.

[Lauda]

When your 1GB hard drive is full
When your 1Ghz CPU is too slow
When your 1MBps Network is too slow
...

Comparing apples and oranges as always. Find a better analogy, this one doesn't work.

Do you realy want handfull of Core developers have the ultimate power to decide when it is needed, which is not purely technical question but much more economical one, no mater what consequences to whole 6-7 Billion Bitcoin economy decision of handfull Core developers might become?

Do you really think that something would change with Classic? People seem to this that it would be more 'democratic' because of Consider.it; quite a lovely joke indeed.

[1714986619]

1714986619

[1714986619]

1714986619

[1714986619]

1714986619

[1714986619]

1714986619

[Dabs]

When your 1GB hard drive is full, you don't buy 1.1 GB hard drive, you buy 2GB or 3GB hard drive
When your 1Ghz CPU is too slow, you don't buy 1.1Ghz CPU, you buy 2-3Ghz CPU
 (of course recent years CPU upgrade only gives you about 20% increase in performance so I have not upgraded for years, therefore the block size bump can be dangerous without sigop limitation )
When your 1MBps Network is too slow, you don't buy 1.1Mbps, you increase to 10Mbps

Any upgrade less than 2x is a maintenance release

I got a 4 TB HDD drive. But I also got a few small SSDs.

I got an old dual quad core server, so that's 8 cores, or 16 threads with hyper-threading. I think that's the trend now, get more cores. New server processors come with 12 cores or more. I've seen 18, and I'm sure I read somewhere about a 64 core Intel Xeon. Has 48 GB of RAM.

That's too much for a desktop, but that's nothing compared to servers of today in 2016 (they have 128 or 256 GB of RAM, and root hint DNS servers are supposedly 4 TB of RAM.)

Everybody get gigabit networks now. Matter of time before more people are on gigabit internet speeds as well.

[Lauda]

Everybody get gigabit networks now. Matter of time before more people are on gigabit internet speeds as well.

According to Akamai the average speed in 2015 was 5.1 Mbps. I would say that the data is very accurate as it does not include that many countries from what I can see (not sure how). However, I disagree with the 'everybody get gigabit networks now'. I don't know anyone around me that has access to that either.

[Blazed]

You can assume that everyone will immediately update to Classic nodes and therefore that only one chain will survive. But that's unlikely. I sure won't be updating.

You'll probably be DUMPING!!!  

Well, that depends how it pans out.

Yes, dumping is a realistic option. So is double spending on one chain vs. the other. Or some combination. It will be interesting if the hard fork breaks consensus, I'll say that much.

I know that I will be dumping both chains if we fork to a new client.

[Fatman3001]

When your 1GB hard drive is full, you don't buy 1.1 GB hard drive, you buy 2GB or 3GB hard drive
When your 1Ghz CPU is too slow, you don't buy 1.1Ghz CPU, you buy 2-3Ghz CPU
 (of course recent years CPU upgrade only gives you about 20% increase in performance so I have not upgraded for years, therefore the block size bump can be dangerous without sigop limitation )
When your 1MBps Network is too slow, you don't buy 1.1Mbps, you increase to 10Mbps

Any upgrade less than 2x is a maintenance release

I got a 4 TB HDD drive. But I also got a few small SSDs.

I got an old dual quad core server, so that's 8 cores, or 16 threads with hyper-threading. I think that's the trend now, get more cores. New server processors come with 12 cores or more. I've seen 18, and I'm sure I read somewhere about a 64 core Intel Xeon. Has 48 GB of RAM.

That's too much for a desktop, but that's nothing compared to servers of today in 2016 (they have 128 or 256 GB of RAM, and root hint DNS servers are supposedly 4 TB of RAM.)

Everybody get gigabit networks now. Matter of time before more people are on gigabit internet speeds as well.

Best post in the thread.

Not sure what your point was, but I like reading it.

[johnyj]

When your 1GB hard drive is full
When your 1Ghz CPU is too slow
When your 1MBps Network is too slow
...

Comparing apples and oranges as always. Find a better analogy, this one doesn't work.

Simple analogy will get more consensus because that's how majority of the users can understand

[Lauda]

Simple analogy will get more consensus because that's how majority of the users can understand

You mean that's how you understand it because of your lack of knowledge? Don't push it onto the users. The analogy is false and can not be applied here.

[johnyj]

You can assume that everyone will immediately update to Classic nodes and therefore that only one chain will survive. But that's unlikely. I sure won't be updating.

You'll probably be DUMPING!!!  

Well, that depends how it pans out.

Yes, dumping is a realistic option. So is double spending on one chain vs. the other. Or some combination. It will be interesting if the hard fork breaks consensus, I'll say that much.

I know that I will be dumping both chains if we fork to a new client.

I will pick up your major chain dumps  

[johnyj]

Simple analogy will get more consensus because that's how majority of the users can understand

You mean that's how you understand it because of your lack of knowledge? Don't push it onto the users. The analogy is false and can not be applied here.

Having too much wisdom is a dangerous thing, it might drag you too far away from majority and you will be isolated

[Dabs]

Best post in the thread.

Not sure what your point was, but I like reading it.

Thank you. The point was hardware keeps up, even old hardware is good enough, depending on what you use it for.

I was actually just responding to the post, sorry for not contributing to the real topic of block size. For that, I will just wait and watch what happens. As a simple user of bitcoin, I just include a fee in my transactions and I usually get a confirmation in less than an hour.

The fee I use most of the time is the minimum relay fee, just so the transaction gets relayed to as many nodes as possible. Then I just wait for it to be included in a block.

Everybody get gigabit networks now. Matter of time before more people are on gigabit internet speeds as well.

According to Akamai the average speed in 2015 was 5.1 Mbps. I would say that the data is very accurate as it does not include that many countries from what I can see (not sure how). However, I disagree with the 'everybody get gigabit networks now'. I don't know anyone around me that has access to that either.

I think what I was saying is that a lot of people can get gigabit switches for home use now. That's what I got, I have a cheap 8 port Netgear gigabit switch. So I connect one laptop to it wired, one access point, a raspberry pi that doesn't do anything yet, and my just bought old server. The server has 4 NIC ports, but I only connected one for now.

I transfer files between my laptop and the server faster than I can transfer it using a USB flash drive.

I'm not talking about the internet speed. For internet access, you get whatever you can afford, or whatever is available to you. Google Fiber is not going to be where I am for a long time ... but my brother and a friend are already on 50 mbps DSL (fiber).

[johnyj]

When your 1GB hard drive is full, you don't buy 1.1 GB hard drive, you buy 2GB or 3GB hard drive
When your 1Ghz CPU is too slow, you don't buy 1.1Ghz CPU, you buy 2-3Ghz CPU
 (of course recent years CPU upgrade only gives you about 20% increase in performance so I have not upgraded for years, therefore the block size bump can be dangerous without sigop limitation )
When your 1MBps Network is too slow, you don't buy 1.1Mbps, you increase to 10Mbps

Any upgrade less than 2x is a maintenance release

I got a 4 TB HDD drive. But I also got a few small SSDs.

I got an old dual quad core server, so that's 8 cores, or 16 threads with hyper-threading. I think that's the trend now, get more cores. New server processors come with 12 cores or more. I've seen 18, and I'm sure I read somewhere about a 64 core Intel Xeon. Has 48 GB of RAM.

That's too much for a desktop, but that's nothing compared to servers of today in 2016 (they have 128 or 256 GB of RAM, and root hint DNS servers are supposedly 4 TB of RAM.)

Everybody get gigabit networks now. Matter of time before more people are on gigabit internet speeds as well.

That's the benefit of simplicity if you just keep raising the block size limit, just keep adding more capacity on everything and solve all the problems   And it will create demand for the industry and create jobs, good for economy and society

[bargainbin]

...
I know that I will be dumping both chains if we fork to a new client.

I'm sure many like yourself will be. Beat the madding crowd, initiate dumpage nao.
*The above does not constitute finanshul advice. For 100% legit economix insights, consult a certified, non-legally-binded cryptopsychoanalist.

[Lauda]

I think what I was saying is that a lot of people can get gigabit switches for home use now. That's what I got, I have a cheap 8 port Netgear gigabit switch. So I connect one laptop to it wired, one access point, a raspberry pi that doesn't do anything yet, and my just bought old server. The server has 4 NIC ports, but I only connected one for now.
I transfer files between my laptop and the server faster than I can transfer it using a USB flash drive.

I'm not talking about the internet speed. For internet access, you get whatever you can afford, or whatever is available to you. Google Fiber is not going to be where I am for a long time ... but my brother and a friend are already on 50 mbps DSL (fiber).

Gigabit switches were available for a long time, not sure what your point is nor why this is relevant?

Having too much wisdom is a dangerous thing, it might drag you too far away from majority and you will be isolated

Of course your plan is to follow the blind majority. Why does this not surprise me?

That's the benefit of simplicity if you just keep raising the block size limit, just keep adding more capacity on everything and destroy the system.

FTFY. Keep adding more load to that plane, eventually it will crash.

[ATguy]

I know that I will be dumping both chains if we fork to a new client.

Do you realy want handfull of Core developers have the ultimate power to decide when it is needed, which is not purely technical question but much more economical one, no mater what consequences to whole 6-7 Billion Bitcoin economy decision of handfull Core developers might become?

Do you really think that something would change with Classic? People seem to this that it would be more 'democratic' because of Consider.it; quite a lovely joke indeed.

I preffer if more full node clients become available and regularly updated so I have more options to choose from, not Classic as replacement for Core.

For example I dont like the RBF feature in Core 0.12 and Im not sure even if I disable rebroadcasting double spend transactions whether Core 0.12 closes and ban connection to any client which broadcasting doublespends (RBF) because it is possible attack vector to eat my full node network bandwidth. Bitpay and such companies should for example mantain client which better fits their business future and remove the RBF functionality completly - I would appreciate such client. Miners should preffer onchain scaling over offchain scaling because they wont get any of offchain fees. And so on...

So more clients available to choose from = better decentralization of Bitcoin development.

[bargainbin]

... Of course your plan is to follow the blind majority. Why does this not surprise me? ...

As opposed to following the blind, angry, and decidedly unpleasant minority?
The one resorting to threats and blackmail when shit don't go its your way?

[Dabs]

Gigabit switches were available for a long time, not sure what your point is nor why this is relevant?

My first reply was in response to someone who mentioned 1.1 mbps network, so I said "everybody get gigabit now", because I don't know too many people who will stick to 10 mbps or 100 mbps switches for home networks, unless you have an old switch that hasn't died yet.

[johnyj]

Having too much wisdom is a dangerous thing, it might drag you too far away from majority and you will be isolated

Of course your plan is to follow the blind majority. Why does this not surprise me?

You can enlighten them, but it might take decades. Remember those genius who only get acknowledged after their death or even several hundred years later? Being too advanced is a disadvantage

[Dabs]

This whole talk about wisdom and enlightenment and advanced intelligence is a bit off the topic already. I prefer to have more wisdom and knowledge, you don't have to lecture everyone else.

[Lauda]

You can enlighten them, but it might take decades. Remember those genius who only get acknowledged after their death or even several hundred years later? Being too advanced is a disadvantage

If the block size debate has demonstrated anything, it's that there's a fundamental lack of understanding about how Bitcoin actually works. If you're going to the moon, would you like your spaceship built by a handful of informed engineers, or by the average tax payer?

Relevant quote.

[johnyj]

You can enlighten them, but it might take decades. Remember those genius who only get acknowledged after their death or even several hundred years later? Being too advanced is a disadvantage

If the block size debate has demonstrated anything, it's that there's a fundamental lack of understanding about how Bitcoin actually works. If you're going to the moon, would you like your spaceship built by a handful of informed engineers, or by the average tax payer?

Relevant quote.

If you want to go to moon, you need centralized NASA. But this is not how bitcoin works, in a decentralized system, knowledge is much less important than cooperation, without cooperation you are not going anywhere. You can not reach consensus over a complicated idea since that is out of the reach of the comprehension of blind majority, thus it will get rejected