basically you want to turn the bitcoin p2P technology to a centralized supervisa?
seriously you think for one second that fancy-marketed-corporatist-freeloading-xt-corp-gov-coin would retain the same value as bitcoin does now?
why not use ripple then? they got it all up and running already.
No. I am in favor of a de-centralized crypto-currency with mass adoption. It will be driven by individuals storing petabytes or more of data in the future just as they store gigabytes of data today. What I do know is that Bitcoin with a 1 MB blocksize limit will not be it.
au contraire mon ami, 1MB ensures a minimum level of decentralization.
serisouly, decentralized literally means random people across the globe get to run and access the bltcoin client.
not big data farming corporations *inclusively*. else where is the decentralization in this? where is the trust? coinbase?
also, whats that shortcut implying mass adoption would somehow be linked with the block size.
is 'the mass' just waiting for bigger blocks to get on board??? is it a facebook/coinbase thing?
anyway, from my edit above, i think we can agree by now that the increasing the block size is not an effective way to improve scalability, besides potentially jeopardize this decentralized hence trustless and censorship resistant network.
so i am still happy to discuss realistic scaling solutions.
