Quote from: adamstgBit on March 31, 2016, 09:43:40 PM

Quote from: rizzlarolla on March 31, 2016, 09:28:30 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on March 31, 2016, 09:04:05 PM

In the short term segwit should provide enough blockspace so there is minimal fee pressure.
but i agree if bitcoin isn't kept frictionless, if the plan is high fees and complex LN, poeple will gravitate to altcoins.

How can there be high fees if segwit doubles the block size that took 6 yrs to fill.
(i dont want high fees, just saying, all this bs by some about todays/tomorrows fees market is needed and wanted and structured)

The maximum size of a block (with segwit) becomes just under 4 MB.

Adam, in your quote it says "(such as 2/4/8 rescaled to respect segwit's increase)."
If segwit is 4 mb, there will be no need/network capacity for block increase will there, if we respect segwit's increase?
(if core supporters REALLY dont want 1.1 mb now, to tide us over, why would they want to increase on 4mb next year?)

segwit's effective capacity incress is confusing as fuck to say the least
4MB is not achievable
in all likelihood we can expect the equivalent of 1.75MB blocks as a result of segwit's effective blocksize incress
TX demand on the network increases exponentially. the first few years there was no where to spend your coins, and there was alot less usages, I would be surprised if we do not quick fill blocks up again with 1.75MB effective blocksize

It's supposed to be confusing.

No sorry, 4mb of todays tx's are not achievable.
But verifying nodes will have to have a 4mb capacity? (in case everyone uses segwit at the same time)

Thats why Core say "the maximum size of a block becomes just under 4 MB."