner BTC gets rid of wannabe central planner cryptopoliticians constantly spreading FUD about any sort of hard forks,
"the better off it will be." - bigcoinguy
this proves not everyone is falling for the blockstream bullshit
"narrative" - ethMonkey
I wonder what percentage of the community is in r/Bitcoin and bitcointalk.org -vs- uncensored forums, Chinese forums, etc. Its unclear to me the true impact of of the fake narrative in r/Bitcoin on miners if miners are based in China and mostly speak another language. All in all, THIS is the TRUE test of the experiment that is know as Bitcoin. Resisting centralized control and the mutilation of the protocol
"for private (AKA Bockstream funders) interests" - cdn_int_citizen
No prior meetings and no prior announcements.
"Just like Satoshi intended." - todu
As somebody that sees the bigger picture! Great news!
"Hopefully this will encourage more miners that want to follow but are waiting on the sidelines to follow." - Hillscent
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Thu Dec 15, 2016 6:14 pm

Complaints from users, Day 131 (15/12/2016):

Why do transactions take so long to get confirmed? I remember a year ago it wouldn't take this much.
"So I'm a long time user of btc, but tbh I never understood them exactly which again didn't stop me to use them every day instead of credit card. I always used electrum as my wallet and once I send the payment, I forget about it.

But today, I bought VPN, didn't get login info, contacted support, they said there is a known delay with btc and it will take a couple hours until the transaction gets confirmed. I'm checking now and it after an hour it's still not confirmed." - aimp_right
Because we need
"bigger blocks." - dryf2
If I understood correctly BU provides bigger blocks which leads to faster confirmation time and smaller fees,
"so what's the point of segwit then?" - aimp_right
To enable some vaporware second layer off-chain
"solution." - knight222
and give Blockstream a viable
"business model" - squarepush3r
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Thu Dec 15, 2016 6:21 pm

Slush stats getting better day by day - Unlimited enthusiasm growing; today at 21%;
"together with BU compatible classic at 26%; total big block at 28%" - Shock_The_Stream
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Fri Dec 16, 2016 6:02 pm

Complaints from users, Day 132 (16/12/2016):

Another example of Blockstream Core rewriting history: Bitcoin message board founded by satoshi and now controlled by /u/Theymos, satoshi got a badge under his name saying "Bitcoin Core Developer". satoshi "died" long before Core existed,
"he was never a Core developer." - blockstreamcoin
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Sat Dec 17, 2016 12:48 am

John Blocke: Why Full Blocks are Dangerous
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Sat Dec 17, 2016 12:58 am

Right now, a powerplay for bitcoin's future is going on. One side wants to choke bitcoin at 3tx/s. The other side wants bitcoin to be as great as it can be for the people of the world.
"You might believe that the decisionmakers in Core keep the max blocksize at 1 MB for technical reasons. But all their technical arguments have been debunked long time ago. They have changed arguments many times when each argument have been debunked. The last technical argument they had was block propagation-time. This problem was solved by Bitcoin Unlimited developer Peter Tschipper almost a year ago whith Xthin.

Don't be fooled to believe that this is just a technical problemsolving debate anymore." - BitcoinPrepper
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Sat Dec 17, 2016 1:00 am

I just let the creators of the #1 video on /r/Videos that is currently exposing Reddit vote manipulation know about the corruption in /r/Bitcoin.
"Perhaps they can do their next story covering the /r/Bitcoin manipulation if we can get enough of their attention." - MemoryDealers
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

User avatar
Westernory
Nickel Bitcoiner
Nickel Bitcoiner
Posts: 137
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 3:31 am

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Sat Dec 17, 2016 2:07 am

I just let the creators of the #1 video on /r/Videos that is currently exposing Reddit vote manipulation know about the corruption in /r/Bitcoin.
"Perhaps they can do their next story covering the /r/Bitcoin manipulation if we can get enough of their attention." - MemoryDealers
/r/Bitcoin is a platform that is even worse than bitcointalk. There is severe censorship and if you say something wrong then your post will get deleted by a mod. It is quite amusing to see them trying to say that they are not a controlled channel at all. ;)
Image

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:47 pm

Complaints from users, Day 133 (17/12/2016):

Votes for Non-core versions of Bitcoin now higher than Core
"on Slush. 28.92% vs 28.89." - Leithm
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:51 pm

Switching from Core to Unlimited
"I currently run a full Core node on Ubuntu and am interested in switching to Unlimited. I've downloaded and installed the packets from the Unlimited website but cannot launch the program. Any help would be greatly appreciated." - ThibodauxTiger
You used the package repository, with the commands?
"sudo apt-get install software-properties-common
sudo add-apt-repository ppa:bitcoin-unlimited/bu-ppa
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install bitcoind bitcoin-qt
Then the installation created an icon to launch the program. But first stop the Core." - r1q2
Thanks,
"had to delete Core but finally have it up and running." - ThibodauxTiger
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Sat Dec 17, 2016 10:01 pm

I just spent .33EUR on mining fees. I do roughly 250 fiat transactions a year as a consumer. This would cost me 82.50EUR if those were Bitcoin transactions. My bank accounts cost me 30EUR a year. Ladies and gentlemen,
"Bitcoin for consumers is headed in the wrong direction." - SumthingToThinkAbout
My bank account costs me nothing. I've only payed one fee in over 30 years of banking and that was for converting USD to GBP for an overseas payment. That fee was a few cents. On top of that when I use my credit card I get paid for using it. I've never paid a cent to use it either.
"Now when I started bitcoin if I wanted a transaction in the next block I included a fee. If I didn't care if it took an extra block or 2 I could pay nothing. Paying nothing was great for moving money from my hot wallet to cold storage. Now it costs a high fee to basically move money from one pocket to another. I need bitcoin on my phone to take with me and want to take it from my full node there's a fee. I want to move it to my cold storage another fee.

It's become worse than banking. My full node is full of transactions I can't move because they are all small mining payouts that will probably cost most of it to just move them anywhere. Hundreds if not thousands of transactions .01 or less. " - FUBAR-BDHR
BlockstreamCore wants you to believe that Bitcoin shouldn't be for small purchases. They are liars
"and crooks." - Annapurna317
I had planned to go off bank and full Bitcoin,
"but really I don't know when that will be (if ever) possible." - Ant-n
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Mon Dec 19, 2016 7:49 pm

Complaints from users, Day 134 (19/12/2016):

Jameson Lopp on Twitter - Bitcoin Core's txn fee rate estimate to get confirmed in next 3 blocks rose 557% from 14 to 78 satoshis/byte.
"That's 1,013% in USD terms." - increaseblocks
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Tue Dec 20, 2016 2:44 am

The Fee Market Myth
"Contrary to Nakamoto’s vision, there are now humans attempting to be in charge of the system. They aim to keep Bitcoin’s block size limit below the actual level of demand. One of the primary assumptions made by this camp is that Bitcoin needs a “fee market” in which users outbid one another to compete for inclusion in the next block, allowing their transaction to be confirmed quicker than others who have paid less of a fee. https://medium.com/@johnblocke/the-fee- ... .ddsjvvtvd" - JohnBlocke
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:18 pm

Complaints from users, Day 135 (20/12/2016):

The claim is that Core has "hundreds" of developers, yet not even one has the moral backbone to break from the unethical herd and take a prominent and active stand against unscrupulous behavior.
"The Core repository seems remarkably uniform in its deceitfulness." - chinawat
Yes, if I were a Core dev and really believed in Core, I'd be disgusted by the censorship and actively speaking out against it whenever I had the chance, knowing it makes my side look weak to people of discernment, and that it makes us into Bubble Boy.
"By the way, has anyone else noticed how since post-Blockstream Core took over, talk of antifragility has all but stopped? These people don't seem to believe in the principles that underpin Bitcoin: open competition, decentralization in all aspects, antifragility, miners being the stewards of the network and having the incentives to do so, etc." - ForkiusMaximus
I think Satoshi always intended for a very high volume of very low fee txs.
"If anyone who thinks Bitcoin should be a settlement system can provide me with anything to make me think otherwise, I am listening." - zcc0nonA
Is it wise to listen to a fiat-paid minority holding you up? Is it wise to give a minority more power than they represent? For how long?
"3+ years now (look at my submission history, I made my account specifically because I started to smell that something is off regarding maxblocksize). I am in Bitcoin since 2011 (I believe 2010, but the earliest keys I can find in my possession are 2011). I started to only even get engaged in this whole discussion because I saw the derailing and shenanigans. As long as Gavin was at the helm, stuff was fine. There is enough data that the current Core devs are the problem" - awemany
It is amazing how quickly the trolls showed up to comment directly on the article.
"John Locke is doing such an amazing job speaking truth to power!" - MemoryDealers
Great article as always. Understanding the context of how the direction of the bitcoin protocol development has shifted over the past few years
"is critical for understanding how we got to where we are now." - KillerHurdz
Back before I was suddenly and unjustly banned in r.bitcoin, when I contributed regularly with helpful, insightful, and informative comments, I had posted this question to everyone:
"What would be wrong with big Full Nodes being hosted primarily by large operations like miners are/will be? https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comment ... des_being/

If you look, you'll see no one could provide a good rebuttal.

The idea that everyone who has a poor connection and poor computer should be able (or that they would) run a full node is a new myth, it is not in the original design of Bitcoin so beware anyone who tells you that people who run full nodes (who currently don't even though they are able) should be the rate limiting factor of Bitcoin.

Another new myth is that bitcoin blocks should always be full, and that block space is a scarcity. Beware anyone who repeats this myth. Those people have been fed lies or are trying to feed you lies." - zcc0nonA
The core/maxwell Fee Market is a crazy and dangerous idea.
"You can't keep squeezing more and more milk out of the same cow. You need more cows to get more milk. Similarly, you can't keep getting higher and higher fees from just a few transactions per second - you need more transactions per second - ie larger blocks." - papabitcoin
The centrally planned, arbitrary, artificial 1 MB "blocksize limit" which Core / Blockstream is trying to force on Bitcoin
"is destroying the market dynamics of Bitcoin which Satoshi designed." - ydtm
Lots of people don't agree with Core's roadmap and would like to see the project continue more in line with what they believed Bitcoin would be after reading satashi's white paper.
"The Core project has lost confidence with a large part of the community." - themgp
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:22 pm

Blocksream and Core strategy is stealing miner's and investor's profit.
"LN+limited block redirects fees and bitcoin valuation gains to BS/Banks." - blockstreamcoin
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Tue Dec 20, 2016 10:25 pm

PSA there is a clear attack on alternative Bitcoin implementations
"by core supporters" - increaseblocks
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Tue Dec 20, 2016 10:27 pm

My article on fee markets has been censored https://i.redditmedia.com/MthXKtyrVqSg1 ... 4c7c80586c
"from /r/bitcoin" - JohnBlocke
What else did you expect from the Blockstream reddit
"sub?" - coin-master
Hijacking top post to clarify that after this post called it out, it was approved and is no longer hidden. As predicted. Also, as predicted:
"They will pretend like it was accidental

Frankenmint:

automoderator != censored, please try harder.

OP of the /r/bitcoin post:

It did show up when I posted it, got a few votes, then disappeared. It's been released(?) since then, and it appears now." - JohnBlocke[
Last edited by iFixBTCmemoryIssues on Tue Dec 20, 2016 10:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Tue Dec 20, 2016 10:28 pm

/u/nullc now de facto /r/Bitcoin mod: makes up rules, reports to mods,
"user gets banned." - chinawat
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Tue Dec 20, 2016 10:49 pm

We would have launched far sooner
"if we had simply been able to use normal bitcoin transactions." - ryancarnated
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Wed Dec 21, 2016 8:21 pm

Complaints from users, Day 136 (21/12/2016):

Segregated Witness: A Fork Too Far
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:33 pm

Complaints from users, Day 137 (22/12/2016):

The Conclusion is epic:
"Segregated Witness is the most radical and irresponsible protocol upgrade Bitcoin has faced in its eight year history. The push for the SW soft fork puts Bitcoin miners in a difficult and unfair position to the extent that they are pressured into enforcing a complicated and contentious change to the Bitcoin protocol, without community consensus or an honest discussion weighing the benefits against the costs. The scale of the code changes are far from trivial — nearly every part of the codebase is affected by SW.

While increasing the transaction capacity of Bitcoin has already been significantly delayed, SW represents an unprofessional and ineffective solution to both transaction malleability and scaling. As a soft fork, SW introduces more technical debt to the protocol and fundamentally fails to achieve its design purpose. As a hard fork, combined with real on-chain scaling, SW can effectively mitigate transaction malleability and quadratic signature hashing. Each of these issues are too important for the future of Bitcoin to gamble on SW as a soft fork and the permanent baggage that comes with it.

As much as the authors of this article desire transaction capacity increases, it is far better to work towards a clean technical solution to malleability and scaling than to further encumber the Bitcoin protocol with permanent technical debt." - ydtm
A very insightful and detailed overview
"of the current situation." - solex1
Ok, I'm halfway through and I still have stuff to do today so I'll get to the rest tomorrow.. But that is a great fucking article! Thank you for doing this. Outstanding. (If it doesn't get very bad in the 2nd half :D )
"Kyle Torpey, Aron van Weirdum: That's how you write a fucking article. No "according to core dev X that's how it its" but explaining step by step, comprehensible by a somewhat informed person, how and what is being changed." - satoshis_sockpuppet
Epic
"piece." - olivierjanss
Thank God, I feel awareness is starting to come out
"Here are 2 major points that stood out to me:

"3.1 SW creates a financial incentive for bloating witness data SW allows for a theoretical maximum block size limit of ~4 MB. However, this is only true if the entire block was occupied with transactions of a very small ‘base size’ (e.g. P2WPKH with 1 input, 1 output). In practice, based on the average transaction size today and the types of transactions made, the block size limit is expected to have a maximum limit of ~1.7 MB post-SW (Figure 10; assuming all transactions are using SW unspent outputs — a big assumption). However, the 4 MB theoretical limit creates a key problem. Miners and full node operators need to ensure that their systems can handle the 4 MB limit, even though at best they will only be able to support ~40% of that transaction capacity. Why? Because there exists a financial incentive for malicious actors to design transactions with a small base size but large and complex witness data. This is exacerbated by the fact that witness scripts (i.e. P2SH-P2WSH or P2SH-P2WSH) will have higher script size limits that normal P2SH redeem scripts (i.e., from 520 bytes to 3,600 bytes [policy] or 10,000 bytes [consensus]). These potential problems only worsen as the block size limit is raised in the future, for example a 2 MB maximum base size creates an 8 MB adversarial case. This problem hinders scalability and makes future capacity increases more difficult."

and

"3.6 Once activated, SW cannot be undone and must remain in Bitcoin codebase forever. If any critical bugs resulting from SW are discovered down the road, bugs serious enough to contemplate rolling it back, then anyone will be able to spend native SW outputs, leading to a catastrophic loss of funds."" - TommyEconomics
So tired of the goddamn segwit debate. Stop trying to make segwit happen.
"It's not going to happen. " - somewheresome1
What do we owe Core devs exactly? They failed us in every possible way. They deserve nothing less than to be destroyed by the competition at this point. Why are we still so compelled to be nice to them? This isn't gradeschool.
"Renegotiate? How about run a different client built by people who actually care." - reddaxx
Bravo. I used to think there was no good argument against Segwit as a soft fork, but now I realize that I was wrong.
"Thanks for opening my mind." - insette
This is the most epic anti-Segwit article so far.
"(skip to the final section, "The Problems with Segregated Witness," for the main contentions) https://medium.com/the-publius-letters/ ... d6e57a4179" - ForkiusMaximus
A great post.
"A very knowledgeable, fair and thorough article written with lots of care and writing talent." - tl121
Excellent article. Like others have said,
"this should be translated into Chinese." - awemany
This
"should be stickied." - Chream_
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Sun Dec 25, 2016 12:40 am

Complaints from users, Day 138 (24/12/2016):

Roger Ver Says He Was Misled about Recorded Block Size Debate
just the purposely wrong transcript of u/kanzure . he recognized the blatant ' error ' , but refused to fix it .
"https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/5i ... ?context=3

this is dishonesty to the max . it's disgusting .

the blockstream core cartel keep using these methods , systematically ." - realistbtc
This is why I support nothing they do, and never will. Adam is delusional, Greg is hostile, and the rest are the dumb leading the blind who build sloppy hacks like SegWit and push it as a solution. They constantly play dirty pool to push their agenda.
"They are just bending Bitcoin to build a private later on top of it to make money for themselves in what is basically a new kind of private bank no different than what we have today aside more efficient. They are hostile and anti-Satoshi. To me that makes them an enemy to be destroyed." - reddaxx
We don't need them. Bitcoin is more than large enough for other technical talent to come in, if they don't want to contribute because we don't agree with their-way or the highway,
"then we'll let them go!" - TommyEconomics
Thanks for writing this badly needed clarification.
"And that /u/kanzure and the trolls that defended him are just slime." - H0dlr
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Tue Dec 27, 2016 6:27 pm

Complaints from users, Day 139 (27/12/2016):

Bitcointalk.org STAFF are now leaving users negative ratings
"due to their stance on the scaling issues." - MemoryDealers
If you have ever bought something from me at memorydealers.com, Bitcoinstore.com, or Bitcoin.com I'd love a positive feedback rating over at Bitcointalk.org. I think it is really inappropriate for the staff members there to leave negative feedback for someone they have never done any business with
"solely for their stance on the block size debate." - MemoryDealers
I stopped using that site after I called out a scammer after being scammed, and then have 10 people call me a scammer and leave negative reviews on my profile. It's a place for scammers, imho.
"Like Theymos." - YoureFired555
It is really shameful of a Staff-member to leave a negative comment
"because he does not agree with your position." - Thomas1000000000
I have considered Bitcoin Talk to be "hostile territory" for over a year.
"It's a cesspool of scamming and hate where any attempt to conduct honest business is met with suspicion and any attempt to conduct a scam is welcomed with open arms." - chernobyl169
Truly sickening.
"It's called discrimination." - BiggerBlocksPlease
On that forum there are, generally, only 2 types of people left. Scammers and marks.
"All the decent people who can see what is going on left long time ago." - FormerlyEarlyAdopter
sounds like they are making bitcointalk defunct
"by their own hand." - ferretinjapan
It just pisses me off that theymos is pocketing the thousands of
"donated coins." - cartridgez
It should be no surprise anything run by the same core group of greedy revisionists that run /r/bitcoin would maintain a forum that is also equally as much a echochamber cesspool of
"misinformation and manipulation." - reddaxx
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Tue Dec 27, 2016 6:54 pm

Why is my transaction still unconfirmed?
"It's been almost 20 hours and this one transaction that is sent to my account is still unconfirmed" - ohsnapitsjaycee
Need help, bitcoins stuck
"I bought some bitcoins and did like 2 transactions (1 to buy something, another was some because cause the guy sent too much) , both of which had 0 confirmations for hours." - BalkanBuddha
How long would a BTC confirmation take?
"Well, how long would I wait for transaction to get confirmed, the fee was $0.3" - dat_w
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:44 pm

Complaints from users, Day 140 (28/12/2016):

Blockstream Core developer Eric Lombrozo caught red handed in lies and contradiction
"https://medium.com/@elombrozo/satoshis- ... d7f8989e6f

Contradiction:

the only thing on which nodes are actually voting is which of multiple valid chains to extend, not what rules to use in deciding whether a particular chain is valid. Eric Lombrozo

Soft forks deployed with signaling mechanisms such as BIP9 are fundamentally different than hard forks: we don’t lose the algorithmic nature of Nakamoto consensus — the addition of new consensus rules to the validation process can occur incrementally Eric Lombrozo

Lie 1:

Attempting to give miners the ability to vote on hard forks has always run counter to Nakamoto consensus Eric Lombrozo

It can be phased in, like:

if (blocknumber > 115000) maxblocksize = largerlimit

It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.

When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.

Satoshi Nakamoto

Lie 2:

Soft fork mechanisms such as BIP9 were probably unknown to Nakamoto. Eric Lombrozo

It is registred in history Satoshi implemented soft forks including the temporary SPAM protection of 1MB /u/blockstreamcoin" - blockstreamcoin
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

iFixBTCmemoryIssues
Gold Bitcoiner
Gold Bitcoiner
Posts: 2682
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Complaints from Bitcoin Users

Thu Dec 29, 2016 9:40 pm

Complaints from users, Day 141 (29/12/2016):

r\Bitcoin users censoring Linux wiki
"so there is no mention of alternative clients or user forums" - increaseblocks
Image

If you are running a version of Bitcoin Core, stop using it. Upgrade to Bitcoin Unlimited or Classic immediately.

Fix Your Unconfirmed Transaction.

Vote for the future of our Bitcoin network!

Return to “Off-Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests