Michael Naber wrote: > Bitcoin Core must remain the lowest-fee, highest-capacity, most secure, > distributed, fastest, overall best solution possible to the global consensus > problem.
Everyone here is excited about the potential of Bitcoin and would aspirationally like it to reach its full potential as fast as possible. But the block-size is not a free variable, half those parameters you listed are in conflict with each other. We're trying to improve both decentralisation and throughput short-term while people work on algorithmic improvements mid-term. If you are interested you can take a look through the proposals: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-June/008603.html Note that probably 99% of Bitcoin transactions already happen off-chain in exchanges, tipping services, hosted wallets etc. Maybe you're already using them, assuming you are a bitcoin user. They constitute an early stage layer 2, some of them even have on chain netting and scale faster than the block-chain. You can also read about layer 2, the lightning network paper and the duplex micropayment channel paper: http://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper-DRAFT-0.5.pdf http://www.tik.ee.ethz.ch/file/716b955c130e6c703fac336ea17b1670/duplex-micropayment-channels.pdf and read the development list and look at the code: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/ https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning Adam On 27 June 2015 at 16:39, Michael Naber <mickey...@gmail.com> wrote: > Demand to participate in a low-fee global consensus network will likely > continue to rise. Technology already exists to meet that rising demand using > a blockchain with sufficient block size. Whether that blockchain is Bitcoin > Core with an increased block size, or whether it is a fork, market forces > make it almost certain that demand will be met by a blockchain with adequate > capacity. These forces ensure that not only today’s block size will be > increased, but also that future increases will occur should the demand > arise. > > In order to survive, Bitcoin Core must remain the lowest-fee, > highest-capacity, most secure, distributed, fastest, overall best solution > possible to the global consensus problem. Attempting to artificially > constrain the block size below the limits of technology for any reason is a > conflict with this objective and a threat to the survival of Bitcoin Core. > At the same time, scheduling large future increases or permitting unlimited > dynamic scaling of the block size limit raises concerns over availability of > future computing resources. Instead, we should manually increase the block > size limit as demand occurs, except in the special case that increasing the > limit would cause an undue burden upon users wishing to validate the > integrity of the blockchain. > > Compromise: Can we agree that raising the block size to a static 8MB now > with a plan to increase it further should demand necessitate except in the > special case above is a reasonable path forward? > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
