Bitcoin 20MB Fork

[danielpbarron]

What's going on in your elite IRC channel?

You can read it here, or join it here.

[R2D221]

if the fork should have happened it would already have

You claim this based on what?

[Mikestang]

if the fork should have happened it would already have

If it needed to happen it would already have; should or should not is what all the fuss is about.

[R2D221]

Can you tell me where I can order that 100 MBPS your "law" promised to me two years ago ?
I live in a small town and my house has only a 4 km long copper line.
There is no reason to believe optic fiber will be delivered to me within 15 years.

The future is already here — it's just not very evenly distributed
— William Gibson

[solex]

Can you tell me where I can order that 100 MBPS your "law" promised to me two years ago ?
I live in a small town and my house has only a 4 km long copper line.
There is no reason to believe optic fiber will be delivered to me within 15 years.

The future is already here — it's just not very evenly distributed
— William Gibson

True.

Some people have fiber available years before others, so the graph is very much an average with wide variation for individuals. Huge numbers of Bitcoin companies will be in locations where high-speed fiber is present. For people with poor internet service there should eventually be an alternative: satellite broadcasting of transactions and blocks, as per Jeff Garzik's bitsats proposal. Start listening from 42 mins (although it is all interesting, Jeff comes in at 24 min): https://decentralize.fm/shows/episode-21-jeff-garzik

[cbeast]

Can you tell me where I can order that 100 MBPS your "law" promised to me two years ago ?
I live in a small town and my house has only a 4 km long copper line.
There is no reason to believe optic fiber will be delivered to me within 15 years.

The future is already here — it's just not very evenly distributed
— William Gibson

ghdp probably lives in a region where land doesn't cost a million per acre. Everything is a trade-off.

[davout]

Everything is a trade-off.

Sure, so what's the trade-off for allowing micropayments and reddit's tipping on the primary chain?

[cbeast]

Everything is a trade-off.

Sure, so what's the trade-off for allowing micropayments and reddit's tipping on the primary chain?

Bitcoin is ideal for that if you use payment channels. I'm not sure why they aren't doing that right now.

[davout]

Everything is a trade-off.

Sure, so what's the trade-off for allowing micropayments and reddit's tipping on the primary chain?

Bitcoin is ideal for that if you use payment channels. I'm not sure why they aren't doing that right now.

Because micro-channels are only for recurring micro-payments that can be aggregated to a bigger one later. It's a small subset of micro-payments, certainly not the general case.

Now if you'd please answer the original question.

[cbeast]

ghdp probably lives in a region where land doesn't cost a million per acre. Everything is a trade-off.

Sure, so what's the trade-off for allowing micropayments and reddit's tipping on the primary chain?

Bitcoin is ideal for that if you use payment channels. I'm not sure why they aren't doing that right now.

Because micro-channels are only for recurring micro-payments that can be aggregated to a bigger one later. It's a small subset of micro-payments, certainly not the general case.

Now if you'd please answer the original question.

Micro-channels are also for single payments. Tipping is also recurring. You are simply biased as to their direction. Think of tipping like leaving money on the table. You have to trust that the busboy doesn't swipe it before the server. Pushing settlements forward reduces mining fees and the occasional small single tip is made up in micro-channel fees.

I fixed your omitted context. Your question doesn't have a trade-off. Different topics.

[davout]

Micro-channels are also for single payments. Tipping is also recurring. You are simply biased as to their direction. Think of tipping like leaving money on the table. You have to trust that the busboy doesn't swipe it before the server. Pushing settlements forward reduces mining fees and the occasional small single tip is made up in micro-channel fees.

That doesn't make much sense...
But hey, if you feel like avoiding answering the question of what the trade-off of a bigger chain is, I can't really force you.

[cbeast]

Micro-channels are also for single payments. Tipping is also recurring. You are simply biased as to their direction. Think of tipping like leaving money on the table. You have to trust that the busboy doesn't swipe it before the server. Pushing settlements forward reduces mining fees and the occasional small single tip is made up in micro-channel fees.

That doesn't make much sense...
But hey, if you feel like avoiding answering the question of what the trade-off of a bigger chain is, I can't really force you.

check out lightning payment channels and it will make sense.  It allows you to have every global transaction on a 3mb isp. Tips too.. That's not big like you claim.

[Agestorzrxx]

When the block size increased  to 20M, how many people will run the full node?
The whole block chain will big enough, that average people will not run the full node.

[cbeast]

That will be so cool to have a full node on a basic internet package. Looks like they got the problem solved. /thread

[FattyMcButterpants]

I have not read through the full tread but is there a summary of the core developer's positions on this matter?

[davout]

check out lightning payment channels and it will make sense.  It allows you to have every global transaction on a 3mb isp. Tips too.. That's not big like you claim.

To date, lightning is vaporware, let's see when it's actually rolled-out.

That will be so cool to have a full node on a basic internet package. Looks like they got the problem solved. /thread

Why do you speak in the future tense, Bitcoin already works fine on a basic internet package.

[davout]

I have not read through the full tread but is there a summary of the core developer's positions on this matter?

Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn are sold, others are like 'meh'.

[cbeast]

I have not read through the full tread but is there a summary of the core developer's positions on this matter?

This is a troll thread. I doubt any core devs participated in any of these 130+ pages. There have been other threads that resolved this long ago. The cool thing is that they continue to improve the solutions beyond expectations. This thread will only end when MP stops paying his shills.

[davout]

There have been other threads that resolved this long ago.

Could you please quote other core devs saying they OK this ?

Here is mine :

sipa → i'm generally in favor of a larger blocksize, but only under the condition that there is a proposal that has extremely wide consensus

wumpus → I'm still not convinced we require a larger blocksize yet

Luke-Jr → wumpus: we definitely don't yet - but it's probably something to be thinking about

gavinandresen → wumpus: how full do blocks need to be before you think we need a hardfork?

wumpus → gavinandresen: all of them full, and a backlog of serious (not spammy) transactions

gmaxwell → gavinandresen: First stop pretending that there actually is consensus or that this is easy and safe. We couldn't even manage to get BIP34 right without two somewhat ugly unexpected effects (we burned the most significant bit of the block version number; and the switchover criteria we implemented wasn't actually the criteria described in the BIP)

Source.

[DooMAD]

There have been other threads that resolved this long ago.

Could you please quote other core devs saying they OK this ?

Here is mine :

sipa → i'm generally in favor of a larger blocksize, but only under the condition that there is a proposal that has extremely wide consensus

wumpus → I'm still not convinced we require a larger blocksize yet

Luke-Jr → wumpus: we definitely don't yet - but it's probably something to be thinking about

gavinandresen → wumpus: how full do blocks need to be before you think we need a hardfork?

wumpus → gavinandresen: all of them full, and a backlog of serious (not spammy) transactions

gmaxwell → gavinandresen: First stop pretending that there actually is consensus or that this is easy and safe. We couldn't even manage to get BIP34 right without two somewhat ugly unexpected effects (we burned the most significant bit of the block version number; and the switchover criteria we implemented wasn't actually the criteria described in the BIP)

Source.

If wumpus thinks blocks should be full, then I'd like to see his reasoning.  Gavin has outlined his stance with his blocksize economics and scalability roadmap posts.  A continuous stream of full blocks isn't something we've tried before and we need to see a really convincing argument to justify attempting it. 

So far no one has given me a satisfactory response to this:

If the userbase increases and blocks are full, the choices are as follows:

• Pay an average fee and still wait for the next available block that isn't full (which will take longer and longer as more users join, even if you pay a fee)
• Pay an above-average fee and hope that it's more than everyone else is paying (and if you don't guess correctly, wait for the next block)
• Go off chain and hope that whoever you trusted doesn't run off with the coins
• Use another coin