Quote from: hdbuck on February 04, 2015, 03:04:34 PM

Quote from: RoadStress on February 04, 2015, 02:55:51 PM

Why would someone bad intended with a lot of money agree to let your microtransactions happen? He could fill the blocks easily and he could be against raising the limit by owning/renting a lot of mining hashpower. What will you do then when your transaction will require an absurd transaction fee to get propagated?

Well for a starter, people investing in large facilities wouldnt want bitcoin to fail, obviously. So they'd oblige.
Secondly, if the transaction fee gets too high, i guess i'll just have to wait for bitcoin's value to be worth it.
In any case im not planning in spending my bitcoins now, and especially not for frappuccinos..

I think we view things differently. Bitcoin will not fail if people with lots of money will be the only ones using it. That's a wrong assumption in my view. Yes it may fail for you for not being able to use it, but for them it will work as designed.

Quote from: balu2 on February 04, 2015, 03:06:52 PM

is ok. I just thought maybe doing 50 cents transactions on btc with that marketcap is less appropriate than doing 50cent transactions on coins with smaller marketcap to keep the btc chain clean for the big stuff.

I don't see what the problem should be to pass microtransactions down to smallcap tipping currencies. It seems logical to me. And the beauty is: this would automatically occure once fees rise.

That's why we love btc: because it regulates itself.

I don't quite understand what you said, but why should the blockchain only be used by the big transactions? It's like saying that Internet should be used by Google and Facebook and the other should use other networks.

Quote from: balu2 on February 04, 2015, 04:25:04 PM

Nobody said the growth would stop, what has been said is: hitting the blocklimit will not cause big trouble because the first thing that would happen would be microtransactions for tiny amounts of money happen somewhere else. So all your doom preaching and urgency is invalid.

Hitting the limit will not render btc unusable - in fact it will clean the chain from spammy microtransactions.

So you consider that it's not such a big trouble if the microtransactions don't have the space to happen. I think it's a big trouble because the average Joe will not be able to use bitcoin hassle free. He will need to move his coins to another blockchain to be able to use microtransactions. This will render btc unusable for him which is a big deal.

Quote from: balu2 on February 04, 2015, 04:48:35 PM

But i don't see why i need terrabytes on my PC full of satoshi dice crap ...

Again this is a technical challenge that has nothing to do with raising the block limit. Haven't you heard about blockchain pruning? You will not need tons of terrabytes on your PC to host a node so this argument for not doing a fork is simply stupid because it's not a valid argument. It's something that can be fixed!