I'm sorry "you fool" but why on earth would you want such a high limit then?

Seemingly you are such a "fool" you don't even understand the implications of what that might mean do you?

And you do realise that if someone created such a block that no-one else could verify it in the 10 minutes required to create the next block right?

(or - you don't care about the fact that this just wouldn't work?)

That wasn't my point (and you know it).

Hmm.. did I say I'd put you on ignore?

Perhaps that might happen but no such luck for you at this stage (keep trying though).

Let's just look at that and think about how much we should actually consider reading anything else that you might have to post.

Hmm... nope - not worth reading anything further IMO (unable to make any sense in only two lines of text as you contradicted yourself that quickly).

Bitcoin cannot scale to work like VISA with the way it works because VISA isn't doing POW nor are its nodes designed to not trust one another.

If you want to use VISA - why not use VISA?
(it's already there and it works perfectly right now)

Behold - the mighty intellect of @franky1.

And yes - fuck it - I've put you on ignore (you are really just too boring to entertain me even when I make fun of you).

(so please don't forget to "get the last word" as I won't be replying to any more of your posts here or anywhere else on the forum)

Moore's law has actually begun to fall down in a number of ways (perhaps "storage" being the only one that now still stands even though initially it was only supposed to refer to computing power).

This has been in part due to the 3GHz limit that CPUs can operate at (without requiring seriously expensive cooling) and the fact that bandwidth has actually never even followed such a trend (instead it tends to jump every few years by quite a bit but then stagnate for quite a while after that).

Most improvements in processing speed these days are made through multi-threading (which can be applied to block validation) but that doesn't help when you are doing serialisation of information.

Maybe time you went back to creating your VB version of Bitcoin.

(am sure Bill Gates is very much looking forwards to reading your code)

Actually that is rubbish - the amount of code for SegWit is around 500 lines (which is not very much as I often write that much in a day) and it has been in testing for months.

Stop trying to shill for Bitcoin Classic - it is just another attempt by Gavin to take over control of Bitcoin.

Gavin is hoping that everyone is going to want to see "The Return Of The King" but I think that most of us actually would prefer to listen to a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Farewell_to_Kings.

No - I won't bother wasting my time with someone who doesn't even understand the basics.

You should spend more time in the "newbies" area where perhaps you could actually find someone who you could teach something to.

I hope you are right (and do think that it is more likely that Bitcoin will get through this tough time and end up even more resilient because of that).

Moore's law has never applied to bandwidth (so if Satoshi really thought that then clearly he wasn't a genius was he).

Or perhaps you think that because Satoshi could never be wrong then if he said that "Moore's Law" applies to bandwidth it actually does?

@franky1 - validation time is dependent upon signatures and other complex operations - not upon the size of the data itself.

Learn something before you post your stupid stuff please (I am getting close to putting you on ignore as you just continually spout nonsense which clearly hardly anyone else on this forum takes seriously anyway so I don't really care to deal with you much more).

Go back to trying to code Bitcoin in VB please.

From what I gather the SegWit stuff should be able to be done in a couple of months and then we'd expect further improvements later this year (and maybe a hard fork early to mid next year).

If this is handled properly (and not with the "kicking the can" approach that Gavin and others keep trying to push) then this should become a non-issue within a year or so.

It seems that the miners are mostly backing Bitcoin Core but I am not acting on behalf of Bitcoin Core (as I'm sure many want to accuse me of).

At the end of the day it is up to them as to whether a fork happens or not.

One thing I do know about is Chinese (as I live in China) and that is that they do not co-operate with each other (something that many westerners that come to business here are initially rather surprised at considering that they have the world's largest population for a single country).

There is plenty of stuff going on - it is just the idiots on this forum (who are mostly seemingly paid by Gavin's supporters) who need to have a block size increase *this week*.

In the "real world" no-one is even using Bitcoin for much at all (do all your family and friends use it for daily txs?).

Supposedly according to Mike Hearn it should already have died yet strangely enough the price is still over 400 USD (higher than when he declared it to be dead in the first place).

Why - because you say so?

Hey - let's just raise it to 64MB then see what happens.

(who cares if billions of dollars are destroyed - what's important is that we have fun)

SPV mining *is not proper mining*.

Is that not clear to you?

It is irrelevant whether or not they use the SPV protocol to do that so (and in fact they don't as they use the "relay network" which existed a long time before SPV support was added to Bitcoin) so your desperate attempts at trying to discredit me are failing and just making you look even more stupid.

If you mine that way then you end up on a fork (as has already happened) and as I have already tried to explain (but seemingly you are incapable of understanding) the larger you make the blocks then the easier it would be to trick other miners into mining on such forks.

And btw - the only *flawed understanding* here is your own.

WTF - you don't realise that the difficulty has gone down more than once before (and the propagation time has never done the same thing ever so trying to compare the two is simply ridiculous).

It's not my fault that you keep on putting your foot into your mouth - seemingly that's where you like it to be.

FYI - http://www.coinfox.info/news/5022-bitcoin-mining-difficulty-goes-down-for-the-first-time-in-eight-months

(now please do some reading before you post your next piece of nonsense)