so all the usual trolls and bears have taken to swimming in the swamp of endlessly discussing big block politics (not technicals) now that the price is rising?
Nope, just being realistic about the happy case of us receiving what we wish for.
reviving the corpse of Hearn's abortion XT for some necrophiliac loving is just sick and embarassing ... but if that is what you wish? Go for it, just do not expect to be taken seriously by the technical knowledgeable people in bitcoin.
I didn't say a word about XT, if you want my opinion, his added "features" and change of leadership killed it upon birth. I'm fine with adam's 2-4-8.
Fact is, 1MB4EVA needs to be rektd on the shores of romania. We need to seize our moment, or perish via paralysis or capture.
1MB4EVA is not being proposed as a serious technical solution. On h/ware improvements alone capacity will grow but how to implement that in a secure algorithm is the challenge, given the myriad of parameters and delicate balance of the existing competing incentive structure.
It would not surprise me that after all the work that is going on now for secure transactions anchored in main chain, but off-chain, that it turns out blocks wont be demanded by the market to be much bigger at all. Highly distributed networks scale securely best self-similarly, not monolithically (simply bigger blocks is a monolithic approach, so likely wrong) and "big" is a temporally-relative term that is near to impossible to encode in network rules that need to persist for decades.
Believe it when I see it. For now, give me 2MB for some coasting and measuring.