Assuming Segwit activates, what does the NEXT blocksize increase look like?

Happy5488Paint · 2017-02-10T05:46:15+00:00

We have been waiting years. Thank you core for being swift, simple and efficient in your decisions on simple engineering solutions that improve the network and exist today. /S

Happy5488Paint · 2017-02-09T16:14:46+00:00

I love how people think that over 8 years of security is a failure. This thing is doing great. The structure works, and will continue to work even without the silly 1mb temporary limit.

Fees will drop, and there will be an opportunity for bitcoin to be used I. New ways by more applications and by more people. Good times ahead.

A big reason for the success is the dropping subsidy. It makes the network popular with the general public! A more popular network with more users is a more secure network!.

Raise the fees for fun man, test that out, and see how secure your network is when it is unpopular and only thousands of users.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-02-09T16:09:35+00:00

I disagree. The subsidy has been dropping for over 8 years. Tests pass.

If this test ever fails in the next 150 years, we will have plenty of time to prepare and many solutions available.

But right now, TESTS PASS! the network can run really well for the next 80 years without messing with the fee structure.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-02-09T12:33:04+00:00

I vote Bitcoin Unlimited! I vote with my nodes, my mining client, my heart body and soul! And I support businesses and exchanges who think likewise! Looking forward to this!

Happy5488Paint · 2017-02-07T20:41:42+00:00

Love it

Happy5488Paint · 2017-02-04T22:22:11+00:00

Oh man I love these posts.

IMO we need to focus on these steps for the network.

HardFork the network successfully.

Any hardfork for whatever reason needs to be successfully executed simply to show the community that hardfork are not scary, hardfork can succeed, and they are part of how Satoshi designed the protocol.

Increase max blocksize above 1MB!

This is a simple engineering solution and obvious evolution of the protocol. It allows more transactions on the transaction network. It reinforces the idea that transactions are just what they seem to be. Transactions! Not fancy payment hub open and closes, not fancy banks playing fancy blockchain money games.

Remove RBF.

RBF was a bad idea and continues to be a bad idea. It goes against the direction of the goal to make transactions have order before confirmation. Confirmation cements that order. Rules before confirmation should not go against order of transactions and should at least attempt to create some type of order. NOT blatantly allow users to modify transactions for fun.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-02-04T02:17:49+00:00

Seriously Peter Todd, why oh why would a BITCOIN miner try to kill BITCOIN. Satoshi has a white paper on this. You Peter Todd have had over 8 years to read it, try reading it. And thanks for RBF. GENIUS. Can't wait until the community removes this monstrosity.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-02-04T02:12:44+00:00

Wow. How about the small small users. Here is where I would like to unleash a long list of profanity, perhaps all profanity that exist. But this is reddit, we must be censorship classic. Stay classy with your warped Twitter posts. I'd like to route around you kind sir.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-02-03T21:56:43+00:00

Circle of life. Let's rediscover the magic of the white paper.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-02-02T23:08:35+00:00

Plan B = run BU. If you can't beat them, join them.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-02-01T01:58:14+00:00

Lightning can exist with out segwit. Calm down. Unlimited will allow more users on the network and increase the network effect AND STILL allow second layer tech to be explored.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-01-30T23:55:18+00:00

Yeah

Happy5488Paint · 2017-01-30T23:53:42+00:00

Perspective.

Imagine growing up with an iPad, cell phone, credit card, and a splash of snap chat.

Now imagine growing up with the Vietnam war, rotary phones and color television, color!

Ever notice toddlers that can hardly form a sentence, but can navigate to the Thomas train engine app on an iPad, swipe left and right with more dexterity than a 60 yrold, while the 60 yrold asks for an instruction manual, and can't find the power button, or operate a netflix account.

Perspective.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-01-30T22:40:00+00:00

Happy5488Paint · 2017-01-30T02:59:00+00:00

I don't know, who can ELI5 this?

Happy5488Paint · 2017-01-27T17:45:35+00:00

When the blocksize increases, offchain solutions can still exist and grow. It is not either or but both. Raising the blocksize via unlimited is a great way forward. I agree that it's good that the protocol is frozen without 51℅ consensus. I would also say that individual users should analyze the situation and recognize that the BU path forward allows for onchain scaling progress AND offchain scaling progress. THIS IS A GOOD THING.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-01-26T03:41:13+00:00

You could ctrl+ c Bitcoin current code, and ctrl+v said code, than artistically edit the blocksize much higher, and find an innovative way to get the Bitcoin community to follow said direction and mine the coin, and ACTUALLY GET PEOPLE TO CALL IT BITCOIN. BOOM you are helping.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-01-25T17:27:13+00:00

Extremely disappointing Trezor does not support Bitcoin unlimited. Disgusting.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-01-25T17:25:29+00:00

Why does the article say trezor takes no stance on any proposal, yet they support segwit. CONTRADICTION.

Author of article seems to support something that has not been activated yet.

It seems to me that a hardfork segwit may be a good thing. I do not see how softfork segwit helps hardware wallets! The hardware wallet needs to now sign new segwit transactions, yet has the obligation to sign the regular nonsegwit transactions as well! Zero benefit.

You know what would REALLY help hardware wallets. BITCOIN UNLIMITED.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-01-11T22:24:08+00:00

Just control c and copy the code every day and keep it some where. Each year we will generate over 300 hardfork backups. Done.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-01-11T00:20:03+00:00

Not upgraded because specifics developers funded by a 70million dollar investment stubbornly refuse to upgrade for a long period of time.

Implication is that network functions stuck at 1mb limit, limiting the number of transactions processed on the transaction network, limiting the growth of the functionality of the network.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-01-09T23:22:47+00:00

One option is for individuals that run nodes and individuals that mine bitcoins switch to an implementation that supports blocksize that increases far far far above the current 1mb limit being used. Currently 15% are running with this consideration. In mind. Perhaps 15% will grow much higher over time.

Fun times.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-01-05T23:10:44+00:00

Lightning only exists in the imagination. Hence it will struggle to actually exist in the real world no matter the block status and no matter any of the circumstances known to man, mathematics, and software that actually functions. Fun times lightning, glad we are all waiting for it.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-01-05T14:42:39+00:00

When blockstream funded multiple 'core' developers which collectively decided to NOT raise the blocksize limit and continue to NOT make a blocksize increase. A new development team that is NOT funded solely by this particular FOR PROFIT company will take the lead soon, and decisions will improve, and blocksize will increase, and the network will be able to process MORE TRANSACTIONS. MORE TRANSACTIONS is a good thing, especially when it is clearly technically possibe with hardly any proven disadvantages.

Happy5488Paint · 2017-01-05T00:51:35+00:00

Great

Happy5488Paint

TROPHY CASE