B1tUnl0ck3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 266

1 btc = 1 btc


View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
June 12, 2017, 01:42:32 PM

Still waiting for the 10mb block... I am sure that it wouldn't reduce the fees too much as there would be 10 times more txs per block. And then move to 100mb block... and then 1 GB block ( 7000 tps).

What's the size of the mempool?

Which is why the Lightning network is also necessary, Bitcoin as is cannot sustain itself. Not enough TPS to sustain itself with a low block reward. New users look at the fees and go you know what I'll use something else.

at least we agree on the problem : not enough tps. saying that excluding the fees. I agree it's problematic to modify the blocksize. But 7 tps is quite low for a worldwide system.

my problem with lightning is that it's another layer of instability / security issue. I find way more simple to raise the block size and if you look at internet connectivity or harddrive space or processing power since 2009 there has been a big increase in performance. Today a 100mb block wouldn't hurt anyone. but to be more gradual a 10 mb is nothing special.

who will control the lightning network? with a 10 /100 /1000 mb block consensus there shouldn't be any more problem as of now.

I agree a move to bigger blocks solves a lot of problems - I would like both big blocks and other solutions, and a long term pathway to deal with things as usage expands (and the moon on a stick Smiley )
We are still using a network that was inefficient with 1mm wallets in 2014 when we now have close to 14.5mm wallets open

I am not against others solution on top of the chain. but just that the main chain should be usable without any addons. if users want a lightning what ever options next to it, I don't care but just that if their system has a systemic failure it doesn't impact the main chain but just the users of the optional layers.

Make bitcoin great again Smiley.