Simplistic fix for blocksize problem...

[JaredKaragen]

There is a stupid simple way to not destroy bitcoin's value and cause forks and still allow for wiggle room when it comes to blocksize:

For smaller faster transactions;  just use a frikken altcoin thats based around speed....

That is all.  Simple right?

I don't see why people can't wrap their heads around this simple concept..... and instead they would rather risk everything falling apart over a whole redesign of the currently stable system.

Input?

[jeffthebaker]

You don't see why people don't simply just use another altcoin instead of Bitcoin? If you want to kill Bitcoin, it's not through a hardfork, but rather by simply not using it.

[Outlander]

There is a stupid simple way to not destroy bitcoin's value and cause forks and still allow for wiggle room when it comes to blocksize:

For smaller faster transactions;  just use a frikken altcoin thats based around speed....

That is all.  Simple right?

I don't see why people can't wrap their heads around this simple concept..... and instead they would rather risk everything falling apart over a whole redesign of the currently stable system.

Input?

You are going to create another altcoin. You are destroying it. Try to think in this way you are holding dozens of bitcoins.

[gentlemand]

People moan about Bitcoin's volatility, that would be nothing compared to this mythical alt if it was subject to the whims of BTC usage.

[Kakmakr]

There is a stupid simple way to not destroy bitcoin's value and cause forks and still allow for wiggle room when it comes to blocksize:

For smaller faster transactions;  just use a frikken altcoin thats based around speed....

That is all.  Simple right?

I don't see why people can't wrap their heads around this simple concept..... and instead they would rather risk everything falling apart over a whole redesign of the currently stable system.

Input?

What do you tell to the 150 000+ merchants that already adopted Bitcoin? There is also millions of dollars invested into development of Bitcoin based businesses.

Your solution sounds simple, but it's a lot more complicated than that. The alternative would be to just lift the block size a bit, and see how it goes. 

[ranochigo]

There is a stupid simple way to not destroy bitcoin's value and cause forks and still allow for wiggle room when it comes to blocksize:

For smaller faster transactions;  just use a frikken altcoin thats based around speed....

That is all.  Simple right?

I don't see why people can't wrap their heads around this simple concept..... and instead they would rather risk everything falling apart over a whole redesign of the currently stable system.

Input?

Bitcoin currently have much more stable value than alt coins. Many merchants only accept Bitcoin via bitpay or coinbase, asking people to switch to altcoins would not be a solution as their POS options is severely limited. Also, with the high hashrate of Bitcoin, it would be much more expensive for people to attack it instead of Bitcoin.

[dothebeats]

Using another altcoin to replace bitcoin just for the sake of speed is killing bitcoin itself. Also, a hardfork itself wouldn't kill bitcoin. By just not using bitcoin kills the entity itself.

[zetaray]

Using a different crypto is your solution for fixing bitcoin blocksize problem? That is not fixing anything, that is sending users away. We already have solutions to the problem, we just need to have a majority on one of them.

[meyns]

There is a stupid simple way to not destroy bitcoin's value and cause forks and still allow for wiggle room when it comes to blocksize:

For smaller faster transactions;  just use a frikken altcoin thats based around speed....

That is all.  Simple right?

I don't see why people can't wrap their heads around this simple concept..... and instead they would rather risk everything falling apart over a whole redesign of the currently stable system.

Input?

What do you tell to the 150 000+ merchants that already adopted Bitcoin? There is also millions of dollars invested into development of Bitcoin based businesses.

Your solution sounds simple, but it's a lot more complicated than that. The alternative would be to just lift the block size a bit, and see how it goes. 

A lot of the merchants accepting bitcoin can already accept other altcoins.

[Mickeyb]

There is a stupid simple way to not destroy bitcoin's value and cause forks and still allow for wiggle room when it comes to blocksize:

For smaller faster transactions;  just use a frikken altcoin thats based around speed....

That is all.  Simple right?

I don't see why people can't wrap their heads around this simple concept..... and instead they would rather risk everything falling apart over a whole redesign of the currently stable system.

Input?

The problem is that people want the security of the Bitcoin network, even for small transactions. And if they are small, it doesn't mean that they are not valuable. You have merchants that just deal in many small transactions.

So all this time you were telling them that they will have security of the Bitcoin network and now you just need to tell them that it won't be Bitcoin but some other alt. That doesn't work this way!

There is no simple solution. If there was one, it would be implemented already!

[DarkHyudrA]

Oh god, how a perfect solution.
Such good scalable solution, everytime we need more we create Bitcoin(X+1)

[MicroGuy]

I don't see why people can't wrap their heads around this simple concept..... and instead they would rather risk everything falling apart over a whole redesign of the currently stable system.

Input?

I don't think increasing the maximum blocksize to 8MB (static, not Gavin's crazy idea) would be a whole redesign of the current code. It's a tiny, tiny tweak.

Too bad Satoshi disappeared, this is what he would have done already.

[johnyj]

It does not matter, the speed limitation is in the hardware and network, not coin specific. An alt-coin would still face the same problem that bitcoin has, you can only increase capacity by 100% by adding an altcoin, but at the same time alt-coin brings more inflation, so the end result is worse for all of the cryptocurrencies

Current network and hardware is only capable of handling 2MB (In fact some 1MB blocks already hit the bottleneck somewhere along the chain). If the common bandwidth raised to 1GB due to mass adoption of 4K TV, then it is possible to raise the block size further

Another problem is the mining motivation, when the next and the next next reward halving happens, the miners will get less and less incentive to run the mining operation, thus the fee must raise to compensate for that

[XCASH]

Bitcoin has built up more trust than all the altcoins combined. Not enough people would trust an altcoin for small payments to make any real impact on the number of Bitcoin transactions. We all know that there are factories full of mining machines spread all over the world that secure the Bitcoin network. There are no altcoins that can match Bitcoin's hashing power over the long term

[ranochigo]

There is a stupid simple way to not destroy bitcoin's value and cause forks and still allow for wiggle room when it comes to blocksize:

For smaller faster transactions;  just use a frikken altcoin thats based around speed....

That is all.  Simple right?

I don't see why people can't wrap their heads around this simple concept..... and instead they would rather risk everything falling apart over a whole redesign of the currently stable system.

Input?

What do you tell to the 150 000+ merchants that already adopted Bitcoin? There is also millions of dollars invested into development of Bitcoin based businesses.

Your solution sounds simple, but it's a lot more complicated than that. The alternative would be to just lift the block size a bit, and see how it goes. 

A lot of the merchants accepting bitcoin can already accept other altcoins.

I don't think so. Many alt coins are violatile and don't have trustable POS solutions designed for them like Bitpay which allows for instant transaction. Transaction with one confirmation for alt coin is less safer than one confirmation for Bitcoin. An alt coin that has 1 minute block needs 10 minutes to reach the consensus of one Bitcoin confirmation. Furthermore, confirmations aren't needed for day to day transaction, the risks is likely enough to be  negligible.

[jonald_fyookball]

There is a stupid simple way to not destroy bitcoin's value and cause forks and still allow for wiggle room when it comes to blocksize:

For smaller faster transactions;  just use a frikken altcoin thats based around speed....

That is all.  Simple right?

I don't see why people can't wrap their heads around this simple concept..... and instead they would rather risk everything falling apart over a whole redesign of the currently stable system.

Input?

Because I don't want to use an altcoin.  If it ain't bitcoin, it ain't shit.

[brg444]

There is a stupid simple way to not destroy bitcoin's value and cause forks and still allow for wiggle room when it comes to blocksize:

For smaller faster transactions;  just use a frikken altcoin thats based around speed....

That is all.  Simple right?

I don't see why people can't wrap their heads around this simple concept..... and instead they would rather risk everything falling apart over a whole redesign of the currently stable system.

Input?

What do you tell to the 150 000+ merchants that already adopted Bitcoin? There is also millions of dollars invested into development of Bitcoin based businesses.

Your solution sounds simple, but it's a lot more complicated than that. The alternative would be to just lift the block size a bit, and see how it goes. 

Find another marketing gimmick

[Kprawn]

There is a stupid simple way to not destroy bitcoin's value and cause forks and still allow for wiggle room when it comes to blocksize:

For smaller faster transactions;  just use a frikken altcoin thats based around speed....

That is all.  Simple right?

I don't see why people can't wrap their heads around this simple concept..... and instead they would rather risk everything falling apart over a whole redesign of the currently stable system.

Input?

Just when I thought this thread will be the end to all our troubles, you suggest we use another Alt coin .... XT is another Alt coin.  Just saying this to piss on the fire.

We do not need another substitute for the real thing.... we tasted the best, and we want more and we need to protect what we have.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLvIFRNbqOs

[manselr]

There is a stupid simple way to not destroy bitcoin's value and cause forks and still allow for wiggle room when it comes to blocksize:

For smaller faster transactions;  just use a frikken altcoin thats based around speed....

That is all.  Simple right?

I don't see why people can't wrap their heads around this simple concept..... and instead they would rather risk everything falling apart over a whole redesign of the currently stable system.

Input?

The problem will never revolve around using another altcoin. First of all, there's no altcoin that doesn't fall into the same problem than Bitcoin. Second, if we want to support Bitcoin, we want everything to happen within the Bitcoin ecosystem, this is where blockstream + "let a fee market develop" is the only way to go, along with gradually raising the blocksize.

[jonald_fyookball]

A fee market exists with no block cap.  Peter R explained why at the scalability conference.