ONE Minute Blocks! Bitcoin as fast as Dogecoin, faster than Litecoin? VOTE

[Lauda]

My thought exactly. LaudaM probably thinks something similar.

To add an argument to the sarcasm: A rise in price does not help adopting bitcoin as a currency. A stable price will help adoption. People that are just seeing bitcoin as a get rich quick scheme will cash out eventually causing another crash or at least a rollercoaster price. No merchant wants an unpredictable price.

Exactly. People just want to price to stop declining and start rising sharply again because of profits. Anyone who thinks in this way has a wrong image in their head and is just another random greedy person.
Bitcoin works as long as the price stays above 0$. Also, there will be no altcoin to takeover Bitcoin (unless something really bad happens). That is just not as likely as people think.
Anyone preaching otherwise should stay away from the Bitcoin Discussion section.

Your assumptions are as false as you consider mine
-snip-

Saying something doesn't make it true. False cause is the case here.


Update: Here's another 'no' for playing the good guy card.

[unamis76]

Pretty curious to see a dev supporting such a deep change in the code... I don't really see the pros at being big enough for this change.

[NeuroticFish]

...

The last thread I've read about the 20Mb fork ended up with fascism and so on.
Here my points are just not read / understood (maybe I wrote strange, I don't know), but I better leave this, because else this thread will have bad end too and it's a shame.
Because, you know, it was a call for discussion and, I hope, for useful ideas, just in case somebody wants to read them.

[R2D221]

I just lost track of whose points are being proved and for what purpose.

[jonald_fyookball]

Why one minute? Let's go for it and make it one second. A typical miner can do 1 trillion hashes per second. That's plenty for a single block.

That wouldn't work because of network propogation time.  The block time
must be greatly larger than the time it would take to get blocks broadcast
across the network or you risk losing consensus (too many different chains going on
by different miners solving blocks).

[thejaytiesto]

We are on the cutting edge of technology. The idea that the most advanced transfer of value system invented by human beings should have to wait 10 minutes is ludicrous. Most people railing against this are afraid of change which is ironic because they are talking about the revolutionary bitcoin.

The transfer of value does not take 10 minutes.


Should we just post this every 5 posts on every confirmation thread on the board?

Bitcoin transactions take seconds. Bitcoin confirmations take 10 minutes.
Credit card transactions take seconds. Credit card confirmations take 180 days.

Confirmations != transactions

Yeah, like I said before, no one is out there complaining about how credit card transactions aren't instantaneous.
Someone should do a youtube video to explain why this is not a problem to educate the masses.

[WhatTheGox]

It is good as it is.There is no change needed at the moment.The current block time is acceptable and sometime appears little bit delays.Generally I am quite satisfied by the confirmation time.That can be risky to make it quicker.

Shouldn't really matter that much should it? seems like since bitcoin is still in beta without tons of payment services and structures built on top of it the confirm times are more noticeable.

[RitzBitzz]

My thought exactly. LaudaM probably thinks something similar.

To add an argument to the sarcasm: A rise in price does not help adopting bitcoin as a currency. A stable price will help adoption. People that are just seeing bitcoin as a get rich quick scheme will cash out eventually causing another crash or at least a rollercoaster price. No merchant wants an unpredictable price.

Exactly. People just want to price to stop declining and start rising sharply again because of profits. Anyone who thinks in this way has a wrong image in their head and is just another random greedy person.
Bitcoin works as long as the price stays above 0$. Also, there will be no altcoin to takeover Bitcoin (unless something really bad happens). That is just not as likely as people think.
Anyone preaching otherwise should stay away from the Bitcoin Discussion section.

Your assumptions are as false as you consider mine
-snip-

Saying something doesn't make it true. False cause is the case here.


Update: Here's another 'no' for playing the good guy card.

Oh I thought bitcoin has to be at least over 100$ for miners to be profitable and if mining stops then the network shuts down.

[odolvlobo]

Oh I thought bitcoin has to be at least over 100$ for miners to be profitable and if mining stops then the network shuts down.

There is no minimum profitable price. Mining can be profitable at any price because miners drop out as the price falls. As miners drop out, the difficulty goes down, making it more profitable for the miners that stay.

[Agestorzrxx]

What a bad idea, 10 minute is for safe.
We are now start to talk about increase the size of block size, if we make the block time to 1 minute, the size of the whole blockchain will be too large.

[NUFCrichard]

Small Question, yeah and it will sound infinitely stupid?

- Can we implement Kimoto's Gravity Well (A Patched Up Secure Version, Of Course)
- Can BitCoin Implement Proof Of Stake Mining

Also, One Minute Blocks are Just Insane! (Not in a good way)

Isn't kimoto's gravity well only important for coins that have massive swings in mining power, i.e. not Bitcoin?  I guess it wouldn't hurt, but it's also not vital in my opinion.

10 minute blocks aren't a big problem if everyone decides to accept 1 or 2 confirmation transactions, but I agree that waiting an hour can be quite annoying.  1 minute blocks don't seem to have any big downsides to me, I'd be for it.

[NeuroticFish]

That wouldn't work because of network propogation time.  The block time
must be greatly larger than the time it would take to get blocks broadcast
across the network or you risk losing consensus (too many different chains going on
by different miners solving blocks).

If this is indeed correct, then this is the smartest answer I've seen from the "conservative" part.

[Lauda]

Oh I thought bitcoin has to be at least over 100$ for miners to be profitable and if mining stops then the network shuts down.

This doesn't even make sense. Have you ever looked at previous charts? The price was well under $100, and there is no reason that it can't go that path again,
If a portion of miners leave once we reach ($100 per Bitcoin), the difficulty will drop and the profitability will be there again.

[jonald_fyookball]

That wouldn't work because of network propogation time.  The block time
must be greatly larger than the time it would take to get blocks broadcast
across the network or you risk losing consensus (too many different chains going on
by different miners solving blocks).

If this is indeed correct, then this is the smartest answer I've seen from the "conservative" part.

I said that in response to the suggestion that someone posted about one-second blocks.
This wouldn't be a factor for one minute blocks but I still don't think those are a good
idea because I don't see the benefit relative to the risk of changing the protocol.

[NeuroticFish]

That wouldn't work because of network propogation time.  The block time
must be greatly larger than the time it would take to get blocks broadcast
across the network or you risk losing consensus (too many different chains going on
by different miners solving blocks).

If this is indeed correct, then this is the smartest answer I've seen from the "conservative" part.

I said that in response to the suggestion that someone posted about one-second blocks.
This wouldn't be a factor for one minute blocks but I still don't think those are a good
idea because I don't see the benefit relative to the risk of changing the protocol.

The one second block "proposal" was an over-sarcastic answer to my post telling that quicker blocks may be good in the future.
Even if it's not an issue now, we still expect the network to grow, so maybe 1 minute is indeed to small. Better have a big margin there.

The benefit vs the risks on changing the protocol is indeed small now. But I think that the proposal to discuss this is good.
Because from such discussions, especially if they are constructive, we can gather a couple of good changes which, together, may make sense done all together (the benefit bigger than the risks).
And mho is that at some point Bitcoin will need a big change (fork).

Currently the "conservative" members are very strong - some with good arguments (which I respect), some not - and give the impression that Bitcoin is afraid of changes. Which is also not good. Because somebody that wants to invest for long time in Bitcoin would like to see that, with good reasons, Bitcoin will do all it takes, even a fork, to stay the best crypto coin.
Right now that doesn't seem to happen. At least that's my feeling.

Of course, it doesn't count much, because I am just a tiny bitcoiner, but how about the bigger ones? How about the ones to come? Selling needs good product and good strategy too.