SegWit / BU? Either/Or?

[TKeenan]

"When you come to a fork in the blockchain, take it!"  -Yogi Berra

There is no reason at all why we have to choose either SegWit or 8MB.  These are simply not mutually exclusive.  Each provides certain benefit valued by different schools of thought, but neither harms the other.

Clearly from the present state of things, it is a tie at best.  nodecounter

With our current thinking (95%), neither of these will be adopted.  This is just fucking stupid.  Nothing prevents us from adopting BOTH.  

I think we should accept SegWit AND 8MB on the same day.  This way, everyone gets what they want.  Blockstream's Lightning will be enabled, and the blockchain will have good transaction capacity for the next few years until LN gets up to full speed.  Everyone wins.  


Why not?

[1714937995]

1714937995

[1714937995]

1714937995

[1714937995]

1714937995

[1714937995]

1714937995

[unamis76]

Whatever takes it for Bitcoin to scale... I'm most likely up for it, and a mix of these two things (or something similar) seems to be the solution long term. SegWit can only scale so far, and maybe one day 8MB will be very limited too.

[franky1]

segwit AND dynamic blocks.

which is also something nodes with 8mb max would accept.

by doing dynamic blocks the community get the consensus to up the blocksize naturally when requires and copable.. rather than having to play another oliver twist "please sir can i have some more" game with devs in a few years if it was just a fixed dev handed limit

[franky1]

Whatever takes it for Bitcoin to scale... I'm most likely up for it, and a mix of these two things (or something similar) seems to be the solution long term. SegWit can only scale so far, and maybe one day 8MB will be very limited too.

EG dynamic blocks starting 2mb base 4mb weight as default start. making both core and the community happy and then the community raise the limit when they want and need to without dev intervention/prevention.
nodes flag what they are capable of and it moves when the majority of nodes can handle it.

thus natural progressive growth and not the misinformed large leaps to gigabyte blocks by midnight false rhetoric.

everyone is happy

[unamis76]

segwit AND dynamic blocks.

Dynamic blocks are a very interesting ideia too. I believe it's the most reasonable idea from what I've read, it just hasn't been developed further... Now the question is, would we even need SegWit with dynamic blocks?

Whatever takes it for Bitcoin to scale... I'm most likely up for it, and a mix of these two things (or something similar) seems to be the solution long term. SegWit can only scale so far, and maybe one day 8MB will be very limited too.

EG dynamic blocks starting 2mb base 4mb weight as default start. making both core and the community happy and then the community raise the limit when they want and need to without dev intervention/prevention.
nodes flag what they are capable of and it moves when the majority of nodes can handle it.

thus natural progressive growth and not the misinformed large leaps to gigabyte blocks by midnight false rhetoric.

everyone is happy

Yes, everyone would be happy with this, at least most of us, I think.

[BitcoinExchangeIndia.com]

segwit AND dynamic blocks.

Dynamic blocks are a very interesting ideia too. I believe it's the most reasonable idea from what I've read, it just hasn't been developed further... Now the question is, would we even need SegWit with dynamic blocks?

It has been - https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0106.mediawiki

[unamis76]

segwit AND dynamic blocks.

Dynamic blocks are a very interesting ideia too. I believe it's the most reasonable idea from what I've read, it just hasn't been developed further... Now the question is, would we even need SegWit with dynamic blocks?

It has been - https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0106.mediawiki

This is simply a Draft, it hasn't even been included in any client. That's what I meant with "not developed further".