Author

Topic: [INFOGRAPHIC] that details both sides of the blocksize issue (Read 658 times)

legendary
Activity: 2424
Merit: 1147
I like this graphic, I was actually looking for something like this a week or so back, be good to use to expand on the points.
sr. member
Activity: 574
Merit: 250
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1011
Good graphic, i like that.
especially, the "speed" part ... and "low connexion" required.
legendary
Activity: 3724
Merit: 3063
Leave no FUD unchallenged
Care to explain how these are true?...

1. Bigger blocks "Increases bitcoin Martketcap" ??
2. Bigger blocks "Pushes up transaction fees" ??

It doesn't seem to me that way, but I could be looking at it wrong.


Yeah, doesn't seem entirely accurate.  If anything, larger blocks mean more consistent fees, but doesn't imply they would be higher.  Smaller blocks, on the other hand, would create pressure to increase fees.  Plus the fees would be more variable and at peak times you would need to pay more to increase the likelihood of your transaction being given priority.  However, it wouldn't be guaranteed, as you have no idea how much others will be including for a fee.  This adds uncertainty to transactions and could easily create a poor user experience.  At present, including a fee with your transaction almost guarantees confirmation as soon as possible, but with full blocks this would not be the case.
hero member
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
Care to explain how these are true?...

1. Bigger blocks "Increases bitcoin Martketcap" ??
2. Bigger blocks "Pushes up transaction fees" ??

It doesn't seem to me that way, but I could be looking at it wrong.
legendary
Activity: 3206
Merit: 1069
you have to quantify some of those points, for  abetter comparison

for example slow sync but by how much? it is negligeable? also it can be solved with a faster ssd
newbie
Activity: 5
Merit: 0
Seems biased towards small blocks. Lots of typos.

where u see Typos ? please tell me so i fix it now
legendary
Activity: 977
Merit: 1000
Seems biased towards small blocks. Lots of typos.
Jump to: