The 20 MB Miner War That Could Destroy Bitcoin

[littlebeetle]

The issue of Bitcoin block size is coming to a head within a matter of days.
Could a battle over block size between Western businesses and Eastern
miners leave Bitcoin in danger of self-destruction?

Does the problem really exist? Does the article exaggerate the danger of the situation?

[Snorek]

No. I seriously doubt that Chinese miners and community will try to reject changes and impose to stay with 1 MB block limit, they want to earn money from bitcoin, not trash it.
They are barking but they will swallow it, after all this split would mean that bitcoin price would go to hell, and then - we all lose.

[Xialla]

chinese miners are so heavily invested and depended on bitcoin, that they will not shoot to their own legs..at least I hope, that they are smart enough.

[Agestorzrxx]

No. I seriously doubt that Chinese miners and community will try to reject changes and impose to stay with 1 MB block limit, they want to earn money from bitcoin, not trash it.
They are barking but they will swallow it, after all this split would mean that bitcoin price would go to hell, and then - we all lose.

Only Chinese miners not the community. They may reject, they only take care of their profit.

[LiteCoinGuy]

Chinese miners are okay with bigger blocks. no problem here, just a FUD article.

[randy8777]

it's all about money. no matter where the miners comes from, they are looking for profit. no one wants to destroy bitcoin while they can make good money.

[Amph]

chinese miners are so heavily invested and depended on bitcoin, that they will not shoot to their own legs..at least I hope, that they are smart enough.

they are, because another article is talking about how they are accepting a 8MB fork instead of the 20MB

it was expected i guess, they cannot ignore the problem forever

[ajareselde]

Shitty article for more than one reason. It's not US vs China, there are no arguments to support that, and to say that it could "destroy bitcoin" is just straight on retarded.
If the XT fork with bigger blocks is to happen, it will be activated only if the 90% of the network agrees, regardless of the geo location, so this article was overpumped by dumb claims
in order to sell the news and feed the trolls to spread more FUD. I expected more from cointelegraph, but i guess anyone can be an article writer these days.

cheers

[el kaka22]

In fact, some Chinese pools are proposing 8MB block (as stated here) and I have stated how it will waste our hard disk space. This will scare off some newcomers, as well as their purchasing powers to bitcoin. The price will be affected, to the negative extent.

[Xialla]

btw what is issue for mining farms in relation to block size? higher data bandwidth for networks? I really don't get it..

[ajareselde]

btw what is issue for mining farms in relation to block size? higher data bandwidth for networks? I really don't get it..

It's all about maximizing profits for them, both on the network traffic side, and on the disk storage, but at the end of the day it just shows how petty they are.
Chinese and indians, i don't want to sound racially discriminate, but it's hard to do business with either of them.

In fact, some Chinese pools are proposing 8MB block (as stated here) and I have stated how it will waste our hard disk space. This will scare off some newcomers, as well as their purchasing powers to bitcoin. The price will be affected, to the negative extent.

They may propose what they like, but their opinions are biased. You can not be on the paying side of the bitcoin and lead the incentive on the changes that are to happen.
Miners only have profits in their minds, they are not looking at the bigger picture, which makes me believe that they are dumping as soon as they mine blocks.
It is the whole community that will decide what will happen, and if there are some miners that dont like the change, they are free to stop their part of the mining, there will always be ones that will take their place.

cheers

[zetaray]

I don't understand the Chinese miners' thinking. They can still mine 1M blocks under the new fork if they wanted, they can modify their own limit in the code. 20M is a limit, not a requirement.

[DarkHyudrA]

This discussion is becoming to be boring.
The thing is, a 20MB block is not the best solution to avoid full blocks, but what other option we have NOW?
None. So it's easier to accept it and wait for another proposal to avoid the problem for now.

[JackH]

It is not the West vs the East. Not everyone here (including myself) are for the 20MB block increase. I am actually against this very much, and will not switch to the altcoin known as XT.

[Amph]

I don't understand the Chinese miners' thinking. They can still mine 1M blocks under the new fork if they wanted, they can modify their own limit in the code. 20M is a limit, not a requirement.

what you're saying will create another fork, their own fork, and disrupting what bitcoin is right now, they cannot do it, or simply they are not that stupid to destroy their business

fact is, they are controlling more than 60% of the network, we are lucky that multiple farms are under that enormous percentage, otherwise they might dictate the route of bitcoin

[Hazir]

This discussion is becoming to be boring.
The thing is, a 20MB block is not the best solution to avoid full blocks, but what other option we have NOW?
None. So it's easier to accept it and wait for another proposal to avoid the problem for now.

I feel you. It reminds me of discussion from year ago why do we need DVD drives. After all CD was perfectly capable of storage everything we had! And we already had the technology for it too!
Some people are just don't understand progress and necessity of it. They need learn about it hard way.

[98problems]

The blocksize limit itself is the problem. Simply remove the limit and let blocks be as big or small as necessary. We certainly won't be needing anything over 1 mb for the next year or 2, so amping it up to 20 mb is idiotic.

but wouldnt it be bad if there would be random big blocks? also making it to 20 is like safety from having big ones, and it will be ok for a few years i think its a good idea to increase it to 20 mb

[DooMAD]

Just add this to the list of the 100 or more other things that could 'potentially' destroy Bitcoin and haven't come close to doing so.  This goes one of two ways.  Either we have some minor upheaval during the fork before the blocks start filling up and everything settles down again.  Or we wait and hit the blocksize limit, the forum turns into a raging shitstorm of threads complaining about delayed transactions until the fork is rushed through out of necessity and then everyone realises we should have got the fork over and done with much earlier and that it was all a load of fuss over nothing.  It's going to happen either way, but sooner will be much less damaging than later.  We've never run the network with full blocks before and we don't want to start any time soon.  Every 10 minutes would effectively become a bidding war and having to guess what fee you need to pay to guarantee making it into the next block doesn't sound like my idea of a reliable and fast transaction.

[Xialla]

It's all about maximizing profits for them, both on the network traffic side, and on the disk storage, but at the end of the day it just shows how petty they are.
Chinese and indians, i don't want to sound racially discriminate, but it's hard to do business with either of them.

ahh, so they are paying thousands for dollars every single day just for electricity, and they can't effort few TB disks (which costs "nothing" these days) and faster connection and because of those "small investments" they are against whole thing? and agree on this chinese/indians statement, I had some experience with them within IT field..

[ajareselde]

It's all about maximizing profits for them, both on the network traffic side, and on the disk storage, but at the end of the day it just shows how petty they are.
Chinese and indians, i don't want to sound racially discriminate, but it's hard to do business with either of them.

ahh, so they are paying thousands for dollars every single day just for electricity, and they can't effort few TB disks (which costs "nothing" these days) and faster connection and because of those "small investments" they are against whole thing? and agree on this chinese/indians statement, I had some experience with them within IT field..

It's not just few TB disks, when you multiply it by a number of rigs they have; but none the less, trust me when i say that they are calculating every penny,
i can't begin to describe how many issues i had with them over at the rig rental site, it's just horrible that in the end i refused to do any business with any of them.
You said it yourself that you had similar experience, so you should understand how it's hard to do business with such people, but i can not claim that all of them are like that, although majority seams to be.

cheers