Quote from: mikeywith on December 30, 2023, 09:34:42 AM

Quote

the point is, even bigger blocks isn't a good solution.

Really? Then why segwit? Why did blocks go from 1MB to 4MB if bigger blocks are a bad solution?

SegWit was necessary to make L2 solutions more viable, that's why. L2 is where the future of regular user transactions are headed, like it or not.

Quote from: ETFbitcoin on December 30, 2023, 10:17:25 AM

BSV is poor example of big block size. It's doomed to failed since it's associated with faketoshi, don't care about cost/difficulty of running full node[1] where many decide to drop support[2] and even implement ~~confiscation~~ stealing mechanism[4].

All the Faketoshi stuff aside, its blockchain is approaching 10 terabytes and is supported by less than 100 nodes. There couldn't be a clearer picture of why large blockchains leads to centralization. You can say, "ah but nobody wants to run a coin led by Faketoshi," and you'd be right, but even if he stepped out of the picture completely, I sincerely doubt things would be any different.

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on December 30, 2023, 03:27:10 PM

This conversation is so extensively discussed over the years, that it has lost its intellectual spirit. Now more it is just utter complaining. Complaining about what the developers should have done; what they should be writing. People have to move on. Tomorrow, it'll be 2024 and we are talking as if it's still 2017.

Agreed. The conversation has been played out from every angle imaginable 10 times each since 2017.