A simple poll: The future of Bitcoin block size - page 2.

Dissonance

full member

Activity: 167

Merit: 100

Quote from: tadakaluri on August 16, 2015, 01:16:06 AM

Quote

Satoshi said (or wrote) that the block size should be kept as small as possible for as long as possible, to lower barriers to entry for new bitcoin adopters.

I support this statement, if it is said by Satoshi or not.

My understanding was he intended on making core accessable to the masses but only because in the early days you had to run a full node to use bitcoin. That is not necessary for 99% of users today making blockchain size less important.

Possum577

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Loose lips sink sigs!

There's a lot of additional discussion about this on the Forum and Reddit. This poll is becoming more and more relevant - take this opportunity to let your opinion be heard!

Add'l Information:
-XT - First block was mined by XT miner: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/xt-its-on-first-block-was-mined-by-an-xt-miner-1156231
-XT Node Adoption data - http://xtnodes.com/
-Core vs. XT - is there a difference to the average user? https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bitcoin-vs-bitcoin-xt-is-there-any-difference-to-the-average-person-1156181
-Discussion on too much power for the few - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--1156253

If you're a fan of Bitcoin Core, vote for Core.

If you're not a fan of Bitcoin XT, vote for Core...as a strong sign of objection.

If you're a fan of Bitcoin XT, vote for XT.

Possum577

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Loose lips sink sigs!

Quote from: NLNico on August 16, 2015, 01:24:05 AM

By calling the options "the original" and "the next generation", you are being suggestive about which option to choose. It sounds like Bitcoin XT is the improved new version and Bitcoin Core is dead or something.

Nah man, my word choices don't imply that at all, you imply that. Original means the first version of Bitcoin technology. Next Generation means the next version of Bitcoin technology. Don't impose your biases or opinions on to what are very simple words.

Some say "I wouldn't vote for either because I want something in the middle." That's fair, but Bitcoin XT is happening now. So if you want to voice your opposition to that move, this would be one great way to do it. To not vote is to simply agree with what's happening.

Thanks to those that voted.

LiteCoinGuy

legendary

Activity: 1148

Merit: 1014

In Satoshi I Trust

there were already enough pools. you cant handle millions of new users with this artificial and unnecessary limit. 8MB is very conversativ and a good start.

you can find an overview here:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/why-i-will-support-bigger-blocks-and-you-should-too-1141086

here is your satoshi quote:

Should Bitcoin grow, even if the network changes its structure as a result?

The current system where every user is a network node is not the intended configuration for large scale. That would be like every Usenet user runs their own NNTP server. The design supports letting users just be users.

— Satoshi Nakamoto, July 2010

NLNico

legendary

Activity: 1876

Merit: 1295

DiceSites.com owner

By calling the options "the original" and "the next generation", you are being suggestive about which option to choose. It sounds like Bitcoin XT is the improved new version and Bitcoin Core is dead or something.

Besides that I am not sure what you are asking. You ask "should Bitcoin technology be altered to accommodate lager block sizes beyond the existing 1mb?" and yet you give the options Core and XT. Again it's suggested that you need to chose XT for "bigger block sizes", but in theory it's still possible to increase the block size while using Core.

lottery248

legendary

Activity: 1582

Merit: 1006

beware of your keys.

neither bitcoin core, nor bitcoin XT is good.
for bitcoin core, the speed of transaction is too slow, and at most it could handle up to 2000 transactions per block, in fact, most of the ASIC hashes were wasted.
if more people came up to bitcoin, the transaction would be big problem.

however, if with the bitcoin XT, the block size would double every 2 years, leading to the full node users giving up with that matter, it would end up with centralisation.
XT would only encourage monopoly to take us out from bitcoin full nodes.

raise the blockchain size depends on the volume and the sustainability instead.

tadakaluri

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

Quote

Satoshi said (or wrote) that the block size should be kept as small as possible for as long as possible, to lower barriers to entry for new bitcoin adopters.

I support this statement, if it is said by Satoshi or not.

AgentofCoin

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Kazimir on August 15, 2015, 11:49:56 PM

It's not so black and white. I would rather vote for something in between.

I'm all for somewhat increasing the block size, but way WAY more important than increasing or not (or how much) is that we maintain consensus.

A fork (or discrepancy between XT and Core) is MUCH WORSE than either solution.

So, no, I won't vote.

I will also not vote in this poll since I want the middle choice, as well.
The question currently is to vote on whether not to change or for extreme change. Both are equally undesirable.

I want to protect the current bitcoin economy and the systems that are built upon it,
but I also want evolution that will prevent potential monopolies, no matter where they come from.

EDIT: Sorry. I didn't read your last statement about not commenting unless your a veteran.
I only commented because I want the third choice.

Kazimir

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1011

It's not so black and white. I would rather vote for something in between.

I'm all for somewhat increasing the block size, but way WAY more important than increasing or not (or how much) is that we maintain consensus.

A fork (or discrepancy between XT and Core) is MUCH WORSE than either solution.

So, no, I won't vote.

P.S. being into Bitcoin since early 2012 and having reasonable in-depth knowledge of the technicalities, I consider myself a veteran.

Possum577

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Loose lips sink sigs!

There's been endless talk about the prospect of a fork for Bitcoin, so at risk of ostracizing myself, I think it's appropriate to open up a poll to get a sense of where the community sits on this debate/decision/imposition. In better words - should Bitcoin technology be altered to accommodate lager block sizes beyond the existing 1mb?

Satoshi said (or wrote) that the block size should be kept as small as possible for as long as possible, to lower barriers to entry for new bitcoin adopters.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8810

Some say that the existing technology can remain and still handle expanding volume and that the few shouldn't make the decision for the many. Some support:

Some say a change to the technology (or "a fork") is required to keep Bitcoin accommodating growing transactions sizes. Some support:

I'm in no way an expert on the topic. But I believe in a free market, I believe in a free vote, and I believe Bitcoin was created to align with both of these ideals.

Here's an opportunity for a simple poll on the topic. Place your vote. No need to debate, argue, or share your rationale (unless you're a real veteran here, in which case we'd all benefit from your soapbox speech.) Just place your vote!

Thanks.

Topic: A simple poll: The future of Bitcoin block size - page 2. (Read 1480 times)