Bitcoin fundamentals forecast May 2016 - "Stagnation" doesn't exist

[r0ach]

The research I've done tells me Bitcoin needs to scale to around 8MB blocks to be accessible to middle/upper middle class, 1st world inhabitants with market penetration as a checkbook type device for large value transactions.  Segwit goes to 1.6MB, then a hardfork in 2017 goes to 3.2MB. 

3.2MB + payment channels + Schnorr sigs will be functionally equivalent to 8MB out of the gate (or much higher), so price-wise, the glass ceiling on most of BTC should be leaving.  I don't think garbage collection will be a problem in the foreseeable future, because frequent usage of said action will automatically be pushed out of the market.  Even the Gavinator, lord of the largest of blocks, admits we rely on far worse legacy systems every day in computers and finance, so it's not going to be much of a problem in Bitcoin.

It is important to separate the idea of payment channels and Lightning Network, as LN is just a proprietary solution and there will be all kinds of things going on with payment channels.  Any entities that do large amounts of repeat business with each other are going to find value there.  The idea that Bitcoin is stagnating from some pundits is hilarious when the entire glass ceiling on price is likely to come off soon.

[1715567756]

1715567756

[1715567756]

1715567756

[Fakhoury]

Is there any ETA you are aware of my friend about payment channels and Schnorr sigs ?

[r0ach]

Is there any ETA you are aware of my friend about payment channels and Schnorr sigs ?

Payment channels - soon
Schnorr - nobody knows

Some people believe there's benefit in the ability to do 2 of 2  ed25519/secp256k1 multisig transactions to try and bulletproof wallet security (not that any problem exists now), so I'm not really sure all the implications there.

[Fakhoury]

Is there any ETA you are aware of my friend about payment channels and Schnorr sigs ?

Payment channels - soon
Schnorr - nobody knows

Some people believe there's benefit in the ability to do 2 of 2  ed25519/secp256k1 multisig transactions to try and bulletproof wallet security, so I'm not really sure all the implications there.

To be honest, I didn't didn't dig into those two features you've just mentioned.

But what caught me is "bulletproof" the wallets and I think this is extremely important.

Don't forget after we successfully finish the block size debate, there are more to come, anon., security and ... etc.

[r0ach]

But what caught me is "bulletproof" the wallets and I think this is extremely important.

There's not any problem now, it's just kinda over-engineering.  The risk of losing your Bitcoins is things like social engineering, keylogging, etc, not brute force.

[Chef Ramsay]

Thanks for the commentary, roach. Much obliged, as always.

[Denker]

Is there any ETA you are aware of my friend about payment channels and Schnorr sigs ?

Reagarding Schnoor signatures, here a quote by Gregory Maxwell.

The only reason our schnorr sigs will have that property is because Adam Back, Pieter, and myself have been working on it-- this kind of aggregatability isn't something that would just automatically come from schnorr, it requires a special design.

We consider it a priority, but it's only with the advent of segwit that it becomes sufficiently easy to deploy these improvements that I can be pretty confident of getting them in (and rather than having them end up as a marketing point in some altcoin.).  Segwit isn't in the network yet, and there is still a sizable "online" force of people attacking it, the folks working on it (and on general fungibility) improvements-- which makes it harder to give concrete schedules.

I'd like to say that I expect to get aggregateable schnorr into Bitcoin in the next year; but that depends on a multitude of factors that are hard to predict and that I can't control.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1447960.0