...
How is Monero's scaling terrible compared to Bitcoin? I don't get it.
If one believes that keeping the blocksize in Bitcoin at 1 MB is a good idea then Monero's scaling with its adaptive blocksize limit could be seen as terrible. Monero's scaling appeals to those who want to see an increase in the Bitcoin blocksize
I think iCEBREAKER is a well known exception to that generalization about blocksize preferences although I think he has some specific reasons for it.
It is scientifically valid to modify a control variable like max_blocksize in Monero, which is an iteration of the Bitcoin experiment.
It is not scientifically valid to modify a control variable like max_blocksize in Bitcoin
prior to the resolution of that experiment.
(Unless you are a Hearnia-suffering Gavinista, in which case you believe the Bitcoin experiment has already been resolved.)
Thermos is making an unfair comparison between default Bitcoin tx size and default Monero tx size.
It's an apple vs orange situation. One is public, the other private. Of course the privacy isn't free.
That trade-off is a subtle point, but perhaps smooth & the gang can back me up with some numbers for illustration.
tx size[ZeroCash + zk-SNARK Area51 alien tech] >> tx size[Bitcoin + ad hoc off-chain kludge privacy overhead] > tx size[Monero including de facto elegant on-chain privacy protocol]Private tx size, from largest to smallest:
3. Zcash. Takes gobs of RAM to run, and tx are correspondingly enormous.
2. Bitcoin <-> CoinJoin <-> CT sidechain. BTC tx are small, but CJ/CT overhead is not.
1. Monero. On-chain mixing, while challenging to prune, provides one stop shopping. Unknown if/how RingCT overhead will interact with large block reward penalty.
Perhaps Lightning, a future BIP, or nifty CoinShuffle-type on-chain mixing hack will someday give BTC on-chain fungibility|privacy.
Until then, let's scale Bitcoin to 1mb while remembering that ossification is the engine of a bone's anti-fragility (it heals more strongly where broken).
Undue concern about Monero's tx size is exactly like undue concern about Bitcoin's 7 tps of economic bandwidth.
These critiques seem applicable so long as your model is Paypal But With Moar Blockchains.
When you reevaluate using the correct Gold 2.0 settlement paradigm, it's obvious Bitcoin and Monero tx are, however scarce, potentially among most precious things that have ever existed, due to their exorbitant utility in terms of ~frictionless value transfer and wealth creation/preservation.
I would like to see an example of each comparison in tx size.
Personally I haven't followed zcash too closely to know that information, but does anyone have an example?
Painting a clear picture of side by side comparisons of these 3 generalized sizes would be helpful.
Show Posts
