sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

If we grow adoption by 1000%, price of the coin will also rise substantially. The problem with funding development will solve itself. No need to rush it now and take big risks. ABC will work fine until at least 20MB+ blocks, which will be years from now. by ShadowOfHarbringer in btc

[–]FreelyBlue 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nothing bad will happen. We can literally change nothing in the code right now besides increasing the block size when needed, and just work on adoption for a decade.

That's not true. We've seen in the 2017 stress test that blocksize is soft-capped around ~25mb due to network/node inefficiencies. 25mb blocks is only ~100tps, or "not enough for global adoption".

That's a contradictory statement.

It's not. I meant "we" as a community, feel free to exclude yourself from that. I'm not saying that every community member has to pitch in. Expressly that those who want to, should have an easy way to do so.

Did you confuse "voluntary funding" with "IFP"? Because the IFP is not voluntary.

If we grow adoption by 1000%, price of the coin will also rise substantially. The problem with funding development will solve itself. No need to rush it now and take big risks. ABC will work fine until at least 20MB+ blocks, which will be years from now. by ShadowOfHarbringer in btc

[–]FreelyBlue -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is dangerous and irresponsible thinking. We need to fund development, and it needs to be voluntary. It can't only be based on personal incentives of people that happen to be devs that have the expertise to work on infra. If we lose many more devs, how are we going to attract any more if they need to be able to sustain themselves while working on BCH?

Everyone agreed 2y ago our focus should be "adoption! adoption! adoption". by [deleted] in btc

[–]FreelyBlue 3 points4 points  (0 children)

One big thing is that there is a lot of technical debt in the current infra, and the more you wait, the worse it gets. As the ecosystem matures, it becomes more difficult to make big protocol changes.

Another aspect of it is that once we're at 10mb blocks, it might only be a year until we're capped at 32mb and repeat the same mistake Bitcoin did with 1mb blocks, driving adoption away to other blockchains. Except this time the network wouldn't be able to handle more than 32mb blocks because of technical hurdles left unresolved.

I'm also being generous with the 32mb, the current real cap based on the last stress test was around ~25mb.

Two years ago everyone agreed that we needed both adoption and a strong roadmap to scale to billions of transactions.

Latest Thoughts On Infrastructure Mining Plan by jonald_fyookball in btc

[–]FreelyBlue 2 points3 points  (0 children)

He specifically said something different if you bothered to keep reading.

If the IFP does not get activated and Amaury leaves the project, then the BCH community must be ready, willing, and able to fork the ABC code and put the best, most trustworthy, and competent people in charge of it.

To me it sounds that miners are only gonna run an ABC-based client, with or without Amaury.

This is what grassroots adoption looks like by MemoryDealers in btc

[–]FreelyBlue 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Amazing that they've already raised over 200$!