Quote from: LiteCoinGuy on September 30, 2015, 04:36:53 PM

Quote from: manselr on September 30, 2015, 03:59:09 PM

Quote from: knight22 on September 30, 2015, 12:53:33 PM

Quote from: MicroGuy on September 30, 2015, 12:33:58 PM

He's still pushing BIP101 which is probably the worst idea since the invention of software. Gavin and Mike are insane to keep sticking with that concept of doubling the max block size every two years.

Increase max blocksize to 8MB and make the change static, that's the best solution. Then fork again in a few years as/if needed.

The limit should be lift off completely. The network has its own limitations and doesn't need an artificial one at all.

Wait are you saying that the blocksize should have no limit? It seems to me that you don't understand how this thing works at all. Are you aware of all the massive exploits the system could be exposed to if that was the case?

To put a more clear analogy, it was as if you went to a regular everyday car's motor and lifted the max revolutions to limitless. You know what's going to happen once you get past what the actual motor can deal with. This is the case with Bitcoin, thats why a blocksize limit exists at all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ad0Pjj_ms2k

Quote from: brg444 on September 30, 2015, 04:32:25 PM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on September 30, 2015, 04:24:09 PM

A fee market exists with no block cap. Peter R explained why at the scalability conference.

Peter R's theory does not apply in practice so it is irrelevant to discuss it.

Moreover he readily admits it does not hold absent of block subsidy.