Bitcoin works ok if you pay the normal fee.
It works ok with the current amount of users.
Take 10 times as many users and no amount of fees will make the transaction demand fit into the blocks.
As it is, Bitcoin doesn't scale.
Topic: The Tragedy of the Core (Read 1979 times)
It works ok with the current amount of users.
Take 10 times as many users and no amount of fees will make the transaction demand fit into the blocks.
As it is, Bitcoin doesn't scale.
Bitcoin works ok if you pay the normal fee. If you want to pay 0 fees, then expect problems. Isn't this a given by now? we can't stay and super mega low fees forever, so pay your goddamned fee (which is the same if you are paying 1 or 1000000000000000000 dollars).
I still can't see the rationale of denying the larger block size. We know system has weaknesses yet we chose to accept and live with it. I guess you have to really see how broken it is before starts pressing the panic button.
You might get a block increase, but you will be sorely disappointed by its results. Why do you want a block increase anyway?
To make bitcoin ready for future growth in transaction rate. To make room for new users, merchants and use cases. To keep transaction fees competitive and affordable to larger demographic. To give confidence to all actors in bitcoin space that the transaction rate will not be stunted by some artificial cap designed for a completely different purpose. To give an opportunity to Satoshi's vision that the "eventual solution will be to not care how big it gets". (We wouldn't have bitcoin if he wasn't right in great many things)
Well, that's few reasons I could think just now, but there's probably more.
boring
very sophisticated way to communicate, dude. Do you always react like that when you run out of firepower? Just goes to show...
"Not care how big it gets"
Do you grok the implications of this?
I don't care if Satoshi said it this is nothing that deserves a serious response.
Bla blabla bla blabla bla!
You might get a block increase, but you will be sorely disappointed by its results. Why do you want a block increase anyway?
To make bitcoin ready for future growth in transaction rate. To make room for new users, merchants and use cases. To keep transaction fees competitive and affordable to larger demographic. To give confidence to all actors in bitcoin space that the transaction rate will not be stunted by some artificial cap designed for a completely different purpose. To give an opportunity to Satoshi's vision that the "eventual solution will be to not care how big it gets". (We wouldn't have bitcoin if he wasn't right in great many things)
Well, that's few reasons I could think just now, but there's probably more.
boring
very sophisticated way to communicate, dude. Do you always react like that when you run out of firepower? Just goes to show...
"Not care how big it gets"
Do you grok the implications of this?
I don't care if Satoshi said it this is nothing that deserves a serious response.
You might get a block increase, but you will be sorely disappointed by its results. Why do you want a block increase anyway?
To make bitcoin ready for future growth in transaction rate. To make room for new users, merchants and use cases. To keep transaction fees competitive and affordable to larger demographic. To give confidence to all actors in bitcoin space that the transaction rate will not be stunted by some artificial cap designed for a completely different purpose. To give an opportunity to Satoshi's vision that the "eventual solution will be to not care how big it gets". (We wouldn't have bitcoin if he wasn't right in great many things)
Well, that's few reasons I could think just now, but there's probably more.
boring
very sophisticated way to communicate, dude. Do you always react like that when you run out of firepower? Just goes to show...
You might get a block increase, but you will be sorely disappointed by its results. Why do you want a block increase anyway?
To make bitcoin ready for future growth in transaction rate. To make room for new users, merchants and use cases. To keep transaction fees competitive and affordable to larger demographic. To give confidence to all actors in bitcoin space that the transaction rate will not be stunted by some artificial cap designed for a completely different purpose. To give an opportunity to Satoshi's vision that the "eventual solution will be to not care how big it gets". (We wouldn't have bitcoin if he wasn't right in great many things)
Well, that's few reasons I could think just now, but there's probably more.
boring
Already most of people here recognise XT like danger for bicoin,whatdo you want from bitcoin core,everything was going in right direction,maybe slow but right way.And now XT developers are trying to say that thay came to rescue btc from crash,lies.lies,lies
"maybe slow"?? Bullshit! This is the fucking Internet. We want big ass blocks and we want them now! . We don't have time too wait. It is not certain that there will be ANY block size increase and there won't be certainty until it actually happens. If they at least implemented Garzik's 2MB blocks while we continued to work on a more permanent solution THEN I would be convinced that there is some assurance that a solution will come before the network gets jammed like the I5 in Los Angeles during rush hour.
If the debate is about scalability vs. decentralization or scalability vs. security (and youy damn well know it is), then there is NO commitment from a critical mass of core devs to increase blocksize with minimal impact on the other characteristics. It's till a very much "IF" debate and not a "when and by how much" debate. That is not progress. That is unacceptable.
Maybe you could sell them some block space? What if we all chip in?
You might get a block increase, but you will be sorely disappointed by its results. Why do you want a block increase anyway?
To make bitcoin ready for future growth in transaction rate. To make room for new users, merchants and use cases. To keep transaction fees competitive and affordable to larger demographic. To give confidence to all actors in bitcoin space that the transaction rate will not be stunted by some artificial cap designed for a completely different purpose. To give an opportunity to Satoshi's vision that the "eventual solution will be to not care how big it gets". (We wouldn't have bitcoin if he wasn't right in great many things)
Well, that's few reasons I could think just now, but there's probably more.
*two hands clapping*
Well said.
Already most of people here recognise XT like danger for bicoin,whatdo you want from bitcoin core,everything was going in right direction,maybe slow but right way.And now XT developers are trying to say that thay came to rescue btc from crash,lies.lies,lies
"maybe slow"?? Bullshit! This is the fucking Internet. We want big ass blocks and we want them now! . We don't have time too wait. It is not certain that there will be ANY block size increase and there won't be certainty until it actually happens. If they at least implemented Garzik's 2MB blocks while we continued to work on a more permanent solution THEN I would be convinced that there is some assurance that a solution will come before the network gets jammed like the I5 in Los Angeles during rush hour.
If the debate is about scalability vs. decentralization or scalability vs. security (and youy damn well know it is), then there is NO commitment from a critical mass of core devs to increase blocksize with minimal impact on the other characteristics. It's till a very much "IF" debate and not a "when and by how much" debate. That is not progress. That is unacceptable.
Maybe you could sell them some block space? What if we all chip in?
billyjoeallen, from time to time I have to remind myself that poe's law exists when I read your posts.
And gavin un-subscribing from /r/Bitcoin, that's so fucking sweet! We comedy gold miners secretly hope for a schism in the literal sense and it seems we might get our wish.
And gavin un-subscribing from /r/Bitcoin, that's so fucking sweet! We comedy gold miners secretly hope for a schism in the literal sense and it seems we might get our wish.
Already most of people here recognise XT like danger for bicoin,whatdo you want from bitcoin core,everything was going in right direction,maybe slow but right way.And now XT developers are trying to say that thay came to rescue btc from crash,lies.lies,lies
"maybe slow"?? Bullshit! This is the fucking Internet. We want big ass blocks and we want them now! . We don't have time too wait. It is not certain that there will be ANY block size increase and there won't be certainty until it actually happens. If they at least implemented Garzik's 2MB blocks while we continued to work on a more permanent solution THEN I would be convinced that there is some assurance that a solution will come before the network gets jammed like the I5 in Los Angeles during rush hour.
If the debate is about scalability vs. decentralization or scalability vs. security (and youy damn well know it is), then there is NO commitment from a critical mass of core devs to increase blocksize with minimal impact on the other characteristics. It's till a very much "IF" debate and not a "when and by how much" debate. That is not progress. That is unacceptable.
Already most of people here recognise XT like danger for bicoin,whatdo you want from bitcoin core,everything was going in right direction,maybe slow but right way.And now XT developers are trying to say that thay came to rescue btc from crash,lies.lies,lies
Don't you have your XT circlejerk forum now? Why don't you stay over there?
It's not about XT. XT is only one of several new proposals to remove the limit.
Yep, and not of them is any relevant until they get into core
Blocksize will be increased.Like or not.Laugh as much as you. We will see bigger Blocks!!It's inevitable. The majority of the community wants it.The big BTC companies want it.Big part of the Miners are in as well.So no doubt.
The "community" you speak of, ie. general redditards and bitcointalk users, are not representative of the bitcoin holders. As such, their opinion is as irrelevant to those of "big BTC companies" (corporate bankers shills trying to capture Bitcoin) and the other power hungry miners who don't know better.
You might get a block increase, but you will be sorely disappointed by its scale and its results.
The most irrelevant users in the bitcoin community will be those who call other users notoriously 'irrelevant', 'sheeps', 'redditards';
the antidemocratic elitists, the banners, the censors;
the warriors with their vulgar language, the DDos'ers; those who notoriously manipulate quotes, fake nodes etc.
There is no way that the mentality of those people will be winning. They are destined to be forked away to cook their own soup.
Definitely most people want a block increase. But I think that that it is for no particular technical reason, but because they perceive that raising the block limit will settle things.
Don't you have your XT circlejerk forum now? Why don't you stay over there?
It's not about XT. XT is only one of several new proposals to remove the limit.
Yep, and not of them is any relevant until they get into core
Blocksize will be increased.Like or not.Laugh as much as you. We will see bigger Blocks!!It's inevitable.The majority of the community wants it.The big BTC companies want it.Big part of the Miners are in as well.So no doubt.
And Satoshi wanted it too
Don't you have your XT circlejerk forum now? Why don't you stay over there?
No forum per se I can find just a Google Group.
Don't you have your XT circlejerk forum now? Why don't you stay over there?
It's not about XT. XT is only one of several new proposals to remove the limit.
Yep, and not of them is any relevant until they get into core
Blocksize will be increased.Like or not.Laugh as much as you. We will see bigger Blocks!!It's inevitable. The majority of the community wants it.The big BTC companies want it.Big part of the Miners are in as well.So no doubt.
The "community" you speak of, ie. general redditards and bitcointalk users, are not representative of the bitcoin holders. As such, their opinion is as irrelevant to those of "big BTC companies" (corporate bankers shills trying to capture Bitcoin) and the other power hungry miners who don't know better.
A majority of speculators (holders) also wants bigger blocks.
How can you tell?
I said that according to this failed troll poll: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/gold-collapsing-bitcoin-up-noonoopol-1091654
And that was not just about bigger block but about XT. Is says a lot.
Oh I see. Very sharp indeed. I stand corrected
Don't you have your XT circlejerk forum now? Why don't you stay over there?
It's not about XT. XT is only one of several new proposals to remove the limit.
Yep, and not of them is any relevant until they get into core
Blocksize will be increased.Like or not.Laugh as much as you. We will see bigger Blocks!!It's inevitable. The majority of the community wants it.The big BTC companies want it.Big part of the Miners are in as well.So no doubt.
The "community" you speak of, ie. general redditards and bitcointalk users, are not representative of the bitcoin holders. As such, their opinion is as irrelevant to those of "big BTC companies" (corporate bankers shills trying to capture Bitcoin) and the other power hungry miners who don't know better.
A majority of speculators (holders) also wants bigger blocks.
You might get a block increase, but you will be sorely disappointed by its scale and its results.
I'm fine with this.
How can you tell?
He can't, it's just speculation.
Well people, spend all your coins on the longest chain supporting bigger blocks.
I'll spend mine on the shorter chain and make sure my coins are backwards compatible. (Or don't spend them at all if there is a block size increase)
I said that according to this failed troll poll: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/gold-collapsing-bitcoin-up-noonoopol-1091654
And that was not just about bigger blocks but about XT. It says a lot.
I'm not fine with how it's being handled so I continue to run core node with over 70 connections at any given time.
Theres my vote.
Theres my vote.
Jump to: