Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 12, 2015, 11:19:00 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?

Miners should decide which transactions are valuable enough to process, 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".

c'mon, enough with the conspiracy FUD smearing, stirring up, slinging and smearing.

The miners do indeed decide but they are for now more than happy to delegate that responsibility, wholly, and huge development costs to the development community (no committees involved for those not paying attention). Feel free to submit better ideas to the bitcoin development github

Issues: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues
Pull requests: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls

Garzik already submitted BIP102, which I think would be an acceptable "can kick" to further study the issue and possible solutions... The conference is over, and there is no plan in sight. I don't really think a controversial overhaul of the system in the form of SegWit is going to offer any relief, any time soon.