Eventually the block size limit will be hit.
I think that this is the worst scenario.
Even the XT altcoin is better than that.
What happens when your transaction with reasonable fees takes ages to confirm?
1mb will make people treat bitcoin as gold and not currency.
Topic: I support BIP000 (Read 422 times)
Thanks,
I will also be fully supporting BIP000 and currently running a full node with BIP000 that runs successfully and remains unbroken. Thanks so much for coming up with BIP000. BIP000 is a great solution to rebuke the scaremongering that those peddling "fixes" have been crowing about.
No doubt there will be some of those scaremongers replying here to say how the block size is going to be reached etc etc. Their solution ignores the solutions that are already in place in BIP000.
Without going into a full explanation, basically there are market forces for memory capacity that have not yet had a chance to work. Increasing the capacity simply cheapens the market for buyers and sellers while make it less profitable for those who secure the network (i.e. miners). This is NOT my idea of smart.
I'm so happy to see someone come up with BIP000 as it puts a label on my preferred solution to the current political problems masquerading as block size problems.
Running a full node of BIP000 is the most powerful vote I know how to make.
Keep up the good work
I will also be fully supporting BIP000 and currently running a full node with BIP000 that runs successfully and remains unbroken. Thanks so much for coming up with BIP000. BIP000 is a great solution to rebuke the scaremongering that those peddling "fixes" have been crowing about.
No doubt there will be some of those scaremongers replying here to say how the block size is going to be reached etc etc. Their solution ignores the solutions that are already in place in BIP000.
Without going into a full explanation, basically there are market forces for memory capacity that have not yet had a chance to work. Increasing the capacity simply cheapens the market for buyers and sellers while make it less profitable for those who secure the network (i.e. miners). This is NOT my idea of smart.
I'm so happy to see someone come up with BIP000 as it puts a label on my preferred solution to the current political problems masquerading as block size problems.
Running a full node of BIP000 is the most powerful vote I know how to make.
Keep up the good work
By David François aka davout : https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3jhwi3/i_support_
I support BIP000, the BIP that proposes not to change Bitcoin.
Why?
Because I believe Bitcoin isn't broken, I do not buy the false dichotomy that a choice "must be made" between different competing BIPs, or else the sky is going to fall on our heads without notice and "potential new users" are going to "leave ship".
Because I understand that the security of the network has to somehow be paid for, and the current money issuance schedule is still in a phase where mining is heavily subsidized. I know that at the same fee levels, even with 100mb blocks, the miners would make nowhere near the current block reward.
Because I conlude that therefore, blocks must necessarily be full for the Bitcoin network to be able to pay for its own security.
Because I realize that the block space is a scarce resource that is sold, but not paid for, by the miners, especially with constant time block propagation proposed by IBLT and the like, which is why a "tragedy of the commons" situation can only be avoided by a block size cap.
Because I compare this situation with how nonsensical it would be to declare that "people should be allowed to chop down as much wood as they'd like from the rainforest, because the market will magically sort it out and protect the trees".
Because I am not scared by the constant fear-mongering of those who compulsively want to "fix" a system that isn't broken to ensure that they'll get rich while they sleep by allowing more people to "buy into Bitcoin".
Because I don't buy the false sense of urgency that is manipulated upon us, I want to see if less costly solutions can be found, and I want to revisit once fees become more important than the block reward.
This is why, my friends, I support BIP000.
I support BIP000, the BIP that proposes not to change Bitcoin.
Why?
Because I believe Bitcoin isn't broken, I do not buy the false dichotomy that a choice "must be made" between different competing BIPs, or else the sky is going to fall on our heads without notice and "potential new users" are going to "leave ship".
Because I understand that the security of the network has to somehow be paid for, and the current money issuance schedule is still in a phase where mining is heavily subsidized. I know that at the same fee levels, even with 100mb blocks, the miners would make nowhere near the current block reward.
Because I conlude that therefore, blocks must necessarily be full for the Bitcoin network to be able to pay for its own security.
Because I realize that the block space is a scarce resource that is sold, but not paid for, by the miners, especially with constant time block propagation proposed by IBLT and the like, which is why a "tragedy of the commons" situation can only be avoided by a block size cap.
Because I compare this situation with how nonsensical it would be to declare that "people should be allowed to chop down as much wood as they'd like from the rainforest, because the market will magically sort it out and protect the trees".
Because I am not scared by the constant fear-mongering of those who compulsively want to "fix" a system that isn't broken to ensure that they'll get rich while they sleep by allowing more people to "buy into Bitcoin".
Because I don't buy the false sense of urgency that is manipulated upon us, I want to see if less costly solutions can be found, and I want to revisit once fees become more important than the block reward.
This is why, my friends, I support BIP000.
Jump to: