Topic: Bitcoin 20MB Fork - page 112. (Read 154790 times)

That's also a very likely possibility, but only if everything splits into 2.
If 90% people go with the fork, the ones left behind will lose though.

That's also a very likely possibility, but only if everything splits into 2.
If 90% people go with the fork, the ones left behind will lose though.

Both forks will be worthless. There will be no winning fork.

what is 20MB Fork

I disagree on this. Although I'm not familiar with legal procedures in this case, so it is better to avoid commenting for me. I never implied that a fork would instantly, it would definitely be announced beforehand.
Like I've said, how can you take into consideration everyones opinion when there are a lot of people deliberately hating Bitcoin and against the fork (their opinion being absolute)?

Well you need to take into consideration the reputation of this place. This is like the central place for Bitcoin related discussions. Everything else is pretty minor (except reddit maybe). If the forum breaks down into 2 along with everyone else, well then, then we would live though the darkest days of Bitcoin (along with the losing fork, whichever it turns out to be).

Disagree. Gavin cannot do it if majority of users are against it. Every (official, registered) exchange will have to announce their decision beforehand (otherwise they could potentially be facing legal actions). Same with cloudmining businesses and pools.

So theoretically speaking, if pools/exchanges etc announce that they'll go with the new fork, then people, who want to stay on old one, could just move elsewhere. Therefore pools/exchanges probably will check for the average joes' opinions before making any decision.


Why is Theymos that relevant in this case?

If the fork is announced and main core forks the exchanges will fork and so will everyone.

Exactly. If Gavin gets the top 4 exchanges on board and pools, user complaints won't matter (sadly it is like this, and the average Joe can't do anything).

(worst case scenario) This brings even more concern, if Theymos does not support the changes and they get forced we will end up in a very bad situation. Everything will split and the fight for survival will start.

Most of the exchanges can do what the hell they like, they're trading IOUs and calling them bitcoins. Until those IOUs turn into transactions on the blockchain they're worthless, ie. users 'coins' on Gox.

Deep misuse of the word 'consensus' here, by people that want to give legitimacy to their fork.

That and a lot of the nay sayers seem to be at a misunderstanding of what this will bring. If this hard fork came in today there would be no noticeable change for the short term future. Yes eventually in years from now the block sizes may end up being 20mb each but that seems like it would be a LONG time from now probably 5+years and I if history has anything to say in 5 years our average Storage Drives will have no issue and our Internet should be fine to handle it.

The only way for blocks to become bigger is if there is the demand, so the only other option is to strangle the network if there is that demand and have overly long confirmation times.

You can't achieve consensus when you let people who are actively against Bitcoin have a say in this. This can't completely be compared to an election, where party x and party y will try to improve something (hopefully).

anti-fork

Reason:

centralization of the network caused by bloat. Planning and decision-making that control that network would become even more vulnerable to attack.  
Once done it can't be undone. The risk of spam filling up blocks is real. In 10 or 20 years will need the incentives from transactions for the miners.

And most important of all; consensus is everything! I will not be forking with the rest of you. I won't be alone.

Well, you made yourself sound quite silly there Davout 

Have a read.

You mis-interpreted my post. My point was with 20MB blocks, you will no longer be able to host a node on consumer Internet Plans. The important number was not the 2Mbps download, but the 4Mbps upload. BTW, to get those numbers, I simply multiplied my former node's bandwidth usage by 20.

My current ISP has reduced the speeds it is offering for consumer access. The fastest upload offered on a consumer plan is 3Mbps. Business plans have an option with 5Mbps of upload. (Experiments like 250Mbps down and 15Mbps up are being grandfathered)

Telus, the local phone company, is better with it's VDSL offerings. You can get 5 or 10Mbps of upload speed. For independent providers (using the same lines), like the one I was with, your maximum upload speed is 5Mbps. To get 10Mbps or more, you have to go to fibre, costing $$$$. VDSL and cable may technically be able to handle that, but the companies involved don't want to cannibalize their lucrative fibre offerings.


My overall point is that if we go ahead with this fork, we have to do it with the understanding that the era of running a full node on a consumer Internet connection will be over. Due to extra CPU overhead (due to transaction processing), the days of running on a VPS may be over as well.

Now, with 20MB, I expect dedicated hobbyists and small businesses will still be able to run a node, but it will be a considerable expense: hundreds if not thousands per month. Webhosting may be cheaper, but then you can't keep an eye on your box; or plug hashers directly into it.

This needs repeating again, and again, because many here are thinking that we will have 20MB blocks added to blockchain the very moment the block limit is raised. Calm down. Average block size is now 0.35MB, https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size