Complaints from Bitcoin Users

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

We missed payroll because a big transfer didn't confirm

"for over 10 blocks." - andromedavirus

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Waited for 5 hours for a $0.08 fee (34 sat/B) tx to confirm.

"I hate to say this after all these years, but Bitcoin is looking kinda stupid." - pinhead26

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Same for me. Sent BTC to Bittrex and waited hours for the 2 confirmations.

"Just incredible how bitcoin sucks ...." - -----------------www

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Waiting hours for several transactions

"with 7 cent fees each." - altcoinwriter

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Complaints from users, Day 71 (17/09/2016):

Current dev team

"hostile towards bitcoin usage" - jcnike

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

companies are pouring hundreds of thousands (millions?) of dollars into open source code

"yet Bitcoin Core/Blockstream couldn't give a shit." - blockologist

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

I paid 00.00001484 BTC for 1477 bytes of data. Blockchain.info says the transaction will be processed "Very Soon (High Priority)"

"but it's been twelve hours." - HohlraumHe3

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

the network is apparently running at capacity

"and it's taking forever for confirmations" - izza123

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Is a block size increase even planned in Core's "master plan"?

"Blocks seem full, things are getting obvious." - alpha-three

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

No,

"block size limit increase is not planned." - r1q2

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

No.

"I think Bitcoin will just route around devs who are not willing to scale it." - LovelyDay

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Nope,

"they want a "fee market" because they think that it will spur adoption." - ferretinjapan

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

so ego centric to go against what everyone wants. the most logical xplanation is still that they are sabotaging.

"Companies or projects that care about competition try to keep up. This is the opposite. sad its the case really." - alpha-three

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

1,200 transactions is a full block of backlog. The average is 5x that lately. We've basically got next day settlement

"with Bitcoin at fees higher than bank ACH. @#$@ you." - p2pecash

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Is this any surprise? Bitcoin threatens a well entrenched system.

"It requires the whole community waking up to it. A hard fork is likely necessary." - loveforyouandme

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

This is why

"we need a hardfork." - zimmah

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

The only viable plan is for the super rich to buy bitcoin....

"so i've been told." - bitsko

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

That's brg444's pet theory. Only billionaires matter for btc.

"He's waiting for his toy rocket to reach the moon." - jcnike

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

brg444 works in a call centre and is a known troll

"with no influence whatsoever" - Joloffe

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

As far as who I am, I'm a passionate user and advocate of bitcoin. I work at coinbase as a software engineer. I studied both computer science and economics at carnegie mellon. I am obsessed with markets and how they function. I am personally heavily invested in bitcoin and I want nothing more than bitcoin to succeed.

"The fact is that bitcoin is competing every day for market share and mind share. And the fact is that we are way underutilizing the network's potential." - jcnike

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

I'm very interested in have digital currency scale,

"and I agree that ethereum seems to be doing a much better job at this than bitcoin right now." - bdarmstrong

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Is there something wrong causing this transaction

"not to confirm?" - Ratemategr8

[rogerver]

I'd like to suggest changing the title of this thread to "Complaints from Bitcoin Users due to small blocks" or "Complaints from Bitcoin Users due to network congestion" or "Complaints from Bitcoin Users due to slowness of scaling progress"

This way people brand new to Bitcoin wont mistake this thread as complaints about Bitcoin itself when they first come to our forum.

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Complaints from users, Day 72 (19/09/2016):

Lightning network will be a disaster

"I have been a software developer for almost 20 years. Let me share with you a few basic facts about Lightning Network, which simply cannot be omitted:

1: Contrary to Bitcoin - which had a reference implementation (Satoshi's Bitcoin-QT client) from day 0, there is no reference implementation of Lightning Network. There are only multiple non-reference implementations, that haven't been even tested for cross-code compatibility [have they ?]

2: LN is a very complex technology comparing to Bitcoin. Just take a look at the whitepaper (56 pages) comparing to Bitcoin (9 pages)

3: As of today (2016-09-19 10:00 GMT) we have not seen any information [have we ?, sources please] about how will the decentralized routing algorithm work. And this is the absolutely crucial part for LN to work in a Bitcoin-like decentralized manner

4. Bitcoin is an immensely complex system of connected entities, machines and different softwares and, as the the blocksize war has already shown, it will be immensely difficult to push such a huge change onto the entire network.

Do any of you know any software project which started this way and became a success later ? Because I do not. So my conclusion is that, as of today, I see absolutely no chance that LN will work as advertised within reasonable amount of time (like 2 years).

It will either turn out a completely failed project, or it will take at least several years (like 5 or more) for it to be really built, implemented and propagated." - ShadowOfHarbringer

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

When people will look back at history and the beginning of cryptocurrency.. I think all this will be remembered as one biggest missed opportunity/missed management in software development..

"ever.." - Ant-n

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

I believe, the biggest issue with lightning isnt code complexity - it will be user experience - lightning requires keeping open channels and paying for them. In case of problems, retrieving your coins may take very long time. I think it is reasonably likely, that majority of average users instead of using lightning directly, will turn their private keys to third party entities (ie. Banks) , that will manage payment channels for them. And this will long term lead to all the shit we have with current financial system - fractional reserve, cyprus type haircuts, ect.

This, or

"bitcoin gets replaced by other cryptocurrencies that are able to reasonably scale on-chain" - mcgravier

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

it's basically bankcoin when onchain fees are too high and everyone have to use offchain tx. and with 100% offchain tx you don't need bitcoin as a settlement layer. so there will be a blocksize increase/low fees

"or most people will switch to altcoins." - 0x48454C4C4F00

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Why will people tolerate this level of complexity? If they want to use a cryptocoin,

"then there are others with well defended blockchains and space on-chain." - GeorgesTurdBlossom

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

even academics and journalists laugh at Cores 2tps enforced limitation? Listen at 39:50

"https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/1 ... on-bitcoin" - hodls

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

I agree completely. Lightning is years away from providing any type of scaling to Bitcoin. (Although in reality it doesn't actually scale Bitcoin itself).

"Anyone with half a brain would NOT put all their eggs in one basket like this." - seweso