Quote from: brg444 on December 12, 2015, 10:54:13 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 12, 2015, 10:40:29 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 12, 2015, 10:17:12 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 12, 2015, 10:09:24 PM

When the network gets near hitting capacity of ~220,000 tx per day, the rally gets its head lopped off... coincidence?

https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions

Any future rally will be meaningfully constrained by this "safety feature".

... soon time to start high-grading for valuable TX anyway. It's an industrial level tech., can't always remain a sandpit for toy projects. Which makes you misguided about rallies being "constrained" ... but hey, who am I to stop people losing money?

A.Miners should decide which transactions are valuable enough to process, B. not a central planning committee. Especially not a committee which is dominated by a for profit company which was explicitly formed to offer a "solution" to the "problem".

*facepalms*

which one is it.? a central planning committee of miners?

notsureiftrollingorstupid.jpg

Who has incentives better aligned with the network? Many individual companies that have built pools with massive investment in hashing behind them (their success is nearly synonymous with the success of Bitcoin), or one company that benefits (almost solely) from artificial scarcity of capacity?

The questions are somewhat rhetorical, because I already know your answer.