Quote from: LaudaM on March 09, 2015, 06:45:59 PM

Quote from: hdbuck on March 09, 2015, 06:42:48 PM

Quote from: LaudaM on March 09, 2015, 06:34:31 PM

Useless information, unrelated to the thread. That's the point of this. This thread is stretching out way too far without actually going anywhere. Looks like it's been 100 pages of going around in the same circle.
Although there has yet to be presented a valid reason ~~not~~ to fork.

please.. FTFY Kiss

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=946236.0
There you have more than enough reasons to go around.

yea, been there, done that:

Quote from: hdbuck on February 25, 2015, 09:32:46 AM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on February 24, 2015, 04:55:22 PM

Quote from: hdbuck on February 24, 2015, 10:17:13 AM

sidechains?

Side chains and payment channels (or payment hubs) are methods to improve the transaction density of the blockchain. That means you can get more economic transactions from a single on-chain transaction. They are great ideas but they still require at least infrequent access to the primary chain.

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on February 05, 2015, 01:31:00 AM

Code:

Maximum supported users based on transaction frequency.
Assumptions: 1MB block, 821 bytes per txn
Throughput: 2.03 tps, 64,000,000 transactions annually

Total # Transactions per Transaction
direct users user annually Frequency
   <8,000 8760 Once an hour
   178,000 365 Once a day
   500,000 128 A few (2.4) times a week
   1,200,000 52 Once a week
   2,600,000 24 Twice a month
   5,300,000 12 Once a month
   16,000,000 4 Once a quarter
   64,000,000 1 Once a year
  200,000,000 0.3 Less than once every few years
1,000,000,000 0.06 Less than once a decade

As you can see even with a low transaction frequency the network can't support more than a token number of users. When someone advocates a permanent cap of 1MB what they are saying is "I think Bitcoin can live up to its full potential even if it is never used by more than a couple million users making less than one transaction per month.

So yes using sidechains, cross chain atomic transactions, and payment channels are trustless methods to reduce transaction frequency but they are multipliers. One could look at the primary chain like a savings account and the alternative as a credit/debit card. I may make 300+ transactions on my debit card each month and only two involving my saving account. The good news is 2 is less than 300 but it still isn't zero.

If alternatives reduce on chain tx frequency down to even just once a quarter or once a year you are still talking about capping the network to tens of millions of users. Does Bitcoin need 16GB blocks? Probably not. It is one option but it isn't necessary. There are other ways to go about reaching scalability but you aren't getting there from 1MB blocks on the primary chain.

Nowadays (real life), here are the stats i get:

- there is between 80 000 and 110 000 transactions per day (or 0,9 to 1,30 tps)
- there would be around 2 to 4 million bitcoin users (extrapolating from blockchain's + coinbase's wallet database and bitcoin's downloads statistics)

-> this gives me 0,0275 to 0,04 transaction/user/day (or 0,825 to 1,2 transaction/user/month)

According to your table, people would be able only to transact twice to once a month with full blocks (2,03 tps).
So my results are even more conservative (since blocks arent even full).
Yet, it doesnt seem to be a problem currently.
People does not actually seems to restrain themselves from transacting more on a daily basis like your table would like to suggest.. but they just dont, right?

Personally I transact mostly offchain (trading plateforms).
Maybe buy couple products or services per month, but i mean, like it or not, bitcoin is not as handy as cash or credit cards for everyday purchases and even more for the average joe you keep on appealing.

It'd be a safe guess to think that most of the current 2+ million bitcoin users are having the same practices. Besides simply holding, speculating or hedging part of their wealth out of the crippled financial system.

Hence, there is a difference between the users' transactional behaviour you extrapolate on (buying frappucinos) and real bitcoin users.

Imho, we could easily go beyond 10 million bitcoin users without any difficulties regarding scaling.
As to when this would happen, Im not going to guestimate there..

But luckily this would give us enough time to investigate further on.