Quote from: Carlton Banks on November 19, 2015, 11:26:00 AM

Quote from: ATguy on November 19, 2015, 10:39:04 AM

Quote from: Carlton Banks on November 18, 2015, 09:19:58 PM

Quote from: ATguy on November 18, 2015, 09:02:22 PM

I preffer if the next month conference gets consensus about the one time blocksize increase, and whenever the blocks become filled again in future another blocksize limit adjustment has to be made (hopefully not taking 1 year of pain in future again Sad

)

What would you say if the consensus at the conference was a design for scaling up that did not involve altering the blocksize? That's apparently what that conference is about (all solutions, not just one engineering approach).

Thats pretty much impossible keeping 1MB and increasing the number of people using Bitcoin. But if someone proved it is possible put to 1MB several times more transanctions and the solution is secure (from possible attacks) and convenient for Bitcoin users plus no centralized service is needed, then 2016 is the latest year it could be tested whether it works. As I understand LN can not be the only solution because it is not convenient for Bitcoin users to have coins locked for longer time, but it can add to maybe -20% ? of the blockchain usage if LN gets popular - clearly not enought. But I pretty much doubt magic is possible here if we think about increasing Bitcoin usage at least hundred times in next 10 years and I dont understand the need to defend 1MB when Litecoin proved 4MB is fine for every 10 min from the security point.

So, going back to what you were saying about consensus at the scaling conference.

Are you trying to say that you're only interested in respecting consensus when they come to the same conclusions about the technical solution as you have? Isn't that the opposite of consensus? Does that not constitute you forcing your opinion on others?

+

Quote from: hdbuck on November 19, 2015, 12:43:28 PM

2/ please provide technical details as to how relevant would the block size be when it come to scaling bitcoin effectively

I respect consensus which solves sufficient Bitcoin scaling over time so Bitcoin users are not forced to use another altcoin because of the insufficient Bitcoin blockchain space for every Bitcoin user otherwise. Unless someone prove it can be realisticaly done other way, the obvious main working solution is increasing blocksize limits periodically as needed based on how much the blocks are filled so there is not situation when blocks are filled up all the time (aka DDOS and Bitcoin users forced to use another altcoin because no more space for more transactions on Bitcoin blockchain anymore)