I hate the fact that my investment in Bitcoin appears to be getting fucked.
I think you have here revealed the 'core' of your outrage... My impression is that most (all?) of the members of the 'bigger blocks now, at any cost' crowd are people who ultimately view Bitcoin as their get-rich-quick scheme, and have no real concern at all for the long-term technological success of Bitcoin.
That's fine by me - I have nothing against people striving to promote their own enlightened self-interest - but you should at least be honest about it and quit pretending that your concerns are technical ones.
You sure talk a lot of shit for someone who knows next to nothing about the actual problem, if you do, you wouldn't use 'my impression', you would use actual numbers and basic math.
Here is the technical details on why Blockstream/Core is a bunch of lying fucks, I just fact slapped another shill in another thread, so I'll just copy it here (already translated to layman terms):
The 1MB limit IS causing the spam problem, and Blockstream/Core continue to do nothing about it.
Today Bitcoin tx traffic have already reached 1MB every 10mins, since the blocksize limit is also 1MB and you only get 1 block every 10mins on average, spammers can now easily flood the mempool by generating a small amount of tx.
Once the mempool is flooded, tx takes longer to process, users get impatient, they pay more fees, fees go up, miners process higher fee tx first, all the minimum fee spam stay stuck at the bottom of the mempool, they timeout and get deleted before being processed by miners.
If spammers don't set a minimum fee in their spam, the spam will be dropped by nodes before reaching the mempool, but spammer only pay the fee when the tx is actually processed by miners.
So, once the mempool is full and the fee is high, spammer's spam never get processed, spammer can continue to flood the mempool for days paying zero fee.
Blockstream refused to increase the blocksize, so we get huge 50000tx mempool backlog today, because spammers don't have to pay their fees.
If they increase the blocksize, then for every 1MB blocksize increase, we can fit another 2000 tx per block, at 4MB we can fit 8000tx per block.
If normal traffic is 1M and the limit is 4M, spammer have to pay a very high combined min fee to flood a block (min fee x 8000 per block), then, if they continue to spam, any mishap, such as miners get lucky and mine a few blocks quickly within 10 minutes, 'eating' all the spam, then spammers have to pay the fee for almost the entire 4MB spam block.
At 4MB, it'll be too costly for spammers to spam, until normal traffic reaches 4MB and they can flood without paying fee again.
If we increase the blocksize from 1MB to 2MB or 4MB now, it will give room for Bitcoin to grow as well as reduce spam.
This truth is so simple that's why Blockstream/Core have to create all kinds of red herrings/bullshit excuses/censorships/trolls to justify keeping the blocksize at 1MB. If they stop distracting you from the actual and simple problem for just 1 second, you'll immediately find out they've been lying their asses off for years.
The 1MB limit was added in 2010 because tx fee was 0 at the time, the network was young and was growing slowly, average block size was less than 1k, and Satoshi didn't want to see the blockchain full of 32MB blocks filled with 0 fee spam.
You keep hearing all these fuck face morons talking about how SW/LN will save the day, or that we can't keep increasing the blocksize forever, but at this moment Bitcoin isn't even popular enough for SW/LN, the safety limit is above 4MB, we shouldn't even talk about side chains until we have enough tx to fill 4MB blocks every 10 minutes, or 13tx/sec (we are only at 3tx/sec at the moment).
We are having a tx jam right now, so by not increasing the blocksize limit, Blockstream/Core either have absolutely no idea what they're doing, or they're just pricks blatantly lying their asses off.
Now this was the explanation i was looking for. Thanks
