Quote from: NotLambchop on January 12, 2015, 03:02:41 PM

Quote from: knight22 on January 12, 2015, 02:51:42 PM

Quote from: NotLambchop on January 12, 2015, 02:34:12 PM

Quote from: inca on January 12, 2015, 02:27:09 PM

Quote from: NotLambchop on January 12, 2015, 02:11:26 PM

Quote from: Elwar on January 12, 2015, 01:47:46 PM

...
Transaction times eh? You see a lot of complaints by the users do you?
...

Because there are almost no users. According to Bitcoin wiki, Visa alone "handles on average around 2,000 transactions per second (tps)" (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability)
Average doesn't mean maximum.
Visa is capable of handling 30,000 tps.
Thirty thousand transactions per second.
Bitcoin can only handle seven transactions per second. Not seven thousand, just seven (7).
Good luck, new world currency Cheesy

Comparing a nascent payment network with the largest payment gateway provider in the world is a great comparison!

7 transaction per second is hardcoded into Bitcoin. Adding more hashpower/infrastructure/whateveryoucallit won't change that. Nothing short of a hardfork (basically making a new coin) would.

P.S. Never use the word "nascent" unless to mock it--it's even gayer than "disruptive technology."

Bitcoin already had several hardforks. The next one to increase the blocksize limit will be no different.

A hard fork can be & do anything, it's basically making a new coin. Many major players don't want this hardfork. Which part of my post do you disagree with?

Yes and the proposed hardfork will increase the theoretical TPS and allow the block size to scale. Not sure why you don't get this.