Scaling Argument is Ridiculous

[BitcoinBarrel]

There is no need for scaling. Fees will determine Priority.

People that want quick confirmations can send high fee. If you don't care, then you can send low fee. Plus once Bitcoin is more mainstream there will be more micro-payment solutions and alt coins to handle dust transactions.

Just calm down everyone, Bitcoin is working great!

[1715163930]

1715163930

[BitcoinBarrel]

I should mention that all the scaling solutions steal Fees from miners and open the door for security vulnerabilities.

You have to ask yourself... if Bitcoin really is flawed... then why don't these people with the "magical solution" create their own Alt-Coin?

[worhiper_-_]

Well, a solution to include more TPS to bitcoin's network would be needed at some point in the future if it were for bitcoin to support more use. Yet, the proposed solutions up to this point might not be ideal. The network could adopt a proposed solution through consensus if it was urgently needed.

[knircky]

There is no need for scaling. Fees will determine Priority.

People that want quick confirmations can send high fee. If you don't care, then you can send low fee. Plus once Bitcoin is more mainstream there will be more micro-payment solutions and alt coins to handle dust transactions.

Just calm down everyone, Bitcoin is working great!

Lolz. Bitcoin is perfect it does not need to evolve or compete. It is like god.

[uneng]

I don't think it's working great. At some point persons trying to send their transaction using low fees will have it canceled as it will take too much time to complete, forcing them to pay higher fees to have their transactions finished.

[BitcoinBarrel]

I don't think it's working great. At some point persons trying to send their transaction using low fees will have it canceled as it will take too much time to complete, forcing them to pay higher fees to have their transactions finished.

Use Litecoin, Dogecoin, Ethereum, Dash or some alt-coin for $1 transactions. They work great also!

[RodeoX]

I don't think it's working great. At some point persons trying to send their transaction using low fees will have it canceled as it will take too much time to complete, forcing them to pay higher fees to have their transactions finished.

Well, that is correct and is exactly how bitcoin works. It's not charity. You pay for a Tx because it costs money to do that and you are the one who wants it done.

[sir.humus]

if Bitcoin is ever to be a serious challenger to mainstream payments systems, it must be able to create enough liquidity to support very high – and variable – volumes of transactions at low cost. The desire to preserve wealth cannot take priority over the need to support economic activity. Poverty and inequality due to scarcity of money and high transaction costs are surely worse evils than (mild) inflation.

[uneng]

I don't think it's working great. At some point persons trying to send their transaction using low fees will have it canceled as it will take too much time to complete, forcing them to pay higher fees to have their transactions finished.

Well, that is correct and is exactly how bitcoin works. It's not charity. You pay for a Tx because it costs money to do that and you are the one who wants it done.

But when it starts costing much money will be impracticable for most users, no?
For now it's acceptable because there aren't many bitcoin enthusiasts yet, but nobody wants to spend a lot of money on transactions, many persons use bitcoin to avoid high fees and costs. And many transactions could be avoied as they are spam and worthless.

I don't think it's working great. At some point persons trying to send their transaction using low fees will have it canceled as it will take too much time to complete, forcing them to pay higher fees to have their transactions finished.

Use Litecoin, Dogecoin, Ethereum, Dash or some alt-coin for $1 transactions. They work great also!

The consequence can be that crypto currency enthusiasts start using these altcoins not only for 1$ transactions, but for transactions of any amount...

[franky1]

I don't think it's working great. At some point persons trying to send their transaction using low fees will have it canceled as it will take too much time to complete, forcing them to pay higher fees to have their transactions finished.

Well, that is correct and is exactly how bitcoin works. It's not charity. You pay for a Tx because it costs money to do that and you are the one who wants it done.

but bitcoin is not a commercial company, controlling supply to cause price frenzy either.

so holding back supply for a couple years and stroking the sheeps wool to tell them to just pay more is not they way to go either

[daddybios]

Where are you in such a hurry? As if you do not use any other money except for Bitcoins. I doubt it. Even paying a large commission will still have to wait for 6 confirmations. The transaction is in any case will not be instantaneous. You can pay a large commission for individual transactions, where the first confirmation enough.

[d5000]

No. If the bus is full, higher fees won't let enter more people. (There was a nice meme around but I don't remember where).

With 1 MB blocks and no LN/sidechain or other off-chain solution, Bitcoin's target audience and transaction capacity is capped artificially. It won't reach mass adoption and the price will go back to $10 or less. Yes, $10 per bitcoin, as the current price includes speculation that there will be mass adoption at some point in the future.

And the "settlement layer" thingy won't work, because Bitcoin is not really scarce - it's open source and there are plenty of copycats around that will be happy to take Bitcoin's leading role allowing a higher transaction capacity.

[kiklo]

No. If the bus is full, higher fees won't let enter more people. (There was a nice meme around but I don't remember where).

With 1 MB blocks and no LN/sidechain or other off-chain solution, Bitcoin's target audience and transaction capacity is capped artificially. It won't reach mass adoption and the price will go back to $10 or less. Yes, $10 per bitcoin, as the current price includes speculation that there will be mass adoption at some point in the future.

And the "settlement layer" thingy won't work, because Bitcoin is not really scarce - it's open source and there are plenty of copycats around that will be happy to take Bitcoin's leading role allowing a higher transaction capacity.

Actually there are other off-chain solutions , They are just being ignored.  

1.  Gift Cards have no transactions issue, and could easily solve the retail speed issues

2.  Once BTC is in an exchange, there are no limits between internal BTC trading, except what ever is imposed on the users by the exchange.   
     Only when BTC is Deposit or Withdrawn from the exchange , would their be any Onchain transactions.

And both can be done immediately with no changes to BTC whatsoever.  


 

[franky1]

2.  Once BTC is in an exchange, there are no limits between internal BTC trading, except what ever is imposed on the users by the exchange.    
     Only when BTC is Deposit or Withdrawn from the exchange , would their be any Onchain transactions.

once 10,000 people want to pay starbucks they will start to ask...not only is starbucks co-signing 10,000 channels

why do i want to deposit $100 a month, or $1200 a year into a contracted multisig with starbucks. making them the new paypal2.0(thousands of other customers need starbucks to co-sign). which is n-locked for a month/year.. and then when withdrawing/settling after a month/year. my funds are held maturing for 3-5 days after confirmation (CLTV maturity) and starbucks can chargeback(CSV REVOKE) because they think they have the right.

much simpler to just deposit $25 a week using their separate internal bartab to deduct balance from the $25
and i can request my money back same day without all these locks and penalties for month/year. by simply not using LN
or
i can just buy a $25 giftcard

[shinratensei_]

It's ridiculous, every party with his argument about scaling solution. It will never finish. I can't receive in my bitcoin wallet if I use altcoin and I don't have an exchange in my bitcoin wallet.  Nxt just take a second but the people haven't interest to used it.

[eternalgloom]

But isn't the bottom line that either the blocksize is too small or blocks need to be made more efficient?
If Bitcoin wants to be able to compete with, say, the Mastercard network in terms of amount of transactions per seconds it can handle, these things must happen, or not?

Otherwise, people would just be raising the fee without there being any ceiling to it.
If everybody does it, there would be a point in time that you'd have to pay 5 or 10 dollars just to have a transaction confirmed within the hour..

[gentlemand]

People here sometimes act like Bitcoin has already won. In reality it's a dot and right now it needs as many people coming on board as possible, not pulling up the drawbridge before it's occurred to the vast majority to approach it.  

There still doesn't seem to be anything other than gridlock when it comes to scaling. If it can't be pulled off now when it's still so small then it's hard to imagine anything'll change further down the line unless it's developed 100% on top of BTC and does nothing to change the original chain.

[d5000]

@kiklo:

These solutions are totally centralized, although I perhaps would buy a gift card from a local shop or business I trust, as it's unlikely they will run away with my money.  Lightning Network is only semi-centralized as the payment hubs may be centralized but there is no way they run away if I enforce my right to close the channel if they don't cooperate.

[franky1]

@kiklo:

These solutions are totally centralized, although I perhaps would buy a gift card from a local shop or business I trust, as it's unlikely they will run away with my money.  Lightning Network is only semi-centralized as the payment hubs may be centralized but there is no way they run away if I enforce my right to close the channel if they don't cooperate.

read the LN small print.
if you broadcast early. the hub can revoke your broadcasted tx.
your at their mercy

[kiklo]

@kiklo:

These solutions are totally centralized, although I perhaps would buy a gift card from a local shop or business I trust, as it's unlikely they will run away with my money.  Lightning Network is only semi-centralized as the payment hubs may be centralized but there is no way they run away if I enforce my right to close the channel if they don't cooperate.

Hmm,

The Gift card solution is Decentralized, as every Business has an option on how to run it.
They can use a service like Gyft or they can make one inhouse with their own personal setup.
But there are already Legal Protections in Place with Gift Cards in either version.

State Gift Card Consumer Protection Laws 2013 Update.
The Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 (the CARD Act) provides consumers several gift card protections including limits on expiration dates and fees. Nov 25, 2013

In my previous post Option 2: Exchanges Clarification
Example would be if Poloniex or Bittrex act as a Crypto Escrow Service, you deposit some of your BTC , and they setup inhouse systems where you can transfer funds between each other on the exchange only. They already act as a large holder of funds anyway , this could be an additional service they could provide for a fee.
Since All Coin Exchanges could perform this type of function , it would also be decentralized and you could pick your favorite or be on as many as you wish.
Again it is an option , the exchanges are the ones that have to implement it.
* Their are also already laws on the books to protect people that use Escrow Services.*

But Neither require segwit and both can give UNLIMITED OFFCHAIN TRANSACTION CAPACITY.