Topic: Block size max cap should be raised to 2mb with block halving in July 2016 -Y/N? - page 2. (Read 1965 times)

i said it months ago that segwit was not the capacity increase solution. and Lauda shilled for blockstream hard defending segwit..
i said it was just a bait and switch campaign. and guess what. here is lauda moving from the bait... to the switch.. now he is 100% fll retarding LN to distract people away from 2mb increase.

seriously just add the 2mb into aprils release with a 6-9month grace period and stop this endless delay tactic that has been going on since last year

no, only you see no-sense everywhere, how you can be sure that it will only postpone it and not resolve it, only because segwit was temporary?

we can find another better solution if enough time is given

also go read about the possible issue for the possible hashrate dropping caused by the miners, block will be more full, as result of the average increase of the block time
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14073880

The correct answer.

You don't know the definition of 'solving' in technology. What this is doing is postponing the problem (for a very short time period), ergo not a solution. Don't post further nonsense.

Keep in mind the it will take a while to activate Segwit (depends on the miners). Even if it gets implemented early April, it will take additional time until it gets activated.

The correct answer.

I say no!
Segwit first, then HF later.

it buy us enough time to find another solution, which is maybe better than blockstream and the sidechain thing, like we have found the segwit solution
so no, it can solve the problem

it's total overshill - is anyone taking all these ( how many now ? ) full blox!!! FUD threads seriously ?

Though I'm unsure how far and how fast SegWit can change the problems.

Im no techie expert but using my limited knowledge & what I've researched I like the sound of SegWit being implemented in approx April 2016 & then push out the hardfork summer 2017. I think this is the best way to go.

Im no techie expert but using my limited knowledge & what I've researched I like the sound of SegWit being implemented in approx April 2016 & then push out the hardfork summer 2017. I think this is the best way to go.

I say no!
Segwit first, then HF later.

A 2 MB block size limit does not solve anything. Please don't post nonsense.

Nothing per say, but it lowers the value of BTC itself (or limits its potential value due to reduced velocity).

and what is the problem to have many healthy with value blockchain systems? Why you think that one coin will rule them all in this new fintech era?

Yes.

Otherwise growth in Bitcoin is essentially capped and will move to other currencies. Speculators will also move on and the price will dip temporarily. This could possibly cause some spiraling issues... lower growth, lower price, higher fees, halved block reward. Bitcoin could lose their first mover and networking effect advantages in that type of situation.

Yes.

Otherwise growth in Bitcoin is essentially capped and will move to other currencies. Speculators will also move on and the price will dip temporarily. This could possibly cause some spiraling issues... lower growth, lower price, higher fees, halved block reward. Bitcoin could lose their first mover and networking effect advantages in that type of situation.

WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF BITCOIN BLOCKS ARE AT FULL CAPACITY?

If the blocks reach full capacity before there is a functioning transaction
fee market in place, Bitcoin investors will likely see the price drop and may
experience difficulty withdrawing their coins from an exchange. Elsewhere
in the Bitcoin economy, problems could be much graver: casinos that literally
stop functioning, coin mixers screeching to a halt, and coin faucets that
run dry.

Faced with these difficulties, entrepreneurs running these services would
likely set up working alternatives by moving away from the Bitcoin blockchain.
This in turn would make the average block size drop significantly,
thus clearing up space for normal transaction confirmation times in the
network.

The process of gambling and laundering services moving away from the
Bitcoin blockchain could cause a series of rallies in the altcoins (of which
we may already be seeing the start). Shared Coin, for example, includes any
fees within their transactions so that users can get quick access to their
laundered coins. If the block size limit is reached, transaction times will be
slower, and these users may switch from Bitcoin to altcoins.

It’s likely that for gambling and mixing, the most liquid altcoins will be
those highest in demand: Litecoin, actively traded in at least 17 markets,
and Dogecoin, actively traded in at least 7 markets.3 Privacy-oriented coins
such as Dash and Monero could see significant rallies. The short history of
altcoins suggests that when the most liquid coins rally, the rest are lifted
with the tide, resulting in short-lived but strong rallies.