[edited out]
Why do I need to do any further homework than I have already done?
Because you keep denying facts.
Your original assertion was that bitcoin cannot grow because the blocks are full. That is not a fact, it is an opinion.
I am not denying any facts, I am just disagreeing with your conclusion. Whether blocks are full are not does not really matter because they do not support the concluded assertion that bitcoin cannot grow.
So, even if we assume your facts that blocks are full, such a supposed fact does not support that there is some kind of problem with bitcoin, especially when transactions are going through in less than 24 hours (frequently less than an hour) and fairly small fees (frequently less than $.10). Accordingly, there is plenty of room for growth because transactions could take a lot longer and that is not a problem, and fees could go up and that is not a problem. Accordingly, your assertion that the fullness is causing some kind of problem is speculative and unfounded.
I have already asserted facts that are true,
No, you have not.
The facts that I asserted that are relevant relate to transaction times and fees, as I keep repeating. You want me to talk about some other unimportant fact (blocks are supposedly full, which even if true does not matter so long as transaction times and fees remain reasonable, as I have already repeatedly asserted).
and that is that transactions are continuing to be processed in a timely manner
That's not the point, I didn't say they are not.
What is the point, then? Blocks are full? So fucking what?
and for very low fees, so why are you continuing to suggest a problem when there is no problem?
I didn't say anything about fees. Try to focus, we were discussing new users.
Yeah, you asserted that bitcoin could not take new users, what is your proof? I am asserting that there is plenty of space for new users because of relevant factors including but not limited to transaction times and fees. There are a lot of other reasons that new users may be ready, willing and able to get into bitcoin as well, but transaction times and fees are more relevant than your supposed hypothetically relevant fact regarding fullness of blocks.
Main questions are whether transactions are being processed securely in a timely manner, value is being kept secure and how much does it cost to transmit value in this system relative to other systems..
No, we were discussing new users. Stop changing the subject.
Yes, you are wanting to discuss speculation of the future based on irrelevant facts... I am saying that there is room for new users and you are asserting that there is not room based on an irrelevant assertion about blockfullness.
Bitcoin remains way ahead of any competition for what it provides, which is decentralized immutability..
Sure, but we were discussing the extra capacity needed for new users
We are not discussing. You keep bringing it up and speculating about this. You think block fullness is relevant, and I think that it is not. it think that transaction times and fees are more relevant and accordingly that there is plenty of room for new users.
Where's the problem?
The problem is that there's hardly capacity left for new users. Hence, new users can only start using Bitcoin at the expense of existing users.
Yes, you keep saying this, and we disagree. Maybe at some point we can agree to disagree, no?
and why would there be any burden on me to provide further evidence?
Because you keep denying the fact that Bitcoin is running for months on almost full capacity. Either give some sources that support your claim, or admit you're wrong.
I am not denying any facts. I am asserting that the supposed fullness is not relevant... it is just argued over and over and over as if it were relevant... I have no burden to make any further offers of proof because this discussion remains repetitious.
Hello?
Hello, hello, hello!
Yes, nothing new here. Hello to you, too.
Maybe this question of "maxed out" is a matter of perception, because I perceive bitcoin to be quite well functional and well under capacity,
I didn't say that the "functionality" is maxxed out (if such a thing even exists). Only the capacity. Which is maximum 250,000 transactions per day (1 block holds about 1700 tx, there are about 144 blocks in 24 hours). And the past half year there are about 200,000 to 250,000 tx per day on average. No perception here, just facts.
O.k. Even if true, so fucking what? I don't even need to admit nor deny whether those facts are true, because my point is that they are irrelevant in light of more important facts (including but not limited to transaction times, fees, and usefulness of the bitcoin platform)
O.k... then your facts are a big so fucking what? No need for me to repeat here what I have already asserted above in response to the early comment and in my earlier posts in this same topic.
Except.... you didn't! I understand you don't like the fact that there are about 200,000-250,000 tx per day, but that doesn't make them disappear.
Yes, you are repetitious regarding non-relevance.
I don't agree to disagree about facts. Now, are there on average 200,000 to 250,000 tx per day in during the last months or not? A simple 'yes' or 'no, look at this source here...' suffices.
I am suggesting to agree to disagree about the conclusion regarding the supposed facts and the extent to which the facts that you are presenting matter.
It matters, because full is full. It limits adoption.
ditto
If it is maxed out, so fucking what, there is no problem being created.. .transactions are still being processed in a timely manner and for a relatively low fee level..
If it is maxed out, the number of tx cannot grow. Something has to give. You can freeze the number of users, or you can spread the same number of tx over more users.
we disagree about what is relevant... that is true.
furthermore there are additional innovations on the cusp of being introduced.. so where is the problem exactly? And what are you suggesting to be the solution exactly? Are you suggesting that this supposed problem that you are asserting is interfering with adoption in any kind of significant and material way? Are you suggesting that bitcoin prices are being held down because of such a supposed problem? What is the problem, exactly? The burden is on you to describe the problem, rather than on me to describe why there is not a problem - which I have sufficiently done several times (therefore agree to disagree, no?)
I prefer not to discuss anything else with you as long as you keep denying plain facts. Let alone make you any suggestions. You figure it out yourself inside your reality distortion field.
O.k. Finally, it appears that we are making progress.. we will agree to disagree... GREAT!!!!
Poll
