Do you agree to raise the block size limit to 20 megabytes or not?

[Somekindabitcoin]

And that's really the debate, how and when, not if.

And I find that sad. I believe the debate should be about a way of giving back the ability for any client to add transactions to the block chain, getting rid of blocks altogether (or viewed another way, block size=1 transaction) and load balancing the distribution of blocks. Mining and including transactions in the block chain need to be separate, IMO.

 


 then you should design your own coin 

No please, no more bullshit and useless coins.. there's only profit for devs and it's sad.
There was not a good coin for very long time and they should make something useful.

[TransaDox]

No please, no more bullshit and useless coins.. there's only profit for devs and it's sad.
There was not a good coin for very long time and they should make something useful.

Most sensible comment I've seen for a while.

My vision (however feasible it may be) has these two features:
1. Transactions are processed in clients and not by miners, harnessing the collective processing power of participants to run the network. (the original vision?)
2. The block chain is distributed - by that I mean in pieces distributed amongst the clients and a local "cache" of relevant pieces used by the client for transactions. You could still build a complete history by retrieving all the pieces in the cloud if you wanted, but its not necessary for day to day operation.

These two would make most of the infrastructure problems go away, IMO. Interesting times.

[NorrisK]

I guess it is needed and I don't see why so many people are fighting it.. In the end there is no way around it.. It is currently just an arbritrary valule anyway.