VisaBitcoin liberate all human from economic prison ... and trap of inflation.
Visa is a system from the banks that they have printing money because they don't want die.
Topic: How would Bitcoin handle TPS like Visa? - page 2. (Read 1165 times)
I Visa
Bitcoin liberate all human from economic prison ... and trap of inflation.
Visa is a system from the banks that they have printing money because they don't want die.
VisaBitcoin liberate all human from economic prison ... and trap of inflation.
Visa is a system from the banks that they have printing money because they don't want die.
I was wondering if there could be a possibility of making Bitcoin handle TPS as fast an efficient as Visa? Perhaps, it could be achieved but I think that Bitcoin's security would be at risk don't you think?
Maybe this has something to do with a block size increase...
...
Maybe this has something to do with a block size increase...
...
For this discussion, some would argue that there is an important distinction between a "transaction" and a "confirmation".
Bitcoin's ability of relaying transactions is almost instantaneous.
The real question is, when are the "transactions" considered a "final" or "non-reversible" payment?
In Bitcoin, it is when the transaction is included within 1 block (or 6 blocks), which is usually an average of 10 minutes.
All processors are different, but average like VISA are between 15 to 60 days (estimate).
So the issue isn't increasing Bitcoin's transaction ability, but increasing Bitcoin's ability to fit more transactions for confirmation.
The debate about how to fit more transactions in each block for confirmation, is called the "Block Size Debate".
Edit: If you are asking for faster than avg 10 mins per block, then as others have said, Lightning Network and etc is the answer.
I have heard about sidechains but have not gone deeper into it. If you would like to enlighten me more about it, I would greatly appreciate it. Based on what I have read from your post, it looks like it is a very interesting concept. 
Sidechains are basically a mechanism with enables you to move your coins into another blockchain without the need of a third party or anything. This is done with a two-way-peg and you can move your coins back later. It is not easy to explain them in a very short way; this might help. There'll have to be something second layer. Whether that'll ever be the lightning network or 21's solution or anyone else remains to be seen.
LN is far superior than their solution and will be free to use (aside from the TX fees). Bitcoin can't even come close to a centralized solution such as Visa when it comes to on-chain scaling only (without sacrificing decentralization).
Whatever 'side' you're on, it's pretty hard to see how that could ever be achieved with on chain scaling. There'll have to be something second layer. Whether that'll ever be the lightning network or 21's solution or anyone else remains to be seen.
I think second level solutions like side chains can probabaly bring that kind of transactions processing to the masses.
I have heard about sidechains but have not gone deeper into it. If you would like to enlighten me more about it, I would greatly appreciate it. Based on what I have read from your post, it looks like it is a very interesting concept.
My understanding is that Visa processes thousands of transactions a second. I don't think bitcoin ever needs to do that for it to go mainstream. I think second level solutions like side chains can probabaly bring that kind of transactions processing to the masses. However I would like to see the mainchain be able to atleast keep pace with ACH which based on my research appears to do 500-700 TPS. I think that is the ballpark bitcoin should be in.
I was wondering if there could be a possibility of making Bitcoin handle TPS as fast an efficient as Visa? Perhaps, it could be achieved but I think that Bitcoin's security would be at risk don't you think?
Maybe this has something to do with a block size increase...
I would like to see your opinions about it.
Maybe this has something to do with a block size increase...
I would like to see your opinions about it.
Jump to: