Quote from: bug.lady on February 21, 2018, 10:02:16 AM

No, not temporarily. Permanently.

it is temporarily fixed until the block size (ie 8MB) is filled, then next target and next target... and as I calculated in my previous comment you will need nearly unlimited block size for that. and that is not considering spam attacks.

Quote

People have doubts about Lightning Network. I am not taking sides here, but there is talk about high fees in the future and domination of LN by banks and corporations.

most of the information online about Lightning Network is either FUD or advanced and hard to understand.
from what I understand the network has no chance of being centralized. there will always be nodes run by individuals even if banks run LN nodes too. and if you don't like them you can choose not to use them. just choose a different route which goes through the rest of the nodes.
not to mention, thanks to onion routing, any node that receives a transaction can not tell where the start and end of this tx are coming from.

Quote from: bug.lady on February 21, 2018, 10:10:23 AM

Your calculation is valid, but it should be the ultimate goal. We don't need to achieve it now. Currently (unfortunately, but this is our reality) VISA is still more popular than BTC when it comes to paying for stuff. But knowing that the limit exists puts those who are concerned about disk space at peace, and we can do the increases slowly, only to be able to accommodate the local tx peaks, like the one we had in Dec'17.

Also, the average tx size is smaller with SegWit.

well those who say we need block size increase say we do not need SegWit so the average tx size is 450 bytes. and with SegWit we are getting a capacity increase (on chain scaling). I would agree that it is not enough. but I also say the way to go is not to increase the block size as BCH did.