if blocksize gets an issue it will be solved in 24h
its not a big deal, more a question of details
ideialy there wouldnt be this "blocksize" issue in the first place
but there is
so how do we deal with it
dealing with it by ignoring it until it actually start to mess shit up and then saying " that's fine! bitcoin was meant to be slow and costly, using the holly ledger is a privilege! " is wrong.
on ther other hand gavins proposal is equally ridiculous to the other extream.
i'm confident devs will implement a happy middle ground
On what do you base this confidence? Past performance?
from what i see, the scaling conference, the open letter from devs, the on going discussion about it.
it seems pretty clear
something will be done about it, extcal what and when is up in the air.
also what's encouraging is that there is still a lot of room for improvement in a few aspects of the protocol, after a little bit of study 2 months ago i concluded we could grow the network 250 times bigger without demanding more bandwidth than is currently being used, if all these improvements were rolled out. and from there i think 10-100 X increase in bandwidth requirements to run a full node isn't all that crazy, so from where i'm standing bitcoin can potently scale by a factor of 2500 - 25000 while still being very decentralized.
of course i'm probably being a little optimistic on these potential coding gains. but i ain't worried about scalability anymore.
To anyone reading these this "study" was based on flawed assumptions and rather broken understanding of how Bitcoin's gossip network operates.