Will the price raise auto-solve the block size problem - page 2.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

Quote from: knight22 on October 02, 2015, 09:16:36 AM

Quote from: Carlton Banks on October 02, 2015, 08:17:19 AM

Quote from: Mickeyb on October 02, 2015, 07:27:15 AM

I don't think there can be a price raise until this block size debate isn't solved. Why? Well we have made such a mess out of it and made such a huge problem out of it that any serious investors see it as a problem as well and they stay away just until it's solved.

So even if some users here claim that there is no real problem we have made it look like there is one!

All that makes little sense. Bitcoin has been valued higher than current levels when the transaction level was much lower. And the progenitors of the non-problem are Hearn and Andresen, not the people who argued they were exaggerating. That's blaming the subject of an assault for defending themselves, i.e. not observant of reality

It makes a lot of sense.

1. No one with half of a brain would invest in a technology that doesn't scale so the price won't rise from speculation.

Except when precisely that happened in the past, for a period of several months.

Quote from: knight22 on October 02, 2015, 09:16:36 AM

2. Big projects that have the potential of bringing new massive influx of users are being pushed away.

Who? XT?

knight22

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1000

--------------->¿?

Quote from: Carlton Banks on October 02, 2015, 08:17:19 AM

Quote from: Mickeyb on October 02, 2015, 07:27:15 AM

I don't think there can be a price raise until this block size debate isn't solved. Why? Well we have made such a mess out of it and made such a huge problem out of it that any serious investors see it as a problem as well and they stay away just until it's solved.

So even if some users here claim that there is no real problem we have made it look like there is one!

All that makes little sense. Bitcoin has been valued higher than current levels when the transaction level was much lower. And the progenitors of the non-problem are Hearn and Andresen, not the people who argued they were exaggerating. That's blaming the subject of an assault for defending themselves, i.e. not observant of reality

It makes a lot of sense.

1. No one with half of a brain would invest in a technology that doesn't scale so the price won't rise from speculation.

2. Big projects that have the potential of bringing new massive influx of users are being pushed away. If there is no room for new massive influx of users then the price won't rise from usage.

Do you think the price will rise by pure magic?

Mickeyb

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Move On !!!!!!

Quote from: Carlton Banks on October 02, 2015, 08:17:19 AM

Quote from: Mickeyb on October 02, 2015, 07:27:15 AM

I don't think there can be a price raise until this block size debate isn't solved. Why? Well we have made such a mess out of it and made such a huge problem out of it that any serious investors see it as a problem as well and they stay away just until it's solved.

So even if some users here claim that there is no real problem we have made it look like there is one!

All that makes little sense. Bitcoin has been valued higher than current levels when the transaction level was much lower. And the progenitors of the non-problem are Hearn and Andresen, not the people who argued they were exaggerating. That's blaming the subject of an assault for defending themselves, i.e. not observant of reality

I know that it makes no sense. I am just saying what's the general sentiment in the community and in the press when I am reading about Bitcoin. I guess this is normal, after all two months we were buzzing only about the XT fork.

I am not saying that the whole community (Core, XT and block size increase) is guilty but I am saying that Mike and Gavin weren't alone in this, they had and still have people that support them and a community that supports them.

Edit: And let me just add that even though I don't think that the conservative side of the community is guilty for this image that we sent, we did add to it. When you have new people coming in the community to look at the rant that's going on, very often they don't know who's fault is it and who started. They just see a messy rant going on.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

Quote from: Mickeyb on October 02, 2015, 07:27:15 AM

I don't think there can be a price raise until this block size debate isn't solved. Why? Well we have made such a mess out of it and made such a huge problem out of it that any serious investors see it as a problem as well and they stay away just until it's solved.

So even if some users here claim that there is no real problem we have made it look like there is one!

All that makes little sense. Bitcoin has been valued higher than current levels when the transaction level was much lower. And the progenitors of the non-problem are Hearn and Andresen, not the people who argued they were exaggerating. That's blaming the subject of an assault for defending themselves, i.e. not observant of reality

MicroGuy

legendary

Activity: 2506

Merit: 1030

Twitter @realmicroguy

If the block size limit is left at 1MB, a fee market will emerge whereas users will bid/compete for transaction priority. The reason Satoshi left the limit at 1MB is because Gavin scared the hell out of him for reasons well known by most here before he could make that change.

If Satoshi were active in development now, there is no question he would simply increase the max block size to 8MB (static) to prevent this fee market from emerging. He would also most likely send Gavin an email and plead with him to cut back on his meds. BIP101 is not the product of a clear mind. Cool

Mickeyb

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Move On !!!!!!

I don't think there can be a price raise until this block size debate isn't solved. Why? Well we have made such a mess out of it and made such a huge problem out of it that any serious investors see it as a problem as well and they stay away just until it's solved.

So even if some users here claim that there is no real problem we have made it look like there is one!

coinplus

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1058

Quote from: bitgolden on October 02, 2015, 12:20:35 AM

I ask this question based on these...
1. Size of the transaction is based on amount of satoshi we transact.
2. When price raise, the amount in a transaction would be less comparatively.
3. With less sized transactions (still same value or higher value as a regular user transacts), a block can pick more transactions.

I read a average transaction size is 500KB. Assume it has some 1Milllion satoshi or 0.01BTC, current value $2.413 .
If the price goes to 10 times, then to send same $2.413, we just need 0.1 million satoshi or 0.001BTC, by mathematically transaction size must reduce to 50KB or some what. (There are some part of size do not change regardless of number of satoshi)
Now a block approximately can pick 10 times more transactions.

So, we need price raise to solve block-size debate?

So, basically as mentioned by many people here, the size of a transaction is not depended on the amount in that transactions. So, price raise is not doing anything with transaction's size. Now, again we need to think for a solution to beat Visa network in processing more transactions per second.

shorena

copper member

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1528

No I dont escrow anymore.

Quote from: bitgolden on October 02, 2015, 12:20:35 AM

I ask this question based on these...
1. Size of the transaction is based on amount of satoshi we transact.

Thats not how bitcoin works. The size in bytes is based on the number of inputs you use and the number of outputs you create. Inputs have no limit in how much satoshi they can hold, outputs are only limited by the inputs you use. E.g. if you have 2 inputs of 10 BTC each, the sum of your outputs can not be larger than 20 BTC.

Quote from: bitgolden on October 02, 2015, 12:20:35 AM

2. When price raise, the amount in a transaction would be less comparatively.

Fristly the amount of what? The amount of value would increase with an increasing price as long as you meassure value by BTC price. The price of 1 btc in any other currency has no influence whatsoever on how the network works.

Quote from: bitgolden on October 02, 2015, 12:20:35 AM

3. With less sized transactions (still same value or higher value as a regular user transacts), a block can pick more transactions.

See above.

Quote from: bitgolden on October 02, 2015, 12:20:35 AM

I read a average transaction size is 500KB.

Read again, I doubt that anyone ever wrote that. That would result in 2 transactions per 10 minutes (on average) as the current blocksize limit is 1MB.

Quote from: bitgolden on October 02, 2015, 12:20:35 AM

Assume it has some 1Milllion satoshi or 0.01BTC, current value $2.413 .
If the price goes to 10 times, then to send same $2.413, we just need 0.1 million satoshi or 0.001BTC, by mathematically transaction size must reduce to 50KB or some what. (There are some part of size do not change regardless of number of satoshi)
Now a block approximately can pick 10 times more transactions.

So, we need price raise to solve block-size debate?

You should start fresh, I dont know where but somewhere you took a wrong turn when trying to understand bitcoin.

NorrisK

legendary

Activity: 1946

Merit: 1007

If you have a lot of small transactions in your wallet and you try to send a bigger one after that, it will be built up from all those small transactions. This is where the size of your blocks increases.

A price raise will not solve any future problems with the block limit.

goregrind

full member

Activity: 149

Merit: 100

The amount and transaction size are not directly related, so no.

coinpr0n

hero member

Activity: 910

Merit: 1000

"Size of the transaction is based on amount of satoshi we transact." No.

The size of a transaction is based on the number of inputs and outputs a transaction has, has nothing to do with the amount transacted.

dothebeats

legendary

Activity: 3542

Merit: 1352

Cashback 15%

1. Transaction fee isn't defined based on how much we transact, but rather the size of transaction itself.
2. There isn't one, not unless we see a massive adoption and increased transaction numbers in the whole network.
3. Yes.

neonshium

hero member

Activity: 1134

Merit: 515

Perfect discovery.
This is the reason Satoshi left us with 1MB blocks. So, we do need any block size improvement right away. Time will solve.
When nodes can afford big blocks like HDD cost and bandwidth cost considerably go down, we can go for bigger blocks in steps.

Holliday

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1012

1. No.
2. There is no block size problem.

ginvestor

newbie

Activity: 26

Merit: 0

I hope so.

bitgolden

legendary

Activity: 2996

Merit: 1132

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

I ask this question based on these...
1. Size of the transaction is based on amount of satoshi we transact.
2. When price raise, the amount in a transaction would be less comparatively.
3. With less sized transactions (still same value or higher value as a regular user transacts), a block can pick more transactions.

I read a average transaction size is 500KB. Assume it has some 1Milllion satoshi or 0.01BTC, current value $2.413 .
If the price goes to 10 times, then to send same $2.413, we just need 0.1 million satoshi or 0.001BTC, by mathematically transaction size must reduce to 50KB or some what. (There are some part of size do not change regardless of number of satoshi)
Now a block approximately can pick 10 times more transactions.

So, we need price raise to solve block-size debate?

Topic: Will the price raise auto-solve the block size problem - page 2. (Read 1585 times)