Bitcoin Forum
May 30, 2024, 01:40:27 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16]
301  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: My thoughts about the blocksize thing on: February 21, 2013, 09:02:01 PM
I don't understand why some people want a hard limit to encourage fewer potential transactions. Fewer transactions equals higher fees per transactions and less useful technology (at least in the role of a payment network) which then equals a less valuable and used technology (in all other roles).

A raised max block limit that increases at a slower rate than corresponding increases in commodity hardware and bandwidth does not mean that the majority of people wishing to act as full nodes cannot do so. The original 1MB limit is completely arbitrary and should scale as all other resources scale. The only reason that 21,000,000 total coins is not considered a problem is because of divisibility. Blocks also need to be continually divisible for Bitcoin to be valuable. Taking that ability away is incredibly shortsighted.

I am not sure this is so much about the hard limit rather than the unintended consequences if hard limit is raised and removed all together.  These wide-spread discussion is very good in itself.

Also important is the stability of the protocol, if you can raise the block size today, then how about total bitcoin tommorrow? We all know they are different, how and where is the line? And who determine the change? Can people opt to resist the change easily?

All these should be well-thought and discussed.



Nobody (that I have seen) is advocating for the limit to be removed all together, they are advocating for it to scale along with realistic resource availability and consumption. Why is the block limit 1MB and not 10KB? Because 1MB was seen as having realistic resource availability 4 years ago and it was anticipated to be easy to grow in the future. Too bad Satoshi's 1st version wasn't absolutely perfect from the beginning, I guess we are forever stuck with a shitty wire replacement system that will eventually lose value and be replaced since ideologues can't be bothered to give 2 fucks about actual adoption.  

Limiting the number of coins is not a problem because they are divisible. Limiting the number of "possible" transactions forever is a problem because it is counter the primary goal of any technology, which is to be used.
302  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: My thoughts about the blocksize thing on: February 21, 2013, 08:11:21 PM
I don't understand why some people want a hard limit to encourage fewer potential transactions. Fewer transactions equals higher fees per transactions and less useful technology (at least in the role of a payment network) which then equals a less valuable and used technology (in all other roles).

A raised max block limit that increases at a slower rate than corresponding increases in commodity hardware and bandwidth does not mean that the majority of people wishing to act as full nodes cannot do so. The original 1MB limit is completely arbitrary and should scale as all other resources scale. The only reason that 21,000,000 total coins is not considered a problem is because of divisibility. Blocks also need to be continually divisible for Bitcoin to be valuable. Taking that ability away is incredibly shortsighted.
303  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: My thoughts about the blocksize thing on: February 21, 2013, 07:56:20 PM
i'll hop on the bandwagon too...more transactions per block means more fees for the miners

While you're hopping on the bandwagon you might to...actually read the posts in the Development & Technical Discussion forum regarding block size instead of merely regurgitating your view that "hard coded limits are bad." More transactions per block means less fees for miners. I'll leave it as an exercise for you to figure out why.


If this is true, and miners have the option currently of including fewer (or 0) transactions in their blocks, why do current blocks not have minimal numbers of transactions?

It seems to me that to maximize transaction revenue, a miner would want to include the max number of paying transactions that he could, and a higher number per block would equal higher fees.
304  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Selling bitcoin wallet worth over 5 BTC on: February 15, 2013, 08:49:26 PM
I wouldn't do this simply because anyone could copy their encrypted wallet and "sell" it without actually losing the coins. It would be a really easy way to scam people. I'm not saying you're a scammer, I'm saying it would be easy to scam using this method.
305  Economy / Service Announcements / Re: Announcing BitcoinGet.com - New site to get FREE bitcoins on: February 15, 2013, 08:47:18 PM
Excited to try this.
306  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Helloooo everyone! on: February 15, 2013, 08:42:50 PM
Someone wrote a quick guide up yesterday on Reddit and made about 0.8 BTC in tips
307  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Bitcoin rebrand on: February 15, 2013, 08:41:48 PM
Looks awesome!
308  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Cryptography Lifespan on: February 15, 2013, 08:40:14 PM
If the cryptography behind bitcoin is broken, we have much bigger problems then with just bitcoin.
309  Other / Beginners & Help / Re: Introduce yourself :) on: February 15, 2013, 01:03:48 AM
Hello everyone!
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16]
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!