Looks like Bitcoin will remain as it is for life - page 2.

BurtW

legendary

Activity: 2646

Merit: 1138

All paid signature campaigns should be banned.

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on April 15, 2017, 03:22:21 PM

Quote from: BurtW on April 14, 2017, 06:37:07 PM

As long as the value remains, the price continues to increase, people continue to use it as a store of value, no fatal flaws are found, I see no reason to change it. Just leave it as is.

Other coins can become the everyday "currency" coins you use to buy coffee.

Bitcoin works just fine as it is for storing and transferring relatively large sums of money/value.

High security is only possible because of high revenue to miners, which in turn is caused by demand. If you remove the component of the demand that is caused by people wanting to transact on a smaller scale, the demand decreases, the revenue decreases, and the security decreases, which can lead to even less demand and a downward spiral.

We shall see. But I have started to become convinced that a 3 TPS system could possibly work. The fees will have to be high and it would not be used for anything but higher value transactions. I can envision a system where, due to the high fees, people put their savings in and only take out what they need when they need it - maybe a few transactions per year.

3 TPS does give us 3 x 31,622,400 = 94,867,200 transaction per year.

I do understand your argument. I do understand the demand side issues. I do not know of a way to prove it will be sustainable at 3 TPS so I guess we will just have to see how this great experiment turns out.

One thing we can both agree on: at 3 TPS Bitcoin will never be the everyday currency of large portion of the population.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: BurtW on April 14, 2017, 06:37:07 PM

As long as the value remains, the price continues to increase, people continue to use it as a store of value, no fatal flaws are found, I see no reason to change it. Just leave it as is.

Other coins can become the everyday "currency" coins you use to buy coffee.

Bitcoin works just fine as it is for storing and transferring relatively large sums of money/value.

High security is only possible because of high revenue to miners, which in turn is caused by demand. If you remove the component of the demand that is caused by people wanting to transact on a smaller scale, the demand decreases, the revenue decreases, and the security decreases, which can lead to even less demand and a downward spiral.

BurtW

legendary

Activity: 2646

Merit: 1138

All paid signature campaigns should be banned.

As long as the value remains, the price continues to increase, people continue to use it as a store of value, no fatal flaws are found, I see no reason to change it. Just leave it as is.

Other coins can become the everyday "currency" coins you use to buy coffee.

Bitcoin works just fine as it is for storing and transferring relatively large sums of money/value.

Decoded

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1030

give me your cryptos

We will need to come to a conclusion some time. I have a feeling we will be stuck in a deadlock for a couple of years more until some devs come to their senses and create a compromise. Im trying to stay neutral in this situation, because neither forks are ideal.

onemanatatime

full member

Activity: 294

Merit: 101

Aluna.Social

Quote from: manselr on April 13, 2017, 07:27:33 AM

We can never have enough consensus for segwit, 95% is too much.

UASF can cause some disturbances in the mining world, even miners that are signaling for segwit could suffer from network split resulting in PoW change (rendering their mining operation useless.. millions in loses?

BUcoin, BClassic etc, are developed by incompetent morons, no one will ever trust their money on those.

Looks like Bitcoin will remain as it is for life. What do we do now?

I think its a little extreme to say we'll remain at this deadlock for forever..

It may not look like we can ever come to consensus right now, but I strongly believe we'll have UASF & SEGWIT implemented before the end of next year.

cryptoanarchist

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1003

Quote from: achow101 on April 14, 2017, 12:18:19 PM

Segwit is a block size increase. The size of the "block" p2p message can be larger than 1 MB after segwit activates.

No, this is a block size increase:

Quote

-static const unsigned int MAX_BLOCK_SIZE = 1000000;

Note the "-" at the beginning. That for removing that line of code. That's really all that needs to be done. The rest of the code is just for phasing that in.

achow101

staff

Activity: 3458

Merit: 6793

Just writing some code

Quote from: cryptoanarchist on April 14, 2017, 12:12:11 PM

Core needs to either increase the block size

Segwit is a block size increase. The size of the "block" p2p message can be larger than 1 MB after segwit activates.

Quote from: cryptoanarchist on April 14, 2017, 12:12:11 PM

, or miners (acting in their own economic interest) will start using an alternative client, and they'll become irrelevant. Its really that simple

No it isn't. The miners can't just activate any arbitrary consensus rule unless all users follow them and use that alternative client. Given that right now most full nodes are running some version of Bitcoin Core, if miners start using an alternative client supports a block size increase through a hard fork, they will be mining on a chain that few people use.

cryptoanarchist

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1003

LAST 1000 BLOCKS :

Bitcoin Unlimited blocks: 373 ( 37.3% )
Bitcoin Classic blocks: 2 ( 0.2% )
SegWit blocks: 275 ( 27.5% )

Conclusion: The majority of miners support bigger blocks

https://vote.bitcoin.com/arguments/block-size-limit-should-be-increased-to-8-mb-as-soon-as-possible

Conclusion: The majority of bitcoin holders supports bigger blocks

Core needs to either increase the block size, or miners (acting in their own economic interest) will start using an alternative client, and they'll become irrelevant. Its really that simple

manselr

legendary

Activity: 868

Merit: 1006

Quote from: ?? on ??

I'm sure some people will say that SegWit/BU must be activated hard way even with risks chain split, community split, price crash or other else.
I also think that we might have to think that option, especially if tx fee become very high, there's altcoin which have at least 50% of bitcoin market cap or when the community tired with drama.

But what will happen when PoW change happens? PoW change is needed to protect from the hashrate of the other chain (they admited they will attack, in case of a split)

This means segwit-core chain starts from scratch.

Will exchanges, services etc support a chain with small hashrate?

meliodas

sr. member

Activity: 742

Merit: 329

CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!

I really hope that you're right about it,
I wish that the price would stay at the $1,100+ or get even higher.

CARrency

sr. member

Activity: 546

Merit: 256

Quote from: stdset on April 13, 2017, 08:18:33 AM

Staying as it is means getting obsolete, loosing competition. It's better to fork to 2 different coins and see which one outcompetes the other. But before that it would be better to try to forget mutual insults, become less arrogant, more respectful to our opponents and find common ground after all.
I guess the problem could be that most communication in our cryptoworld is going online. For some reason, online communication is almost always much less civilized than offline. I think VIPs should arrange real world meetings much more often.

As far as I know, there are a lot of these "real world meetings" but mostly they call it debate. There are a lot of debate happening about these solutions and I think noone will ever understand eah other because of their pride.

stdset

hero member

Activity: 572

Merit: 506

Staying as it is means getting obsolete, loosing competition. It's better to fork to 2 different coins and see which one outcompetes the other. But before that it would be better to try to forget mutual insults, become less arrogant, more respectful to our opponents and find common ground after all.
I guess the problem could be that most communication in our cryptoworld is going online. For some reason, online communication is almost always much less civilized than offline. I think VIPs should arrange real world meetings much more often.

manselr

legendary

Activity: 868

Merit: 1006

We can never have enough consensus for segwit, 95% is too much.

UASF can cause some disturbances in the mining world, even miners that are signaling for segwit could suffer from network split resulting in PoW change (rendering their mining operation useless.. millions in loses?

BUcoin, BClassic etc, are developed by incompetent morons, no one will ever trust their money on those.

Looks like Bitcoin will remain as it is for life. What do we do now?

Topic: Looks like Bitcoin will remain as it is for life - page 2. (Read 5190 times)