Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on Today at 01:01:18 PM

The discussion started about you being genuinely curious as to why we can't just tinker with the block size limit.

This is my first intervention in this topic:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5437464.msg62427173#msg62427173

Quote from: stompix on June 19, 2023, 09:06:50 AM

Oh, but they can! The only thing is that you need more than 500 000 a day, if we look at block 788766 which had nearly the same fee/reward ratio you will see the median fee was 20$. So in order to get the same revenue that would guarantee the same level of protection you will need to have 4000 users paying on average $20 since the reward is gone.
OR!!!! You could have 40 000 and pay $2. Or 80 000 pay $1.

So, it's not really why we don't do it, more like what the f**8 we're going to do if we don't do that!

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on Today at 01:01:18 PM

Do you imply that the block size limit should be dynamical, and analogous with the total unconfirmed transactions and the bitcoin price?

Dynamical or why now implement the opposite of halving for the block size, we have a halving in the reward a doubling in the block size. If we look at disk price and internet speed we;re already 12 years behind compared to 2009, so we would have at least 2 decades to see if it works or no!

Quote from: stompix on Today at 12:28:07 PM

Then with what? Binance or Coinbase credits? Bank of America IOU bitcoin?

Second layers.
[/quote]

And do you have a timeline on how long it will take for every single let's say US citizen to open and close let's say twice a second layer LN channel with a 1MB block? Or you can forget the US, let's just say 10% of the world, that's 800 million people, so 3.2 billion in and outs of a second layer.
Is it doable ?