Bitcoin Forum
March 29, 2024, 12:49:48 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: Bitcoin fork proposal by respected Bitcoin lead dev Gavin Andresen, to increase the block size from 1MB to 20MB.
pro
anti
agnostic
DGAF

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 ... 125 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Bitcoin 20MB Fork  (Read 154756 times)
R2D221
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500



View Profile
February 04, 2015, 05:27:41 PM
 #441



Person who claims we should argue with facts and not opinions uses memes for their arguments.

An economy based on endless growth is unsustainable.
1711673388
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711673388

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711673388
Reply with quote  #2

1711673388
Report to moderator
You get merit points when someone likes your post enough to give you some. And for every 2 merit points you receive, you can send 1 merit point to someone else!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1711673388
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711673388

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711673388
Reply with quote  #2

1711673388
Report to moderator
1711673388
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711673388

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711673388
Reply with quote  #2

1711673388
Report to moderator
davout
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1007


1davout


View Profile WWW
February 04, 2015, 05:29:06 PM
 #442

Person who claims we should argue with facts and not opinions uses memes for their arguments.

Was he arguing?

balu2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 04, 2015, 05:30:21 PM
 #443



Person who claims we should argue with facts and not opinions uses memes for their arguments.

at least not climatechange / the weather  Roll Eyes
LeMiner
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 139
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 04, 2015, 05:31:56 PM
 #444


You are taking into account, that there will be a time, when you can't use Bitcoin as you are used to do it. I think, that would really hurt Bitcoin.
If Bitcoin is successful, this problem will occur.

Do you have hard evidence for your hypthesis other than vague projections that may or may not come true?
You are repeating the same over and over again while ignoring the counterarguments presented.
https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=
https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=
I didn't see any argument, explaining why that growth would stop. Can you show it to me?

Nobody said the growth would stop, what has been said is: hitting the blocklimit will not cause big trouble because the first thing that would happen would be microtransactions for tiny amounts of money happen somewhere else. So all your doom preaching and urgency is invalid.

Hitting the limit will not render btc unusable - in fact it will clean the chain from spammy microtransactions.

That's funny. So here you are entering a store, present your creditcard to pay for your coffee..... But guess what? I'm sorry sir, your order is below 5$, you will have to fill up this special "Starbucks-card" first with at least 50$, since we don't accept 5$ creditcard payments here.

Give me one reason we would not allow micropayments to happen on the blockchain? They're all fee-paying-payments just like the large(r) ones. If you want the blockchain to be supported by transaction fees at one point you're going to need a lot of transactions.

Besides that, why put a hard limit on an open-market-concept? Let the market decide. If miners don't want to mine what in your opinion are "spammy" transactions then they wont. For the rest of us, let us mine what we want to mine, in the end for the miners they are all equal in terms of transaction fees.

It would have space for them for a while but at some stage the network wouldn't have space for them and that's with clunky as fsck fiat payment system volume, that would likely go up a few orders of magnitude with programmable money. By the time micropayments are a common thing more efficient means of carrying the out will have evolved but there's not much point placing the barrier of entry artificially high even then.

Got to say, after reading up on all the reasons against, space and network limitations, miners rewards, propagation times, all the centralisation issues, etc. the most convincing reason I've seen yet to support a hard fork is all the FUD and empty arguments being put forward against it. If they're so eager to flood this thread with the same kind of crap as the speculation subforum there must be something really good about raising the limit.

Let's put a few of your arguments against the fork and line them out;

Quote from: stan.distortion
space

Currently the blockchain is ~34GB. If it will continue following the current ~0.35MB block average per block we'd be increasing the blockchain about ~30GB/year.

Block size average was around 0.17MB in 2013. More or less Moores law. If this keeps increasing at the current rate the cost of storage of the blockchain will remain the same over the years.

Quote from: stan.distortion
network limitations

20MB block / 10 min = 2MB/min = 0.033MB/s, common even on very very basic household connections.

Quote from: stan.distortion
miners rewards

Miners need either;

lots of transactions all paying a little fee
very little amount of transactions paying a large fee

Bitcoin needs prefers to be viable for as many people as possible, so a very little fee per transaction over a large amount of transactions has the preference.

Quote from: stan.distortion
propagation times

There are already techniques out there like Pieter Wuille's  “headers first” approach downloading the longest chain of 80-byte block headers, which is only 25 megabytes of data. The headers are sufficient to know whether or not you have the best chain, and once your node has the headers it can “back fill” by requesting complete blocks from multiple peers in any order it wants, similar to how BitTorrent downloads chunks of a large file from many different peers at once. (source: Gavin's blog)

Pieter has also been working hard on ‘libsecp256k1′ — a highly optimized library for performing math on the elliptic curve used to secure Bitcoin transactions. It is undergoing extensive review, and will be rolled out when we’re convinced it is bug-free and completely compatible with the existing, OpenSSL-based code. (source: Gavin's blog)

rdponticelli has a pull request to run Bitcoin Core to run with a “pruned” block database. Once you have downloaded and indexed the full block chain, the only reason to store all of the old transaction data is to serve it to brand new peers who are performing the initial download. (source: Gavin's blog)

Quote from: stan.distortion
all the centralisation issues

Mining centralization? Node centralization? Currently it's already unviable to run a full node on your mobile or your occasionally-connected-to-the-internet-laptop. Full nodes in the future will stay completely possible for the hobbyist, for the non-hobbyist or people that simply don't want to store the full chain light clients will be a totally acceptable alternative.
R2D221
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500



View Profile
February 04, 2015, 05:35:15 PM
 #445

at least not climatechange 

Do I need to spell it out for you?

a·nal·o·gy
/əˈnaləjē/

noun
noun: analogy; plural noun: analogies

a comparison between two things, typically on the basis of their structure and for the purpose of explanation or clarification.
"an analogy between the workings of nature and those of human societies"

•a correspondence or partial similarity.
"the syndrome is called deep dysgraphia because of its analogy to deep dyslexia"

•a thing that is comparable to something else in significant respects.
"works of art were seen as an analogy for works of nature"

•Logic
a process of arguing from similarity in known respects to similarity in other respects.

synonyms: similarity, parallel, correspondence, likeness, resemblance, correlation, relation, kinship, equivalence, similitude, metaphor, simile
"there's a thinly veiled analogy between his fiction and his real life"

antonyms: dissimilarity


•Linguistics
a process by which new words and inflections are created on the basis of regularities in the form of existing ones.

•Biology
the resemblance of function between organs that have a different evolutionary origin.


An economy based on endless growth is unsustainable.
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
February 04, 2015, 05:37:10 PM
 #446

Giving the network more capabilities doesn't change the lying fundamentals of Bitcoin nor the protocol.
Didn't Satoshi consider the 1MB a temporary limit as well?

Except it's not just about "giving the network more capabilities".
Referring to satoshi's supposed authority by the means of your personal interpretation is no argument.
Well I could also say that it's your personal interpretation that it is not just giving the network more capabilities..
I was asking, I was not stating.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
LeMiner
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 139
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 04, 2015, 05:37:13 PM
 #447

....
Everything should be the same currency, and Bitcoin is capable of handling microtransactions. I don't understand why people say the opposite.

Not indefinitelly, even with the cap removed completely, networking streamlined, etc. it would still reach a point where bundling small transactions together would be more efficient.

That's just not true, there are already techniques out there that can easily handle 4000 TPS in both network/signing and size.

Here are a few interesting articles:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability#Network
https://blog.bitcoinfoundation.org/a-scalability-roadmap/
https://blog.bitcoinfoundation.org/a-bitcoin-backbone/
balu2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 04, 2015, 05:39:16 PM
 #448

at least not climatechange 

Do I need to spell it out for you?

a·nal·o·gy
/əˈnaləjē/

noun
noun: analogy; plural noun: analogies

a comparison between two things, typically on the basis of their structure and for the purpose of explanation or clarification.
"an analogy between the workings of nature and those of human societies"

•a correspondence or partial similarity.
"the syndrome is called deep dysgraphia because of its analogy to deep dyslexia"

•a thing that is comparable to something else in significant respects.
"works of art were seen as an analogy for works of nature"

•Logic
a process of arguing from similarity in known respects to similarity in other respects.

synonyms: similarity, parallel, correspondence, likeness, resemblance, correlation, relation, kinship, equivalence, similitude, metaphor, simile
"there's a thinly veiled analogy between his fiction and his real life"

antonyms: dissimilarity


•Linguistics
a process by which new words and inflections are created on the basis of regularities in the form of existing ones.

•Biology
the resemblance of function between organs that have a different evolutionary origin.



false analogy:
http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/falsean.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_analogy

just to draw an analogy doesn't make your analogy an argument. I can compare bitcoin to the weather too and draw all kinds of conclusions.

Good night.   Cool
R2D221
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500



View Profile
February 04, 2015, 05:43:00 PM
 #449

false analogy:
http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/falsean.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_analogy

just to draw an analogy doesn't make your analogy an argument. I can compare bitcoin to the weather too and draw all kinds of conclusions.

Good night.

Finally you make some sense.

Good bye, for the third time.

An economy based on endless growth is unsustainable.
Eamorr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 04, 2015, 05:48:07 PM
 #450

false analogy:
http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/falsean.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_analogy

just to draw an analogy doesn't make your analogy an argument. I can compare bitcoin to the weather too and draw all kinds of conclusions.

Good night.

Finally you make some sense.

Good bye, for the third time.

I think you should fork off outta here too.
LeMiner
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 139
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 04, 2015, 06:06:32 PM
 #451


EDIT: 4000 tps and even 45000 tps theoretically but considering how many we have in the fiat world now despite all its inefficiencies we could easily be looking at 4 billion tps at some stage.

Obviously the technique can be improved a LOT before we would be hitting limits anywhere even remotely near that. And computers that far in the future will also be a lot more powerful.
bambou
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 346
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 04, 2015, 06:17:36 PM
 #452


EDIT: 4000 tps and even 45000 tps theoretically but considering how many we have in the fiat world now despite all its inefficiencies we could easily be looking at 4 billion tps at some stage.

Obviously the technique can be improved a LOT before we would be hitting limits anywhere even remotely near that. And computers that far in the future will also be a lot more powerful.

Bitcoin will fail because involved people are lost in the future, instead of focusing on the present.

edit: Quod Erat Demonstrandum > http://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/2uovrl/me_28_f_with_my_husband_31_m_5_years_will_not/

Quote
"I used to consider him a smart guy and I never, ever thought he would succomb to basically being brainwashed by a bunch of clueless idiots on the internet who seem to know absolutely nothing about finance or the real world."

Non inultus premor
bambou
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 346
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 04, 2015, 06:32:51 PM
Last edit: February 04, 2015, 06:49:19 PM by bambou
 #453

Quite spot on for the rest mate,


...

Quote from: stan.distortion
miners rewards

Miners need either;

lots of transactions all paying a little fee
very little amount of transactions paying a large fee

Bitcoin needs prefers to be viable for as many people as possible, so a very little fee per transaction over a large amount of transactions has the preference.

This is what the "people will use bitcoin without knowing it" stands for.


Non inultus premor
LeMiner
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 139
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 04, 2015, 06:48:00 PM
 #454


EDIT: 4000 tps and even 45000 tps theoretically but considering how many we have in the fiat world now despite all its inefficiencies we could easily be looking at 4 billion tps at some stage.

Obviously the technique can be improved a LOT before we would be hitting limits anywhere even remotely near that. And computers that far in the future will also be a lot more powerful.

Bitcoin will fail because involved people are lost in the future, instead of focusing on the present.

edit: Quod Erat Demonstrandum > http://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/2uovrl/me_28_f_with_my_husband_31_m_5_years_will_not/

Quote
"I used to consider him a smart guy and I never, ever thought he would succomb to basically being brainwashed by a bunch of clueless idiots on the internet who seem to know absolutely nothing about finance or the real world."


I don't claim to be a financial guru or anything else. All I see is this technology that can be used as a backbone for so many things. And to open it up to a large as possible public we need it to be as viable as possible for everyone. Including the little guys. For that to happen to need the technology to continue maturing as well as grow.

The article you linked refers to someone with a "bitcoin" gambling addiction mixed with very vocal conspiracy theorist that like to bring their political views up at every chance they get.


....
Everything should be the same currency, and Bitcoin is capable of handling microtransactions. I don't understand why people say the opposite.

Not indefinitelly, even with the cap removed completely, networking streamlined, etc. it would still reach a point where bundling small transactions together would be more efficient.

That's just not true, there are already techniques out there that can easily handle 4000 TPS in both network/signing and size.

Here are a few interesting articles:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability#Network
https://blog.bitcoinfoundation.org/a-scalability-roadmap/
https://blog.bitcoinfoundation.org/a-bitcoin-backbone/

Hadn't heard about the network in the last link before, looks impressive. Thanks.


Anytime Smiley


Quite spot on for the rest mate,


...

Quote from: stan.distortion
miners rewards

Miners need either;

lots of transactions all paying a little fee
very little amount of transactions paying a large fee

Bitcoin needs prefers to be viable for as many people as possible, so a very little fee per transaction over a large amount of transactions has the preference.

This is what the "people will use bitcoin without knowing it" stands for.



Obviously there is so much more that we can do with blockchain (bitcoin) based solutions/technologies. And I'm very curious and interested to see what the future has to bring.
ujka
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 04, 2015, 08:42:03 PM
 #455

Been back after few hours, and here 4 pages of FUD to read.
Must agree with

...
Got to say, after reading up on all the reasons against, space and network limitations, miners rewards, propagation times, all the centralisation issues, etc. the most convincing reason I've seen yet to support a hard fork is all the FUD and empty arguments being put forward against it. If they're so eager to flood this thread with the same kind of crap as the speculation subforum there must be something really good about raising the limit.
sickpig
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008


View Profile
February 04, 2015, 09:56:56 PM
 #456

Giving the network more capabilities doesn't change the lying fundamentals of Bitcoin nor the protocol.
Didn't Satoshi consider the 1MB a temporary limit as well?
Except it's not just about "giving the network more capabilities".
Referring to satoshi's supposed authority by the means of your personal interpretation is no argument.

I think that these two examples leave no room to interpretations, sure one can disagree but...

Quote from: satoshi nakamoto on Nov 2008 http://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/emails/cryptography/2/
Long before the network gets anywhere near as large as that, it would be safe for users to use Simplified Payment Verification (section Cool to check for double spending, which only requires having the chain of block headers, or about 12KB per day. Only people trying to create new coins would need to run network nodes. At first, most users would run network nodes, but as the network grows beyond a certain point, it would be left more and more to specialists with server farms of specialized hardware. A server farm would only need to have one node on the network and the rest of the LAN connects with that one node.

The bandwidth might not be as prohibitive as you think. A typical transaction would be about 400 bytes (ECC is nicely compact). Each transaction has to be broadcast twice, so lets say 1KB per transaction. Visa processed 37 billion transactions in FY2008, or an average of 100 million transactions per day. That many transactions would take 100GB of bandwidth, or the size of 12 DVD or 2 HD quality movies, or about $18 worth of bandwidth at current prices.

If the network were to get that big, it would take several years, and by then, sending 2 HD movies over the Internet would probably not seem like a big deal.

It can be phased in, like:

if (blocknumber > 115000)
    maxblocksize = largerlimit

It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.

When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.


Bitcoin is a participatory system which ought to respect the right of self determinism of all of its users - Gregory Maxwell.
solex
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078
Merit: 1002


100 satoshis -> ISO code


View Profile
February 04, 2015, 10:17:57 PM
Last edit: February 05, 2015, 07:08:15 AM by solex
 #457

I thought I would have a look at recent blocks >900KB. There are 21 in the last 6 days.

Block_height Block_time Size_KB Num_Tx Fee_BTC
341192   31/01/2015_7:10   976.54   2518   0.3303735   
341226   31/01/2015_13:01   903.09   1106   0.15922165
341305   1/02/2015_1:05   959.89   1320   0.20086461
341313   1/02/2015_2:19   912.48   693   0.2979134
341350   1/02/2015_7:49   975.67   1735   0.263689
341505   2/02/2015_5:11   976.5   735   0.16244257
341517   2/02/2015_7:02   947.72   746   0.14308729
341519   2/02/2015_7:36   957.16   482   0.13242593
341520   2/02/2015_8:02   976.45   1964   0.28018485
341525   2/02/2015_8:35   973.77   844   0.187877
341737   3/02/2015_19:00   976.49   1291   0.18828618
341765   4/02/2015_1:23   976.49   2549   0.35075577
341773   4/02/2015_2:45   941.58   1635   0.22893775
341794   4/02/2015_6:05   976.46   2380   0.31873266
341798   4/02/2015_6:50   971.04   1759   0.24739191
341810   4/02/2015_8:30   976.17   1705   0.25575189
341944   5/02/2015_4:08   976.54   2268   0.30628975
341951   5/02/2015_5:35   974.37   1635   0.23624007
341963   5/02/2015_7:53   976.46   1911   0.27444743
341965   5/02/2015_8:33   976.52   2105   0.2951799   
341967   5/02/2015_9:24   973.82   2675   0.33440304

Average block size = 965KB
Average number of tx = 1622 (or approximately 2.7 TPS)
Average block total fee = 0.25 BTC

These blocks are near to the 1MB limit and do not really permit that much real-world business to be transacted on the main-chain. If the number of people using Bitcoin, worldwide, increased to 10 million then everyone would only be able do one transaction per 43 days. This ignores that some blocks will always be mined small or empty while the reward remains high.

20MB blocks would offer 54 TPS and an average total fee per block of 5 BTC (based on this evidence) which means that fees would be comparable with the reward once the average block size hits 20MB and the reward is down to 6.25 BTC (within 6 years time).

The limit increase permits a much healthier outcome for the Bitcoin network and ecosystem.

pawel7777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2394
Merit: 1555



View Profile WWW
February 04, 2015, 10:51:24 PM
 #458

The limit increase permits a much healthier outcome for the Bitcoin network and ecosystem.

Today is the limit increase, what will be tomorrow? Are people really wanting to go all in and bet all the todays consensus on the hard-fork? If you read Gavin post about the need for hard-fork, its a totally fear-based move with arguments Bitcoin will be replaced by Altcoins, this means its a matter of time until another need for a hard-fork happen and next time it wont be as trivial need as just increase block-size. I predict next hard-fork will want to increase the number of coins.

So no arguments against, just anti-fork by the rule? If I'm not mistaken, bitcoin has already been forked twice (2013 and 2010?). Are you sure you're on the very first fork?

▄▄███████▄▄
▄██████████████▄
▄██████████████████▄
▄████▀▀▀▀███▀▀▀▀█████▄
▄█████████████▄█▀████▄
███████████▄███████████
██████████▄█▀███████████
██████████▀████████████
▀█████▄█▀█████████████▀
▀████▄▄▄▄███▄▄▄▄████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀███████████████▀
▀▀███████▀▀
.
 MΞTAWIN  THE FIRST WEB3 CASINO   
.
.. PLAY NOW ..
RoadStress
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904
Merit: 1007


View Profile
February 04, 2015, 10:53:10 PM
 #459

Why would someone bad intended with a lot of money agree to let your microtransactions happen? He could fill the blocks easily and he could be against raising the limit by owning/renting a lot of mining hashpower. What will you do then when your transaction will require an absurd transaction fee to get propagated?

Well for a starter, people investing in large facilities wouldnt want bitcoin to fail, obviously. So they'd oblige.
Secondly, if the transaction fee gets too high, i guess i'll just have to wait for bitcoin's value to be worth it.
In any case im not planning in spending my bitcoins now, and especially not for frappuccinos..

I think we view things differently. Bitcoin will not fail if people with lots of money will be the only ones using it. That's a wrong assumption in my view. Yes it may fail for you for not being able to use it, but for them it will work as designed.

is ok. I just thought maybe doing 50 cents transactions on btc with that marketcap is less appropriate than doing 50cent transactions on coins with smaller marketcap to keep the btc chain clean for the big stuff.

I don't see what the problem should be to pass microtransactions down to smallcap tipping currencies. It seems logical to me. And the beauty is: this would automatically occure once fees rise.

That's why we love btc: because it regulates itself.

I don't quite understand what you said, but why should the blockchain only be used by the big transactions? It's like saying that Internet should be used by Google and Facebook and the other should use other networks.

Nobody said the growth would stop, what has been said is: hitting the blocklimit will not cause big trouble because the first thing that would happen would be microtransactions for tiny amounts of money happen somewhere else. So all your doom preaching and urgency is invalid.

Hitting the limit will not render btc unusable - in fact it will clean the chain from spammy microtransactions.

So you consider that it's not such a big trouble if the microtransactions don't have the space to happen. I think it's a big trouble because the average Joe will not be able to use bitcoin hassle free. He will need to move his coins to another blockchain to be able to use microtransactions. This will render btc unusable for him which is a big deal.

But i don't see why i need terrabytes on my PC full of satoshi dice crap ...

Again this is a technical challenge that has nothing to do with raising the block limit. Haven't you heard about blockchain pruning? You will not need tons of terrabytes on your PC to host a node so this argument for not doing a fork is simply stupid because it's not a valid argument. It's something that can be fixed!


Quantus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 883
Merit: 1005



View Profile
February 04, 2015, 10:59:00 PM
 #460

The limit increase permits a much healthier outcome for the Bitcoin network and ecosystem.

Today is the limit increase, what will be tomorrow? Are people really wanting to go all in and bet all the todays consensus on the hard-fork? If you read Gavin post about the need for hard-fork, its a totally fear-based move with arguments Bitcoin will be replaced by Altcoins, this means its a matter of time until another need for a hard-fork happen and next time it wont be as trivial need as just increase block-size. I predict next hard-fork will want to increase the number of coins.

So no arguments against, just anti-fork by the rule? If I'm not mistaken, bitcoin has already been forked twice (2013 and 2010?). Are you sure you're on the very first fork?

The last fork was needed the old chain had a really bad bug so bad that no one wanted to use it and it died. This time both chains would be functional.
Edit: in fact the only people risking anything are those who fork, for those who stick with the original chain they risk nothing because they can chose to switch to the Giga-bloat-coin at any time but then they can't go back to bitcoin.

(I am a 1MB block supporter who thinks all users should be using Full-Node clients)
Avoid the XT shills, they only want to destroy bitcoin, their hubris and greed will destroy us.
Know your adversary https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 ... 125 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!