Quote from: knightdk on December 26, 2015, 03:58:41 AM

Quote from: BruceSwanson on December 26, 2015, 02:58:06 AM

Quote from: knightdk on December 25, 2015, 03:37:14 AM

Quote from: BruceSwanson on December 25, 2015, 03:27:33 AM

On the matter of transaction confirmation by individual miners, I found two sources which contradict your position. At http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/16607/if-a-block-chain-is-considered-invalid-how-about-transactions-in-this-block-cha?rq=1 look for the answer to the top question "If a block chain is considered invalid, how about transactions in this block chain?" At http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/30452/how-long-does-it-take-for-a-transaction-with-0-fees-to-be-confirmed-or-rejected look for the statement "No transaction can be rejected though, there's just no such thing in the protocol."

How do they contradict me?

I thought they did, but since you are apparently in agreement with them, the matter is settled: the 7-transaction-per-second limitation is and will be irrelevant for many present and future users of the BTClockchain.

No, I never said that. How do those articles lead to your conclusion? Please explain how I those contradict me (if in fact they do, then I probably missed something or you misunderstood something) and how those lead to the conclusion that the 7tps limit is irrelevant.

Sorry for the holi-delay. Earlier you painted what was to me a rather alarming picture of the process of transaction-confirmation:

Quote from: knightdk on December 24, 2015, 03:25:28 AM

. . . it is completely possible for a legitimate (meaning valid and confirmable) transaction to not be confirmed. Miners could simply choose not to add a legitimate transaction to a block. If could be because they don't want to, the transaction having a low fee, or having a dust output, among other reasons. All of those simply means that a valid transaction may not be confirmed once it is broadcast. You can be fairly certain if a transaction will confirm by checking a few things, but it is not guaranteed. You can check the fee and for dust outputs, but even if the fee is high and there is no dust, there is nothing that guarantees that it will confirm. All you can say is that it probably will.

But to further make my counter-assertion that the 7-transactions-per-second limitation is and will be irrelevant to many users; and that all legitimate and fully fee'd transactions will be always be routinely confirmed, go to:

http://allcoinsnews.com/2015/12/28/uproov-first-to-offer-mobile-proof-on-the-blockchain/

and look for the statements "There is virtually no time lag between the taking of the photo, video, audio and its encryption to the Blockchain for any manipulation to be performed, it is instant," and "This ground breaking technology means it will be very difficult to argue against a Uproov photo or video, as an encryption key is permanently time-stamped instantly into the blockchain, making it unchangeable and the perfect court evidence if need be." What is lacking is any discussion of a delay in confirmation-time or a fear of a random chance of non-confirmation. Clearly what matters to this for-profit business -- what is essential to their service -- is the instant broadcast (publication) on the bitcoin ledger of a transaction that will -- not probably -- be confirmed. (You can also go to the website https://uproov.com/)

Other business are already depending on the same thing. I think that if your description was accurate, then these businesses could not exist because they could not guarantee instant and permanent incorporation of a transaction onto the blockchain. Claiming they could might make them liable for damages caused by a randomly failed confirmation and the possible excision of a critical transaction from a majority of miners' block-hashing.