Topic: Will you keep block size at 1MB if that makes bitcoin value rise? - page 2. (Read 1501 times)

Suppose I own a building and have some tenants living there.
I know there is a demand for housing, so that if I renovated the building to
accommodate 2x of the number of tenants, I'd still have most of the rooms
filled all the time.

Now which one would make me more attractive to prospective buyers of
my building?
a) enlarge the building and get 2 times more rent
b) do nothing but charge 2 times more rent

Increase in rent is the same, so you might think that by raising
the rent, you'll get the same result without having to do anything.
But buyers don't just look at the figures alone.

They use them as starting point and look at the fundamentals as well.
If they learn that you're just overcharging your tenants, well...

So with bitcoin, once ordinary people start to see with their own eyes that
BTC is accepted in many places, there are easy-to-use wallets
available, burgeoning Bitcoin-based businesses and good steady flow of
transactions then BTC price will stabilize.

Whereas the other option means that you check up your full node on Raspberry,
issue estimatefee on the console and see that the silkroad crowd
desperate for their fix are really getting fleeced today... so hey, things looking
good!  

When your transaction capacity is limited, you will plan accordingly. For example, if your bank allow you to do only one transaction per day, or 0 transaction during weekends, then you will combine all those small transactions into a large one, thus reduce the amount of transactions. In fact, behind the scene, banks combine millions of transactions daily into one single transaction to dramatically reduce the amount of transaction data

Almost anything's value was crashed around the world during Friday, stock market, oil, etc... this is just anticipation of more rate hike from FED, not because of Hearn  

Forgive me my ignorance,  but why increasing block size increases database? Won't same number of transactions need same total space regardless of block size?

So the fifteen percent drop on the same day as hearns post was pure coincidence?

I understand that the thinking behind 2MB is following the initial trajectory, and as long as technology allow, the block size can be increased at a controlled pace. But as a software, the blockchain database is already too big. Nothing grows at exponential rate forever, and network bandwidth and CPU speed have not increased significantly during the latest decade. So if you sooner or later will hit a technical limit, then why don't limit it at an early phase when you still can keep the database growth small?

Artificial limit typically is used to provide better user experience. All modern cars have artificial limit for its torque output, so the torque is a constant level regardless of engine RPM, thus the driver can experience smooth acceleration of the car. Cars can all provide larger output than their stock performance through chip upgrade to remove this limit, but in that case the car output will vary a lot at different RPM, gives worse user experience and reduce the engine life

The fundamental question is, will cheap transactions increase bitcoin's value? This is the same as: What is the reason that people come to bitcoin? I don't think they come to bitcoin to do cheap transactions, anyway there are many 0 fee instant confirmed mobile payment solutions out there already, why bother using bitcoin when you need to exchange and pay a lot of fee along the way to spend

2MB will make it rise, not artificial 1MB. in the long run we need some flex-cap.

Hearn dumped, then he told Wall Street he dumped, then Wall Street dumped, then China saw Wall Street dump, then China dumped, and now China is dumping. 

I don't see any direct relationship between price and Hearn, it is just time to make some consolidation after we had so strong run during past 2 months, the resistance at 450 is so strong that now whales need to wash the market for a while to shake out the weak hands

I read the same thing. Lost the sauce tho.

other dev, those that remained there supporting the real bitcoin, there is a proposal for 2mb, in different way

segregated witness or directly upgrade it to 2mb, then probably go to the sidechain route


OP, miners don't really need to increase fee, if the value is increased, so you can fix this in three ways, increase fee, increase the demand(not directly possible), increase the block limit

one of this must be increased in the end, there is no other way around

Geez how thick are you? Price is tanking because hearn just revealed bitcoin isnt scaling.  Unbelievable.

Who is raising limit?  Core?

Not because of the price would go up or down, but because decentralization of nodes is the first priority by anyone that actually cares about Bitcoin surviving long term.

They are raising the limit to 2 MB in April anyway so this should make noobs STFU for a while.

Of course keeping the block size at 1MB will make the transaction more and more expensive, but then people will ask: What makes this system more and more expensive to do transaction? Then after a little research they will understand that this is due to a designed limited transaction capacity to ensure the agility and decentralization of the system. However, a rising fee is a good indicator of increased transaction demand. So when they see the fee is rising, they will understand the usage is higher and the demand is higher, they will foresee a rise in price due to higher demand and buy more bitcoins, so the bitcoin price rises. This is similar to: When the miners see the mining difficulty has gone up, they don't quit mining but invest in new generation miners instead

My observation is: There is almost nothing in this world becomes more valuable because it is cheaper and cheaper to use. Going the cheap route usually result in the decrease in value

Just look at those capital goods that have a high transaction cost: Gold, Stocks, Real estate ... They are never meant to be cheap to transact but still gained higher and higher value over time. On the other hand, those things that have cheaper and cheaper running cost, like car, tv, pc, mobile phone etc... they all goes down in value over time

I always think that low fee is a marketing trick from early adopters to attract those who don't really understand bitcoin and dump the coins on them. But to get true believers on board, they should be attracted to bitcoin by their own research and understanding, not by some marketing campaign. The hype caused by such campaign is always short lived. I'm quite sure the bitcoin hardcore supporter did not come to bitcoin because of its low fee

If someone can show an example that something's value goes up with lower and lower usage cost, please share it