Thanks for your response, your initial point definitely makes sense, havent thought about it that way before now. When you say making nodes more adaptive do you mean more accessible for individual users? Anyone can setup a BTC node but not many do I guess due to the lack of getting anything in return (and storage space in some cases).
(2) Definitely agree with this point, what exact innovation? How can this be accomplished? Will Segwit address these needs in your opinion? How do you think that the fee war can be addressed?
Thanks for the post, the perspective that you've given me makes chronological sense, really interesting. (Y)
making nodes more adaptive
= nodes can set rules/change settings at runtime
things like
instead of needing to download a whole new client just to accept a new setting. the clients which people currently have can tweak settings and be able to accept certain things as patches.
EG download patches/ddl's rather than having to choose a 'brand' or starting a brand civil war
the reason i say this is the community becomes less dependant on a particular group of devs to make decisions on what is best and instead people can choose what they want. which then brings consensus back into the communities symbiotic relationship with each other, rather than a tier network and finger pointing civil war debates
innovation
lol segwit lol..pfft thats been overhyped to the extreme.
there are other innovations. its not just about transactions/block formations.. its about the GUI (front end user interface) hardware wallets. retailer Epos(cashier terminals) atms, next gen asics, even making payments via NFC smart watches rather than camera scanning QR codes or copy and pasting lengthy addresses
fee war can be addressed easily..
at the moment fee's for a 225byte tx cost the same if you spend it every block or only once a month. meaning it does not punish spammers that respend as soon as its confirmed.
EG if you pay above estimate fee you pretty much gonna get your transaction put through at the same block, no matter if the coin is only one confirm old 144confirms or 30,000 confirms.
if a group think LN is "the solution" then they feel that people doing onchain transactions more than once a day is bad/spam/unneeded and anyone who genuinely needs to use bitcoin often/multiple times a day can utilise side services like LN.
so we can make a fee priority formula that utilises coin age and also CLTV to reward people willing to only spend once a day and punish people that want to spend every ~10 minutes. that way those 'spammers' condition themselves to be less selfish because suddenly spending every time it confirms becomes more expensive(extremely) compared to someone who only spends once a day or less often
EG spend once a day using a lean 225-400byte tx only costs pennies. spend with just 1 confirm costs 144+ times more. and ontop of that the bloat of the tx also adds more costs.. thus it teaches people to be leaner and less spammy