Quote from: jubalix on August 29, 2017, 10:12:40 AM

Quote from: Kakmakr on August 29, 2017, 06:02:11 AM

This sounds a lot like the Roger Ver mentality, where you simply ignore the reasons for the problem and blame the technology. The miners are the real problem here and people ignore this as the root cause of the scaling problem at the moment. The miners automated the process to shift hash power to the most profitable chain to mine and this is causing problems on both BCash and BTC.

Now add some "selective" mining into this, where miners manipulate the process by mining empty blocks, then you have a recipe for disaster. Bitcoin will fail if miners continue to sabotage the network, by being greedy.

look, I agree larger blocks may lead to centralization and too much power to the miners. However it seems BCH does have significant value, that should or could flow to btc.

I think access to "blockspace" is a critical need and on chain transactions. Otherwise you may create 2 tires of citizens.

The shifting hash power does not worry me so much if the algos to stop blocks being not mined are implemented.

The value/hash should work itself all out.

I thing pos, dpos ala nem, or something may come in. Eg iota makes use of spammers, and democratizes mining, but i'm not convinced you cant double spend it yet

I agree both may relatively fail, which is why I see some sense in some blocksize increase as required, tech has come along way since 2009....if core does not increase blksize somewhat, I feel they are no less narrow without reason then you could say about ver/jihan. What if...ver/jhihan activated segwit on their chain.....imagine that for a moment......

Blockspace isn't that important, actually. Many people believe that a smaller blocksize would actually be a lot better. What really matters is the Lightning Network which will allow for thousands of small purchases per second, even moreso than VISA, Mastercard, etc. This is what we truly need.