Quote from: prezbo on February 19, 2013, 12:01:15 PM

Quote from: Anon136 on February 19, 2013, 11:57:26 AM

Quote from: Technomage on February 19, 2013, 11:53:43 AM

Quote from: Anon136 on February 19, 2013, 11:48:28 AM

i for one would not go along with such a fork. i think many others would agree with me. So long as there are atleast a few other people who agree, a hard fork will not be possible.

This change is (eventually) such a critical and needed change, if we want Bitcoin to be used for small payments as well, that it will simply be done. Anyone who disagrees will form their own payment network.

The alternative scenario is that for some reason the dev team doesn't have the will to do this, and users eventually start to flock to other cryptocurrencies.

This problem can be solved with centralized services. I know this sounds ominous, but since these servers would only be used for transactions that were too small to be efficiently sent through the bitcoin network it really wouldnt be a big deal at all. I would probably only have a tiny fraction of a percent of my assets held in such a system at any given time.

So you feel like 7 transactions/second will always be enough? Roll Eyes

not at all. Im saying that small transactions will be handled off network and 7 transactions per second will be enough to transfer large amounts of bitcoin. (assuming 7 transactions per-second is the actual limit applied by 1mb blocks)