the 1MB limit will centralize bitcoin

[Brewins]

I agree, with 1MB block size , only transaction with higher fees will confirmed and a normal user can't pay big tx fes for their small transaction so it will make bitcoin a currency of big boys, but we always wanted bitcoin to be currency of everyone not of some rich guys who pay big tip for their transfer

[CIYAM]

I agree, with 1MB block size , only transaction with higher fees will confirmed and a normal user can't pay big tx fes for their small transaction so it will make bitcoin a currency of big boys, but we always wanted bitcoin to be currency of everyone not of some rich guys who pay big tip for their transfer

So - you expect to be able to use Bitcoin to pay for your coffee but no-one is actually even paying you in Bitcoin (or wait for it...).

How do you get your BTC for your coffees then (apart from having your rather obvious ad-sig)?

I get it now - the people who want to make such small payments are all ad-siggers (it figures).

I'd rather that the Bitcoin network wasn't tailored for people spending most of their time making pointless posts in order to earn coffees (but maybe others think that is how the world should work).

[adamstgBit]

I agree, with 1MB block size , only transaction with higher fees will confirmed and a normal user can't pay big tx fes for their small transaction so it will make bitcoin a currency of big boys, but we always wanted bitcoin to be currency of everyone not of some rich guys who pay big tip for their transfer

So - you expect to be able to use Bitcoin to pay for you coffee but no-one is actually even paying you in Bitcoin (or wait for it...).

How do you get your BTC for your coffees then (apart from having your rather obvious ad-sig)?

I get it now - the people who want to make such small payments are all ad-siggers (it figures).

I'd rather Bitcoin wasn't tailored for people spending most of their time making pointless posts in order to earn coffees (but maybe others think that is how the world should work).

there is no reason we cant have bitcoin handle small and large TX tho. this thread attempts to prove its beneficial for decentralization that both small and big payments are allowed on the blockchain.

[brg444]

This post would fit well here:

If you can't understand that a 1MB chain favors the entire network and not only "a small minority" you are either being intentionally dishonest or outright ignorant. Let me spell it out for you: a 1MB block size guarantees access to the most open, private and secure chain.

Open: every users has an ability to trivially run a node and store their wealth on that chain

Private: relying on SPV means relying on a third-party to relay your transactions, there are considerable privacy risks.

Secure: an ultra conservative block size allows the number of independent nodes in the system to grow infinitely, considerably increasing the strength and decentralization of the network. it enables possibilities like the commoditization of hardware such as the existing Bitnodes (https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/hardware/)

Now your obvious complain is that not everyone will get to transact on this chain since it might be considerably pricier. If we're being honest, that's not a problem. A strong & decentralized protocol layer will work as a guarantee that third-parties involved in superficial layers are being kept honest provided that their actions can be checked against the one absolute truth layer. That's the role you should expect Bitcoin to play in the future:

CodeShark the blockchain is there to protect you in the event of an uncooperative counterparty

gmaxwell A more useful mental model for the system is that the network is a trustworthy AI Judge that makes sure you complied with the contracts specified in your contracts. Now, it's possible to transact by taking every contract to the judge, but this is inefficient.

CodeShark right, the blockchain is like a court

CodeShark you don't go to court over every contract you enter

CodeShark only the ones where there's a breach

[CIYAM]

there is no reason we cant have bitcoin handle small and large TX tho. this thread attempts to prove its beneficial for decentralization that both small and big payments are allowed on the blockchain.

There is a reason - it is the cost for processing txs.

It is simply cheaper to process txs in a centralised manner (always has been and always will be).

So unless you have worked out how to change the laws of physics I'm afraid your idea is just plain wrong.

Again - why does no-one seem to care that Bitcoin has failed to do anything in the remittance market (low hanging fruit) yet argue so much about stupid small txs?

If it can't replace SWIFT and WU then really it will never replace VISA (yet you only seem to care about competing with VISA and not care about the "big picture").

[adamstgBit]

So unless you have worked out how to change the laws of physics I'm afraid your idea is just plain wrong.

I have, or actually i found someone that has!

However, the Corallo Relay Network does support a sort of compression.  Rather than transmitting all the transactions in a solved blocks, since most the other miners know about them already, it just transmits indices that refer to each transaction (sort of like a map for how the TXs fit in the block).

I think a more appropriate term for this would be encoding - using codes to represent larger blocks of information that is already known by all parties. This is usually way more effective than blind data compression.

if minner could communicate 100MB blocks with 250KB of encoded data, this is what will allow bitcoin to scale don't you think.

my guess is they wouldn't even need to send the full 64byte TX IDs only a 4 byte hash of the TX ID should be enoght for other minner to identify the TX's included in the new blocks.

using this method a miner could communicate a block with 250000 TX's!!! ( >400TPS ) with only 1MB of data

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1175669.msg12381557#msg12381557

[brg444]

I agree, with 1MB block size , only transaction with higher fees will confirmed and a normal user can't pay big tx fes for their small transaction so it will make bitcoin a currency of big boys, but we always wanted bitcoin to be currency of everyone not of some rich guys who pay big tip for their transfer

So - you expect to be able to use Bitcoin to pay for you coffee but no-one is actually even paying you in Bitcoin (or wait for it...).

How do you get your BTC for your coffees then (apart from having your rather obvious ad-sig)?

I get it now - the people who want to make such small payments are all ad-siggers (it figures).

I'd rather Bitcoin wasn't tailored for people spending most of their time making pointless posts in order to earn coffees (but maybe others think that is how the world should work).

there is no reason we cant have bitcoin handle small and large TX tho. this thread attempts to prove its beneficial for decentralization that both small and big payments are allowed on the blockchain.

Why won't you sit down, read this http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/measuring-decentralization/ and figure it out already.

Please stop everyone's time.

[CIYAM]

I have, or actually i found someone that has!

You haven't - as they are talking about nodes that already received the txs (it is only about reducing the information needed to talk about what is in a block assuming a node already has seen the txs).

I am also of the opinion that you are just starting to waste people's time with stupid stuff (so if you won't listen to the other poster then perhaps you'll listen to me).

All the core devs agree that you can't do decentralised txs as quickly and that is due to some very fundamental reasons. So this is not going to get "fixed up" by some magic piece of code in the same way you can't just get rid of gravity.

[adamstgBit]

I have, or actually i found someone that has!

You haven't - as they are talking about nodes that already received the txs (it is only about reducing the information needed to talk about what is in a block assuming a node already has seen the txs).

well sure, but it still allows for huge blocks to be handled by home users, they just have to be able to stream data at ~1MBPS to handle >4,000TPS

[CIYAM]

well sure, but it still allows for huge blocks to be handled by home users, they just have to be able to stream data at ~1MBPS to handle >4,000TPS

Why on earth would they?

Everyone on earth should be able to handle the same txs as VISA just so you can buy your coffee?

I think you forgot to ask everyone on earth if they want to (and most smartphones which are going to be the majority of computer users are going to literally start burning a hole in your pocket doing that).

[adamstgBit]

well sure, but it still allows for huge blocks to be handled by home users, they just have to be able to stream data at ~1MBPS to handle >4,000TPS

Why on earth would they?

Everyone on earth should be able to handle the same txs as VISA just so you can buy your coffee?

I think you forgot to ask everyone on earth if they want to (and most smartphones are going to literally start burning a hole in your pocket doing that).

most desktops can handle streaming 1MBPS with ease

i sure as hell am not asking everyone on earth to run a full bitcoin node.

i'm asking for ~10,000nodes.

[brg444]

well sure, but it still allows for huge blocks to be handled by home users, they just have to be able to stream data at ~1MBPS to handle >4,000TPS

Why on earth would they?

Everyone on earth should be able to handle the same txs as VISA just so you can buy your coffee?

I think you forgot to ask everyone on earth if they want to (and most smartphones are going to literally start burning a hole in your pocket doing that).

most desktops can handle streaming 1MBPS with ease

i sure as hell am not asking everyone on earth to run a full bitcoin node.

i'm asking for ~10,000nodes.

THE TX HASH IS ONLY USED TO COMMUNICATE BLOCK INFORMATION BETWEEN MINERS.

ALL TRANSACTIONS HAVE TO BE TRANSMITTED BY THE NODES (BANDWIDTH), ALL NODES STILL HAVE TO PROCESS (GPU), ALL NODES STILL HAVE TO STORE (HD)

GODDAMNIT YOU ARE STUPID

YES I'M MAD  

[CIYAM]

most desktops can handle streaming 1MBPS with ease

That actually depends upon your bandwidth (a point I was trying to make before about China which seemingly you missed).

Again even Satoshi did not think that home nodes would be needed so I don't know why you think they are (provided we have enough miners we should have enough decentralisation).

If you really want a network of just CPUs from home computers or the like then you don't want to use PoW (maybe you should look into PoS or PoC or the like).

Also please make sure you have read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAP_theorem to understand why Bitcoin can never be as efficient as a centralised service.

Please think about the fact that Bitcoin has *failed* to gain any significant hold in the remittance market - as all logic and economics says it should have (and I do know major players in this area). If it can't succeed in that then I think hoping that it has any chance against the major payment systems is actually just fantasy.

[adamstgBit]

well sure, but it still allows for huge blocks to be handled by home users, they just have to be able to stream data at ~1MBPS to handle >4,000TPS

Why on earth would they?

Everyone on earth should be able to handle the same txs as VISA just so you can buy your coffee?

I think you forgot to ask everyone on earth if they want to (and most smartphones are going to literally start burning a hole in your pocket doing that).

most desktops can handle streaming 1MBPS with ease

i sure as hell am not asking everyone on earth to run a full bitcoin node.

i'm asking for ~10,000nodes.

THE TX HASH IS ONLY USED TO COMMUNICATE BLOCK INFORMATION BETWEEN MINERS.

ALL TRANSACTIONS HAVE TO BE TRANSMITTED BY THE NODES (BANDWIDTH), ALL NODES STILL HAVE TO PROCESS (GPU), ALL NODES STILL HAVE TO STORE (HD)

GODDAMNIT YOU ARE STUPID

YES I'M MAD  

yes i know, stop yelling, 1MBPS allows for streaming a max of ~4,000 TPS
processing and storage is just as easy.
if you can't store 1MB of data pre second your HD sucks balls
if you can't process 1MB of TX pre second your GPU sucks balls.
point is a 1000$ computer with a home connection can deal with 4,000 TPS

did you expect bitcoin full nodes to run on embedded devices?

[CIYAM]

yes i know, stop yelling, 1MBPS allows for streaming a max of ~4,000 TPS

For a lot of people that would be 1/4 of their entire bandwidth.

So you think they should stop watching movies and do other things apart from let others buy coffees?

And 4K TPS is not even close to what VISA does currently (and as you want it to replace everything then you need to multiply that by everything else that is being used).

[Klestin]

Surely there's something between 1 MB and 8 GB that we can work towards, isn't there?  If Bitcoin is eventually used by 10% of the population, a 1MB block allows a particular person to make one transaction every 7 years.  If the concept of actually owning Bitcoin is to survive (and actually from time to time signing a transaction to make a transfer), then 1MB blocks are not enough to support any form of worldwide adoption.

Those of us advocating for an increase from 1 MB are not universally advocating for all the world's coffee purchases to be posted directly to the main blockchain.  

[brg444]

most desktops can handle streaming 1MBPS with ease

That actually depends upon your bandwidth (a point I was trying to make before about China which seemingly you missed).

Again even Satoshi did not think that home nodes would be needed so I don't know why you think they are (provided we have enough miners we should have enough decentralisation).

If you really want a network of just CPUs from home computers or the like then you don't want to use PoW (maybe you should look into PoS or PoC or the like).

Also please make sure you have read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAP_theorem to understand why Bitcoin can never be as efficient as a centralised service.

Please think about the fact that Bitcoin has *failed* to gain any significant hold in the remittance market - as all logic and economics says it should have (and I do know major players in this area). If it can't succeed in that then I think hoping that it has any chance against the major payment systems is actually just fantasy.

That was a mistake.

[brg444]

well sure, but it still allows for huge blocks to be handled by home users, they just have to be able to stream data at ~1MBPS to handle >4,000TPS

Why on earth would they?

Everyone on earth should be able to handle the same txs as VISA just so you can buy your coffee?

I think you forgot to ask everyone on earth if they want to (and most smartphones are going to literally start burning a hole in your pocket doing that).

most desktops can handle streaming 1MBPS with ease

i sure as hell am not asking everyone on earth to run a full bitcoin node.

i'm asking for ~10,000nodes.

THE TX HASH IS ONLY USED TO COMMUNICATE BLOCK INFORMATION BETWEEN MINERS.

ALL TRANSACTIONS HAVE TO BE TRANSMITTED BY THE NODES (BANDWIDTH), ALL NODES STILL HAVE TO PROCESS (GPU), ALL NODES STILL HAVE TO STORE (HD)

GODDAMNIT YOU ARE STUPID

YES I'M MAD  

yes i know, stop yelling, 1MBPS allows for streaming a max of ~4,000 TPS
processing and storage is just as easy.
if you can't store 1MB of data pre second your HD sucks balls
if you can't process 1MB of TX pre second your GPU sucks balls.
point is a 1000$ computer with a home connection can deal with 4,000 TPS

did you expect bitcoin full nodes to run on embedded devices?

It's not 1MB you retard, it's the full block. THERE IS NO COMPRESSION!!!

[adamstgBit]

yes i know, stop yelling, 1MBPS allows for streaming a max of ~4,000 TPS

For a lot of people that would be 1/4 of their entire bandwidth.

So you think they should stop watching movies and do other things apart from let others buy coffees?

And 4K TPS is not even close to what VISA does currently (and as you want it to replace everything then you need to multiply that by everything else that is being used).

not everyone will use bitcoin for everything this like 100years in the future at best.

and VISA can accommodate more than 4K TPS but typically they process <4K TPS

[CIYAM]

That was a mistake.

I guess that depends upon how you think decentralisation should be handled.

What I find most frustrating is that everyone keeps ignoring the fact that Bitcoin has made no inroads into the remittance market and instead keeps on arguing about coffees (or whatever small txs).

Why don't you guys care about the fact that it has failed to defeat Western Union when that company is gouging people for fees in excess of 10%?

Seriously if it can't beat WU then it will never beat VISA.