Quote from: ujka on February 03, 2015, 08:20:53 AM

Quote from: phillipsjk on January 31, 2015, 12:24:46 AM

Quote from: inBitweTrust on January 30, 2015, 09:41:16 PM

... and others that have very slow internet connections under 2Mbps wont be able to assist with being a full node.

You mis-interpreted my post. My point was with 20MB blocks, you will no longer be able to host a node on consumer Internet Plans. The important number was not the 2Mbps download, but the 4Mbps upload. BTW, to get those numbers, I simply multiplied my former node's bandwidth usage by 20.

My current ISP has reduced the speeds it is offering for consumer access. The fastest upload offered on a consumer plan is 3Mbps. Business plans have an option with 5Mbps of upload. (Experiments like 250Mbps down and 15Mbps up are being grandfathered)

Telus, the local phone company, is better with it's VDSL offerings. You can get 5 or 10Mbps of upload speed. For independent providers (using the same lines), like the one I was with, your maximum upload speed is 5Mbps. To get 10Mbps or more, you have to go to fibre, costing $$$$. VDSL and cable may technically be able to handle that, but the companies involved don't want to cannibalize their lucrative fibre offerings.

My overall point is that if we go ahead with this fork, we have to do it with the understanding that the era of running a full node on a consumer Internet connection will be over. Due to extra CPU overhead (due to transaction processing), the days of running on a VPS may be over as well.

Now, with 20MB, I expect dedicated hobbyists and small businesses will still be able to run a node, but it will be a considerable expense: hundreds if not thousands per month. Webhosting may be cheaper, but then you can't keep an eye on your box; or plug hashers directly into it.

By the time blocks get to being 20MB in size, what internet speed will be common? And what processing power? Remember, for 20MB blocks bitcoin network needs 84K transactions per block! When will we get there?

Quote from: ujka on February 01, 2015, 09:05:21 AM

Quote from: inBitweTrust on February 01, 2015, 03:20:47 AM

Quote from: cozk on February 01, 2015, 02:55:06 AM

1k GB per year is a bigger problem than the 1MB vs 20MB thing imho or at the very least equivalent...

This is misinformation and you are confusing people.

That number isn't true as it assumes we will immediately be processing 84k transactions per block which isn't going to happen.
20GB is the future limit and not the size of most blocks in the future. We are only 600-700tpb at the moment
https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions-per-block which means we are typically 15-25% full blocks for 1MB blocks.... do you really expect this to shoot up to 100% full 20MB blocks overnight?.... it will take years to start getting close to those levels.

Additionally, you are completely ignoring the work that is being completed on merkle tree pruning.

This needs repeating again, and again, because many here are thinking that we will have 20MB blocks added to blockchain the very moment the block limit is raised. Calm down. Average block size is now 0.35MB, https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size

EXACTLY People are getting confused and thinking if we make the switch sooner than later the blocks will be larger in size immediately in reality what we are doing is just making sure the limit is there to clog up transactions and make a hasty fork and block increase. By the time it is 20mb a block (probably a couple of years) consumers should be fine on upload speed and 4mb upload is no concern here in America and Europe, I don't see why that is an issue especially in years from now.