Quote from: RoadStress on February 12, 2015, 03:38:02 PM

Quote from: sardokan on February 12, 2015, 01:48:52 PM

I'm sure that having a huge network flow is a very big risk for the network, I'm sure that less nodes, with big infrastructures is more risky.
I'm sure that 20mb x 1.4 x year is huge and that it's impossible that the risks have been studied carrefully and tought acceptable.
I'm sure that some countries can't afford so much bandwith
I'm sure that it will be harder to maintain, easier to cause networks splits...
I'm also sure than when blocks will be full, a quick fork with consensus (that we can plan right now) will be implemented quicly.
So, I will stick my coins offline for some time, and be sure to not follow the fork, just to be sure.

(for sure there will be technical tricks, and do you think this fork will go smouth executed right now ?)

So as I said. You are sure of some stuff and you think that there will be no technical solutions for all the above. Reality is different.

As for the "a huge network flow is a very big risk for the network"...Well I'm speechless! What are your expectations from the Bitcoin network other than a huge network flow? You are one of those people that only see Bitcoin as a currency and are only interested in the exchange rate?

No

Honestly, I was thinking to use the Bitcoin network for a project, and concluded after some thinking that the numbers of transactions I needed would be to high for me to believe in the network to take my transactions (kind of contracts)

So I would have to rely on my network.

Bitcoin is for reference, not to be used to store to much data on blockchain, the smalest it will stay, the more resilient it will stay

What are today transaction per second for gold market ? maybe we should target this.

And continue to work on side chains or other merged solution, including using proofs from bitcoin network, without writing into it