Quote from: Fatman3001 on January 10, 2016, 02:56:06 PM

Quote from: AlexGR on January 10, 2016, 02:21:28 PM

Look, I don't know how to code shit (in terms of BTC code), but I do know how to change a few variables / constants. That doesn't make me a developer or someone who can maintain my fork even if the market agrees that I found the right value for maxblocksize.

This is actually a good point.

Quote

The scaling issue hides many motives and I'm not sure how deep the rabbit hole goes. I always found it suspect that some people are so hell bent on increasing block size that even if you tell them "ok, let's say we have a tech that effectively doubles the txs that can fit in a 1MB block, like segwit or something... why would you want it to go to 2MB?" and they are like "but it has to go to 2mb". Well, I call bullshit with them. That's hypocrisy. If the 1mb is an effective 2mb, then why would you need the 2 to become 4?

Why would someone, who would say yes if you asked them about a 2mb upgrade, be dissatisfied by a technological equivalent of a 2mb upgrade in terms of tx/s? What's going on here?

Segwit will take time to be spread to enough nodes and users to actually lead to a significant capacity increase. And that capacity increase will be more like 60-70%. Not double. Plus, there seems to be little advantage to this over just increasing block size, basically you can softfork it.

Yes, that's why I'm phrasing it more like a hypothetical 2x - because it's not 2x in practice. In essence, a 2MB with segwit is actually >3MB without - from the numbers they are giving.

Quote

The GOOD thing about Core's roadmap is that their approach will fry a lot of brains in order to find scalability improvements through efficiency increases. I hope. But the fear is that whatever they come up with will be too late to avoid crippling congestion and, in its turn, the crippling of the bitcoin economy. Or, that capacity limitations will send money elsewhere. We sort of have to pray that Bitcoin stays in the periphery for a couple more years without losing its competitive advantage over other cryptos.

At most a few dust and spam txs will be prevented. The money transacted will continue to increase, even with a set limit in tx/s. Instead of getting, say, 300k txs per day with 1$ each, you'll get 300k txs with 10$ each. The USD-volume will multiply, because that type of scaling in value is not dependent on the number of transactions. It is inevitable that costly transactions will consolidate the market to higher value transfers.

End of year metrics can be like "Bitcoin payments accounted for 10bn in 201x and 100bn USD the next year, rivaling other payment solutions such as ......".

But of course the tx/s will go up too. I'm just giving an example here.