An idea for a compromise on the scaling debate. - page 2.

1Referee

legendary

Activity: 2170

Merit: 1427

Quote from: aarturka on April 01, 2017, 11:59:25 PM

Wu and Ver don't want any compromise they just want to take over Bitcoin

That's a likely thought. I couldn't stop laughing at the time I read a tweet stating the following; Bitcoin Unlimited team on a China tour trying to convince economic majority that economic majority doesn't matter. Cheesy

Next step will be rebranding Bitcoin into RojiCoin, and the "whole" BU crew can sleep well after a cup of hot milk.

Cool dude and worthy of being followed; https://twitter.com/excellion

naughty1

sr. member

Activity: 406

Merit: 250

Segwit has been compromised a lot of times, it's a big topic of public interest, however, the rate required for segwit to occur is too high, so it is difficult and almost impossible. success. Segwit was given many times, but it never won. Bitcoins are very powerful, so they claim that segwit is not necessary. LTC is a weaker currency, so people are aiming for it, and segwit is the way it grows, and they are so stingy, 75% is a reasonable percentage.

d5000

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 6249

Decentralization Maximalist

That proposal is similar to what some of us have discussed in the following thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/poll-possible-scaling-compromise-bip-141-bip-102-segwit-2mb-1817272, particularly from here on. It would take the mechanism of BIP 100 but add a "upper limit" for security reasons.

Ideally this limit could move based on internet bandwidth/performance tests. Nielsens Law of Bandwidth has also been proposed as a base for the upper limit, but I think it's too optimistic because the upstream bandwidth growth is slower.

aarturka

sr. member

Activity: 277

Merit: 250

SegWit is already a compromise. But Wu and Ver don't want any compromise they just want to take over Bitcoin

JanpriX

hero member

Activity: 1708

Merit: 606

Buy The F*cking Dip

I believe the problem right now is not the technicalities of scaling debate but the "political" aspect of it. The scaling debate that started few years ago just became a pissing contest and all the sides are not open for any compromises. They just insist that only one side should win and prevail. They will not meet halfway to come up with a more sustainable solution for the community.

Iranus

hero member

Activity: 1792

Merit: 534

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Unfortunately Core are not particularly willing to compromise. Their stubbornness is really not helping us move forward, they just need to make some meaningless promises and then even if mining monopolies don't budge, huge numbers of supporters will flock to Core so that there doesn't need to be a fork, and that'll be enough to force those monopolies to eventually move over and let Bitcoin move on.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

What if the Core developers make a compromise of having dynamic block sizes but with a limit of up to 4mb and have Segwit activated at the same time? I am sure there would be a need for a block size increase both with and without an off chain transaction layer.

Topic: An idea for a compromise on the scaling debate. - page 2. (Read 1833 times)