An analysis of Bitcoin's throughput bottlenecks

Post by gruez » Wed, May 12, 2021, 10:43 PM UTC

dylkil wrote: post #40

scotty79 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lower transaction throuput,the higher the fees, the higher the incentive for the miners to process transactions. They probably don't want to mess with that dynamic too harshly.

this was the debate circa 2014/2015. Should the bitcoin network consist of many low fee transactions or few high fee transactions. Right now the incentive for miners to secure the network is produced with the block reward, but when the block reward runs out this incentive will be from fees alone. In order to provide miners with the same revenue as today when the block reward runs out, the average fee per tx will need…

Post by gruez » Wed, May 12, 2021, 10:43 PM UTC

itsdsmurrell wrote: post #74

dylkil wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'll get many different responses to this question depending on who you ask. If you want to read into further i recommend you read the great scaling debate[1]. Its pretty long but does a fantastic job of summarizing the history. In short the most popular reason for not having a block size increase (to allow many low fee transactions) was that it would increase the cost of running a full node, in turn centralising t…

They (the devs that control the repo that almost all miners run code from) chose to stifle the base layer to profit from higher layers using 'goat herders should be able to run a full node' as the excuse.

Post by CyberDildonics » Wed, May 12, 2021, 10:47 PM UTC

beiller wrote: post #70

CSSer wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if there's a run on the exchange?

I don't think there can theoretically be a run on the exchange because in theory all the deposits are there, in the exchange, in theory, unlike a bank which only had a fraction of the deposited money in reserve. A run on a crypto exchange would be great for them considering they usually charge a withdrawal fee.

Post by CyberDildonics » Wed, May 12, 2021, 10:50 PM UTC

ezekg wrote: post #5

MereInterest wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Bitcoin were used by everybody on the planet, the current max of 10 transactions/second means that each person could be part of a transaction once every 13 years (4 billion pairs of people / 10 Hz). Boosting the rate up to 100 transactions per second reduces that down to 15 months. Just think, receive you paycheck this week, and over a year later you can use it to buy groceries. Bitcoin's throughout is absolutely…

Are there any cryptocurrencies that are attempting to solve this issue?

Post by DennisP » Wed, May 12, 2021, 10:55 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #84

Havoc wrote: post #82

I’m still not quite following why people are looking at bitcoin for this. Surely one of the newer generation like eth is better suited? Or better yet a layer 2 on eth

>Surely one of the newer generation like eth is better suited? What scaling technologies do they have? The ones I'm aware of are: "commit the global state every n blocks and trust that", and "have n parallel blockchains so it's not one big chain" >Or better yet a layer 2 on eth or layer 2 on BTC, aka lightning network?