Block size increase status!

[Mickeyb]

If you scroll through the forum, especially this main Bitcoin discussion thread, you can see there is much less talk about the all XT fork situation and block size increase.

So where are we exactly on this? Have we moved anywhere closer to the solution?
Or are the people just tired of talking about this problem so they refuse to do it anymore?

Or are we so confident that the consensus will be reached and problem will be solved during the next 2 workshops of which the first is in Montreal so we already consider it a done deal?

[unamis76]

You have a nice thread summing everything "big block support" related here. And some random info scattered around different threads.

And yes, I think people are tired of talking about it... For sure, I am We're also all waiting on moves from the devs.

[Velkro]

This whole block size increase debate takes far too long and far too much drama in all discussions about it.
Democracy isn't good for voting on changes, where huge technical knowledge is needed to make good decision.

[jonald_fyookball]

There are scalability workshops next month and in December.  Perhaps the core devs will decide to increase the blocksize afte that.  meanwhile, miners are voting to implement their own solution.  The situation will come to a head sooner or later, probably in the next 12 months if not before.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

I thought it was now generally accepted that Bitcoin can never scale as much as some of us imagined and that mass adoption is a pipe dream because of it.  Or did I miss something?

[jonald_fyookball]

I thought it was now generally accepted that Bitcoin can never scale as much as some of us imagined and that mass adoption is a pipe dream because of it.  Or did I miss something?

Said who?

At a certain level of scale, offchain solutions might be necessary to scale further.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

I thought it was now generally accepted that Bitcoin can never scale as much as some of us imagined and that mass adoption is a pipe dream because of it.  Or did I miss something?

Said who?

At a certain level of scale, offchain solutions might be necessary to scale further.

I guess I'm having a hard time seeing how forcing more and more transactions off-chain helps anything.

[jonald_fyookball]

I thought it was now generally accepted that Bitcoin can never scale as much as some of us imagined and that mass adoption is a pipe dream because of it.  Or did I miss something?

Said who?

At a certain level of scale, offchain solutions might be necessary to scale further.

I guess I'm having a hard time seeing how forcing more and more transactions off-chain helps anything.

Well I agree.  We should be scaling on chain as much as possible.
Gavin is attempting to do that. 

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

I thought it was now generally accepted that Bitcoin can never scale as much as some of us imagined and that mass adoption is a pipe dream because of it.  Or did I miss something?

Said who?

At a certain level of scale, offchain solutions might be necessary to scale further.

I guess I'm having a hard time seeing how forcing more and more transactions off-chain helps anything.

Well I agree.  We should be scaling on chain as much as possible.
Gavin is attempting to do that. 

Well we're at 2.7 tps now. How many could we handle at 20MB blocks? Any idea?

[maokoto]

It is refreshing not to see that much XT-blocksize increase posts anymore. I also think that people perhaps do not have much more to say.

But we can consider this post to be about the issue again, no? 

[jonald_fyookball]

I thought it was now generally accepted that Bitcoin can never scale as much as some of us imagined and that mass adoption is a pipe dream because of it.  Or did I miss something?

Said who?

At a certain level of scale, offchain solutions might be necessary to scale further.

I guess I'm having a hard time seeing how forcing more and more transactions off-chain helps anything.

Well I agree.  We should be scaling on chain as much as possible.
Gavin is attempting to do that. 

Well we're at 2.7 tps now. How many could we handle at 20MB blocks? Any idea?

I would imagine 20 times as many as 1 mb, all things being equal.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

I thought it was now generally accepted that Bitcoin can never scale as much as some of us imagined and that mass adoption is a pipe dream because of it.  Or did I miss something?

Said who?

At a certain level of scale, offchain solutions might be necessary to scale further.

I guess I'm having a hard time seeing how forcing more and more transactions off-chain helps anything.

Well I agree.  We should be scaling on chain as much as possible.
Gavin is attempting to do that. 

Well we're at 2.7 tps now. How many could we handle at 20MB blocks? Any idea?

I would imagine 20 times as many as 1 mb, all things being equal.

That's not much better. If my math is right...There are hundreds of millions of people out there!

[jonald_fyookball]

I thought it was now generally accepted that Bitcoin can never scale as much as some of us imagined and that mass adoption is a pipe dream because of it.  Or did I miss something?

Said who?

At a certain level of scale, offchain solutions might be necessary to scale further.

I guess I'm having a hard time seeing how forcing more and more transactions off-chain helps anything.

Well I agree.  We should be scaling on chain as much as possible.
Gavin is attempting to do that. 

Well we're at 2.7 tps now. How many could we handle at 20MB blocks? Any idea?

I would imagine 20 times as many as 1 mb, all things being equal.

That's not much better. If my math is right...There are hundreds of millions of people out there!

That's why Gavin wants to eventually scale to 8 gig blocks on chain
Certainly better!  But still, we may need offchain help eventually.

[Mickeyb]

There are scalability workshops next month and in December.  Perhaps the core devs will decide to increase the blocksize afte that.  meanwhile, miners are voting to implement their own solution.  The situation will come to a head sooner or later, probably in the next 12 months if not before.

Yes, this is how I am feeling as well. I hope that there will be some consensus reached in these workshops. After all, I guess that's why they are organizing them. Will the XT people, Gavin and Heart attend these workshops as well?

Meanwhile, the price is headed up again. I guess that everybody are slowly getting over this problematic. In my mind, after reading a lot, Bitcoin of the future will either accommodate everybody, with large blocks and a space for all of the transactions, or it will be left for only some part of financial services, since the blocks won't be big enough and its use will be scarce and limited for niche markets, if we leave the blocks where they are.

[coinpr0n]

I think people are waiting for the conferences and a less-heated environment to actually discuss the whole block size thing. According to theymos' post (here) at Scaling Bitcoin they...

"[...] will discuss Bitcoin's max block size issues from an academic and technical point of view. The first conference is focused on requirements: what we want Bitcoin to do, what is necessary for Bitcoin to continue functioning, etc. Specific proposals will not be considered at this conference, but will be considered at the later Hong Kong conference. This event will not be a debate, no decisions will be made, and it will not be political: it'll be entirely technology-focused."

[S4VV4S]

I think people are waiting for the conferences and a less-heated environment to actually discuss the whole block size thing. According to theymos' post (here) at Scaling Bitcoin they...

"[...] will discuss Bitcoin's max block size issues from an academic and technical point of view. The first conference is focused on requirements: what we want Bitcoin to do, what is necessary for Bitcoin to continue functioning, etc. Specific proposals will not be considered at this conference, but will be considered at the later Hong Kong conference. This event will not be a debate, no decisions will be made, and it will not be political: it'll be entirely technology-focused."

Interesting.
Waiting to see what will come out of it.

[pooya87]

If you scroll through the forum, especially this main Bitcoin discussion thread, you can see there is much less talk about the all XT fork situation and block size increase.

So where are we exactly on this? Have we moved anywhere closer to the solution?
Or are the people just tired of talking about this problem so they refuse to do it anymore?

Or are we so confident that the consensus will be reached and problem will be solved during the next 2 workshops of which the first is in Montreal so we already consider it a done deal?

i didn't know about the two workshops, i hope they reach consensus as soon as possible, we are all tired of this debate.

and it looks like that there is no progress on bitcoin xt either. i always check http://xtnodes.com/ to see how things are going (if there any better place to check for it please do tell me)
it shows only 0.1% blocks mined with BIP 101 (Bitcoin XT), and there is no change in number of XT nodes from AUG 18 until now.

[mallard]

That's why Gavin wants to eventually scale to 8 gig blocks on chain

Jesus, that's over 1TB a day (providing that the blocks were filled to the limit).
Maybe in the future we'll be able to store all that.

[marky89]

Will the XT people, Gavin and Heart attend these workshops as well?

Mike Hearn commented on the workshops and has already indicated that he believes they are a dead end and that nothing will come of them. Wladimir stated that Hearn was toxic to the development process... I have my doubts that there will be much future collaboration between these parties.

[marky89]

If you scroll through the forum, especially this main Bitcoin discussion thread, you can see there is much less talk about the all XT fork situation and block size increase.

If I had to guess, the loudest proponents from each side (XT/BIP101 vs. everyone else) have put their opponents on "ignore", hence the lack of vitriolic discussion over the past several days. Have we achieved any sort of consensus? Invariably, no.

But the way that bitcoin works -- if there is no consensus on a new protocol change, the status quo prevails. ^^