Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 19352. (Read 26620518 times)

1. Economics is about dealing with scarce resources, not free shit, especially of the self-defeating kind.

2. Therefore the upper-layers managers will do exactly what you ask: paying higher btc fees thanks to the higher volume that they manage -not work at a loss and compensating it with volume :-D

IF GAME THEORY > PRECEDENT {SUCCESS}
ELSE {FAILURE}

Good morning, everyone!

I explained it to you many times already but fine. Things (w/e they are) only have value if the supply is limited and they have a purpose. How limited something is determines it's value (together with its utility value). The block size at the moment is in limited supply (1 MB roughly every 10 minutes), so a place on that has a certain implied value (this will be the fee in the long term, right now it's not very visible because of the huge subsidy which skews actual fees). The value of the sum of the fees determines the amount of security because this is how the miners are paid (the miner market is a commodity market so it will approach break-even long term. Total fees will equal security). Therefore if the block size is increased the value of size on the block chain goes down and thus the amount miners get paid goes down and so does the security.

Security is the most important thing giving value to XMR units and so a lower security will lower the intrinsic value of Bitcoin.

Similarly increasing the 21M coin limit will also lower the intrinsic value of Bitcoin because it inflates the supply (more unit available).

Next to all this there is the precedent reasoning mentioned above. Right now I trust Bitcoin to never inflate supply of either limited unit (XMR or block chain size) and therefore value Bitcoin as such. If they inflate it I will be forced to estimate future watering down of XMR and blockchain size (and thus watering down of value) in my intrinsic value calculations and therefore I will be prepared to pay a lower price for Bitcoins as an investment. The market will do the same.

1. The network capacity is half a million transactions per day no matter how high the fees are. Fees don't change capacity.

2. If people are forced onto layers, then the fees that go to securing the network will go to the layers also, depriving the miners of needed compensation when the blockreward gets halved. If the 1 MB limit is never raised, then the network will eventually be funded by those same half million people even if billions are using it in layers and side chains.  That will present a security problem. 

extrapolating out hashing difficulty, the mining network in a couple of years will be several gigawatts, all funded by fees because the block reward will be next to nothing. That means that fees will have to reflect a cost of hundreds of dollars per transaction if we keep the 1 MB limit! 

But that precedent already exists, since the max blocksize was lowered from 33 MB to 1 MB in mid 2010. Hence, instigating a precendent is not a valid argument.

hdbuck is very particular about the circles he jerks in.

Well I don't have quantitative analysis for your one and didn't understand your two so...

Anyway limiting the number of tx everyday is a bit strange. Why not setting no limit but imposing a high fee? I don't care to pay a high fee, what I want is that bitcoin is used and might replace fiat one day!

Coin



Explanation

1. Limit is reached today thanks to the tons of dust due to low fees
2. Anyone can build systems on top of bitcoin to make instant and almost free transactions for micropayments and not only micro.

Indeed.

This is a bullshit argument. See "slippery slope" reference above.  The only way miners would want to eliminate the 21MM cap is because they aren't getting enough in fees to remain profitable, which will be MORE likely to happen if those fees are going to third parties in sidechains and layers instead of them. 

Nobody else would want to increase total bitcoins as it would devalue their existing holdings.

I'm not talking about coins cap but block size.

Block size = limit number of tx = limit number of bitcoiners no?
If you can't make more than X tx a day it means you can't have much more than X people using btc in their daily life... Which means you limit the adoption of bitcoin... Which means it will never be able to replace the fiat system.

I find it both sad and not compatible with the btc ideology. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something though.

Hmm... Perfectly clear yeah... As polite as usual from what I see...

But paying the fees is not the problem. I don't care about paying the fees. What I care about is that if there is more transactions that can be added into the block, the fees will only get higher until enough people refuse to pay them for the number of transactions to be small enough to get in the blocks no? Which means we can have only a limited amount of tx everyday... Limit already reached today with maybe 1 million bitcoiners! So how do you want to reach teh billion? That's impossible!

Did I miss something?

The Bitstamp price fell back below $400 down to $396. The pump to $410 was very fast and I thought it would run out of steam, but now I don't know what it will do. There's a wall at $392 and another at 382. Will it go through those walls or go back up past 400 again?

Increasing adoption has nothing to do with blocksize cap, but the *trust* in the system to prevent any politicized human interference.

Adoption will follow the need to bypass traditional financial systems, even if it become more expensive to do so (it obviously should).

Nobody is forcing anyone in or out of bitcoin.

But by using Bitcoin you have abide to its protocol, and that is all.

Peter R. Rizun is not a madman, but he has been taking a lot of flak in this debate.

It might be healthy to run an independant site if you find his approach a bit too enthusiastic.

In any event, bct users like hdbuck, iCEBREAKER and brg444 are not good sources of info or judgement.

Bitcoin will still be there and usable only that it will stop from increasing in volume. Usability wise, bitcoin is not being used in a major way yet. Most of the coins are kept and simply traded with USD/BTC. The increase in demand while the supply is not will make the bitcoin price go up but that won't happen in the near future yet so there are so many things that could still happen.

Anyone can adopt bitcoin by paying the damned fees at market price.
Shills, saboteurs, trolls, academics, and useful idiots are invited to fork off.
Clear enough?

Indeed. Just follow the money, it usually answers many questions.