Topic: BLOCKS ARE FULL!!!! - page 5. (Read 4706 times)

Nothing can happen to Bitcoin or it's block-size.  Bitcoin itself has ability to adjust these fluctuations in block sizes.

Exactly. It is the same as with mining and thus these doomsday scenarios are just bad attempts at manipulation.

This policy is not currently in "effect". Segwit will provide more transaction capacity after which we might see a block size increase in addition to the Lightning Network. We should be fine for a while after these events.

Suggest it via the mailing list instead of talking about it everywhere. The are reasons for which this has not been done.

Maybe in 2017.

This is just self regulation cycle,

more people using Bitcoin -> fees go up -> some people stop using Bitcoin -> fees go down

This can go on forever. While it is plan for some, others know this is not how to make Bitcoin successfull longterm and no rational business would make such terrible PR like "we have monopol so wont change anything, you can go elsewhere to some suckers if you dont want to pay us premium for ever being able to use our most popular coin". I dont know how long people can tolerate such rude policy though.

You can even decrease block size limit to any value (like 50 KB) and Bitcoin gonna work for some people.

segwit proposes to turn cars into motocycles to fit more road users onto the road.. right.. as a better analogy..
 the problem is that blockstream then turns the motorcycle into a trike by adding the flags and other opcodes for LN and sidechains. and then adds a 10foot trailer to the trike in the form of confidential payment codes.

meaning that by the time blockstream have rebloated a transaction the eventual maxblocksize wont really help because it would be used to cushion the impact of blockstreams bloated transactions.

simply put
1mb traditional tx's average 2000 transaction capacity(for 1mb data store)
1mb+segwit proposes 3800.(for 1.8mb data store)

2mb traditional proposes 4000 transactions.(for 2mb data store)
but by the time blockstream are ready

2mb+segwit+CPC does not offer 7600 transactions for 4.6mb
but instead 7600 transactions for 5.7mb

yet 4mb traditional transactions proposes 8000 transactions for 4mb..

so it made me laugh, when using lauda's own magical numbers of segwit offering 180% capacity increase and payment codes adding 250bytes per tx. to actaully see that the corporation he defends is actually causing more bloat then just staying with the traditional transactions and just increasing capacity properly.

segwit is not a cure for capacity. it is just a temporal measure.. even the blockstreamers try not to claim it to be a cure, but call it a positive side effect. yet lauda wants to PR spin it as the cure for cancer

and lastly i am still laughing because Lauda thinks bitcoin-core is programmed in java. there there ticked the box to say that lauda has not personal knowledge of bitcoin and is just a mouthpiece for someone else spoonfeeding him.

if he atleast used the actual numbers he splurts out.. he to would realise the truth..

One way to reduce traffic congestion is to speed up the traffic. Making cars larger so they can carry more people, means they take up more space, and may not increase the occupancy rate anyway.

lauda's defense to not inccrease the blocksize is to keep contention alive by not letting core increase the maxblocksize for 16 months.. purely on the bases that it should be deemed as a strike against miners who are lucky enough to solve a block before they validated the competitors previous solution..

basically hold miners to ransom by not increasing the size until they stop making "empty blocks".
to me that is just the most lame excuse he has came up with yet. trying to infer that REAL blocks are not nearly full just because the empty blocks are pulling down the average..

seriously.. thats like saying the red signal on traffic lights doesnt need to change to green.. ever.. because if you include people walking as 'traffic' then the road is always on the move so there must not be a traffic problem by leaving the lights on red.
(cars are real blocks of data, walkers are empty blocks)

you can try to criminalize the sidewalk as much as you like.. but even on highways you will still get hitchhikers walking passed.. so how about looking just at the traffic jam and stop using averages that include pointless blocks

when the block size will be changed?

What are you going on about? Developers are far from being preteens and they are doing a fine job at protecting your investment. The restricted block size is there for a reason, and bumping it up to allow for videos and funny pics, would be preteen behavior. Keep the block size at manageable sizes and you will protect it from spam attacks and you will also make it easier for people to store that data. If block sizes were increased to allow for videos and funny pics, much less people would be able to run full nodes, and this function will have to be handled by centralized data centers. < This will harm decentralization >

Do your homework and research next time, and post something that makes sense. ^hmmmm^

Is the OP a troll or he is really that dumb, please enlighten me.

It seems like he is just kidding, but its hard to tell on the internet.

when you use offline wallets then you can't control your transaction fee. same situation happening with me.. but when we use bitcoin core I think bitcoin core give this facility to set a transiction fee by ourselves..

I'm not sure the hash rate will go down.
But maybe. Core are standing by to meddle with the difficulty if that happens, to save us from tx gridlock.

(but tx gridlock is predictably coming much sooner than that anyway)

https://blockchain.info/block/0000000000000000044cc1a682a5f947fd8489a8337765ab226c6f878f641d79

the avg TX fee pre TX on this block is 8cents

For (many) months people have been saying blocks are full, will soon be full, or things will collapse soon. BTC continues working normally ever since.

just wait till reward halfs and hash rate starts going down.
we are in for some serious delays

Now last 6 blocks produced in 20 miniutes. (3x quicker than expected, producing 4mb in 20 min, 2x expected mb)
That helps keep blocks not full.

The hash rate wont always be spiking. Miner wont always get so lucky.
When miners get unlucky, 6 blocks can just as easily take 3 hours. (3x slower than expected, producing 6mb in 3 h, 3x less expected mb)

That's why I said litecoin, it's old, it's boring, it's quite stable, I don't think people should invest in the the fad of the month, Monero or Ethereum, specially now the price is highly inflated.

Telling people to switch to completely dead coin is kind of... bad. Monero or Ethereum, safest bets in crypto-space right now.

Near 100% is achievable. This just shows us that the blocks are not full. The correct thing to say would be something in the lines of: "Some blocks are full." or "The average block size is nearing 1 MB.". Miners need to be called out on these empty blocks; they need to stop.

Classic is just XT 2.0 apparently, not much better. However, you need to understand that some people don't like to waste their time in such discussions.


Please no; we already have too many people doing this.

I think it is pretty clear that this thread never was meant serious. The suggestion of adding nonsense on the blockchain was pretty clear. As well as a newbie account with this stupid language.

This or it's a kid.

---

rizzlarolla



Convenient that the blocks can't get full 100% in average, I guess.

Though in fact blocks are full pretty often at certain times of the day. It doesn't help you that you get told that sometimes in the night there are blocks that are not full. Bitcoin is supposed to be fast. But it's losing it's advantages against established payment forms pretty fast.

Speed? Goes away. Low fees? Go away in the same speed.

yes it is not achievable but those near full blocks mean that some of the transactions might not get confirmed if they are with lower fees

we surely have to do something in order to lift the size of the block as the fees might increase significantly if the blocks will keep on going full