Reponse to Roger Ver's "Time to End the Block-Size Blockade" essay

[Lauda]

Bitcoin is dead as we know it if you raise the block size.

Okay, that is definitely a bit hyperbolic to say the least. If the quadratic validation time get fixed (which should happen with Segwit) I can see a future in which a block size increase is definitely possible. Just today we've 'received' two amazing news: Fibre (upgrade to the relay network that builds on compact blocks) and Flare (Bitfury's LN implementation). With the proper infrastructure in place, I do not see a reason for which a HF on which consensus has been reached (with a proper set of rules) should not happen sometime in the future.

The node count as we have it now is low already at around 5000. If you double this, you can expect a lot of the widespread % to decrease. Even if the total node count went up, the system would be more centralized if specialized services for running nodes arise.

It is really unfortunate that, with so many people running around on Reddit and BTCT that we are unable to keep a higher node count. If half of us were to run a single node, the situation would definitely improve.

[gmaxwell]

It is really unfortunate that, with so many people running around on Reddit and BTCT that we are unable to keep a higher node count. If half of us were to run a single node, the situation would definitely improve.

That would require a lot of people who don't own any Bitcoins to run nodes...

[calkob]

I just wish we could move on and lets be unified as a bitcoin community

[franky1]

It is really unfortunate that, with so many people running around on Reddit and BTCT that we are unable to keep a higher node count. If half of us were to run a single node, the situation would definitely improve.

That would require a lot of people who don't own any Bitcoins to run nodes...

you mean like you, who gets paid in fiat and monero?

anyway..
LOL there are 2 million bitcoin users and 5k-6k nodes..

i really laugh if you think that with 2million users that you are suggesting that the node situation would only improve if there was 2million and one+ nodes..
have you really detached that much from reality.

how about try and get your boss and your best friends to stop with the crap like making fullnodes unable to validate fully due to pruned,no witness modes which your friends keep saying is 'perfectly ok'

if people want to be full nodes you should be telling them the importance of remaining full nodes.. dont advertise pruned/no-witness. and instead leave it for electrum and other liteclient people to advertise those lite features

anyway.. what is your stance on LukeJR's MAX_BLOCK_BASE_SIZE = 2000000;

are you going to be for it. or join in a new REKT campaign to throw him under the bus like you did with hearne and gavin..

[brg444]

It is really unfortunate that, with so many people running around on Reddit and BTCT that we are unable to keep a higher node count. If half of us were to run a single node, the situation would definitely improve.

That would require a lot of people who don't own any Bitcoins to run nodes...

you mean like you, who gets paid in fiat and monero?

anyway..
LOL there are 2 million bitcoin users and 5k-6k nodes..

Actually there are probably much more

[Cuidler]

However, with Bitcoin, we cannot just ‘add more nodes’ to respond to an increase in demand; as every (full) node must carry the entire burden of the network.

Its not completly true every full node carry the entire burden of the network. At least you can set your full node network and disk usage to your liking. Every node should set its network and disk usage policy individually:

Network usage can be defined by number of connections, and if it is not enought you might choose to accept and relay only blocks and not transactions. On a side note if RBF transactions become popular because of continuously full blocks, the Bitcoin network bandwith usage going to be much higher than any block size increase, the re relay of the same transactions with slighly higher fees can be real burden to Bitcoin network bandwith in future. Obviously here can be a lot to be improved for the client to follow specific user network bandwith policy.

About disk usage, you might run prunned version and still have full validating node. You may choose how much disk space you want to use to archive historic blocks for others to upload, but unless you specially need all historic blocks for yourselves, there is no need for every node to have all historic blocks for the Bitcoin network to function normally.

[Denker]

I just wish we could move on and lets be unified as a bitcoin community

We will move on don't worry!
I mean we are moving on since 7 years!
But there will always be people who will see things different and try to change it by manipulation, social engineering and spreading fear.

In terms of Roger Ver I'm extremely disappointed by seeing which path he is going the last 12-18 months.
There was a time I was looking up to that guy.This has totally changed and I can not take him serious anymore.

[franky1]

i find it very funny that the people with the loudest mouths wanting offchain solutions and locking bitcoins so that people use different networks instead. are in the majority monero fans..