Why BitcoinXT Must Never Gain Consensus

[jonald_fyookball]

so your argument for why BitcoinXT Must Never Gain Consensus is that it would allow it to potentially compete with Visa?

Well I am convinced. I would much rather pay a 3% tx fee to visa in the forum of higher prices then pay around $0.04 in tx fees to the miners, especially for thousand dollar transactions.

here the coup de grâce, if we stick to 1MB blocks we'll pay minner 10-100X more on TX fees and they will continue to deliver a system that can't handle more the 1/100000^th Visa's system.

pay more for less, FUCKING BRILLIANT

Nobody wants that tho. Raising the block size now is not needed now. It wont be needed for at least a year or two.

Raising it so aggressively to 8GB so fast as Gavin/Hearn intend is bad.

Nobody wants what?

[adamstgBit]

so your argument for why BitcoinXT Must Never Gain Consensus is that it would allow it to potentially compete with Visa?

Well I am convinced. I would much rather pay a 3% tx fee to visa in the forum of higher prices then pay around $0.04 in tx fees to the miners, especially for thousand dollar transactions.

here the coup de grâce, if we stick to 1MB blocks we'll pay minner 10-100X more on TX fees and they will continue to deliver a system that can't handle more the 1/100000^th Visa's system.

pay more for less, FUCKING BRILLIANT

Nobody wants that tho. Raising the block size now is not needed now. It wont be needed for at least a year or two.

Raising it so aggressively to 8GB so fast as Gavin/Hearn intend is bad.

Nobody wants what?

no one wants to let the 1MB limit be the reason miners 10-100X TX fees

i also agree Gavin/Hearn fix seems like overkill, all we should really be trying to get out of this mod is a quick fix not a be all end all solution to scalability

[Liquid71]

Visa currently has a transaction processing capability of 50,000 per second. If this 8GB blocksize were to be instantiated, then bitcoin would potentially be able to compete with the likes of traditional payment systems, but is that what it has been originally designed for?

Yes.

Quote from: satoshi

In a few decades when the reward gets too small, the transaction fee will become the main compensation for nodes. I'm sure that in 20 years there will either be very large (bitcoin) transaction volume or no volume.

If the large companies in the Bitcoin space can decide by majority vote (not consensus) to change the protocol, then the governments those same companies are regulated by can force those commercial entities to regulate the Bitcoin protocol. It will no longer be an apolitical protocol that runs on consensus.

[knight22]

Visa currently has a transaction processing capability of 50,000 per second. If this 8GB blocksize were to be instantiated, then bitcoin would potentially be able to compete with the likes of traditional payment systems, but is that what it has been originally designed for?

Yes.

Quote from: satoshi

In a few decades when the reward gets too small, the transaction fee will become the main compensation for nodes. I'm sure that in 20 years there will either be very large (bitcoin) transaction volume or no volume.

If the large companies in the Bitcoin space can decide by majority vote (not consensus) to change the protocol, then the governments those same companies are regulated by can force those commercial entities to regulate the Bitcoin protocol. It will no longer be an apolitical protocol that runs on consensus.

Bitcoin is driven by economic incentives and market forces. Raising the blocksize limit has an obvious economic incentives for businesses and miners. Governments can't do shit about it.

[Liquid71]

If the large companies in the Bitcoin space can decide by majority vote (not consensus) to change the protocol, then the governments those same companies are regulated by can force those commercial entities to regulate the Bitcoin protocol. It will no longer be an apolitical protocol that runs on consensus.

Bitcoin is driven by economic incentives and market forces. Raising the blocksize limit has an obvious economic incentives for businesses and miners. Governments can't do shit about it.

You are sadly naive when it comes to government influence over businesses. And the economic and market forces have spoken, you check the price recently  

[knight22]

If the large companies in the Bitcoin space can decide by majority vote (not consensus) to change the protocol, then the governments those same companies are regulated by can force those commercial entities to regulate the Bitcoin protocol. It will no longer be an apolitical protocol that runs on consensus.

Bitcoin is driven by economic incentives and market forces. Raising the blocksize limit has an obvious economic incentives for businesses and miners. Governments can't do shit about it.

You are sadly naive when it comes to government influence over businesses. And the economic and market forces have spoken, you check the price recently  

What are governments waiting for to regulate the internet to death? They can't for the same reasons they won't be able with bitcoin.

[turvarya]

If the large companies in the Bitcoin space can decide by majority vote (not consensus) to change the protocol, then the governments those same companies are regulated by can force those commercial entities to regulate the Bitcoin protocol. It will no longer be an apolitical protocol that runs on consensus.

Bitcoin is driven by economic incentives and market forces. Raising the blocksize limit has an obvious economic incentives for businesses and miners. Governments can't do shit about it.

You are sadly naive when it comes to government influence over businesses. And the economic and market forces have spoken, you check the price recently  

Did you check the stock markets recently? Especially the Chinese one(since most miners are Chinese)
There are so many thing going on in the world, you just can't draw a straight line from cause to effect, but I seriously doubt, that this debate has much to do, with the price movement.

so your argument for why BitcoinXT Must Never Gain Consensus is that it would allow it to potentially compete with Visa?

Well I am convinced. I would much rather pay a 3% tx fee to visa in the forum of higher prices then pay around $0.04 in tx fees to the miners, especially for thousand dollar transactions.

here the coup de grâce, if we stick to 1MB blocks we'll pay minner 10-100X more on TX fees and they will continue to deliver a system that can't handle more the 1/100000^th Visa's system.

pay more for less, FUCKING BRILLIANT

Nobody wants that tho. Raising the block size now is not needed now. It wont be needed for at least a year or two.

Raising it so aggressively to 8GB so fast as Gavin/Hearn intend is bad.

That is exactly the point. If we need it in a year, we have to make the preparations now. You just can't switch a global system over from one day to another, you should plan at least 6 months for that.

[glub0x]

We can at least agree that bitcoin WAS designed for mass transaction.
We can now disagree on the fact that satoshi was wrong and that it cannot be Or that the decision cannot be taken now.
So when do you think we should start raising blocksize? In a year? 2? why ?