Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 501 posts

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#201

Post by zrm »

spookthesunset wrote: post #191
zrm wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That wouldn't work because mining blocks also validates transactions. It's possible to validate transactions with proof of work and compensate the work with transaction fees rather than the creation of new coins.

> creation of new coins. If your crypto-coin starts life with all the coins instantly sprung into existence, that means everybody gets to buy their coins from you--the founder. There is a name for this--it is a pre-mine scam. All you do is mine most of the coins yourself, then go pimp your coin so it gets some buyers, and sell them all off for a sweet profit.

It isn't that new coins can't be created, a coin may be worth e.g. $100 and it costs $101 in electricity to create another one so nobody does until the demand for coins increases.

But the amount of work required to validate a transaction need not be as much as it takes to create a coin, and people will continue to be willing to pay someone 5c to do 4c worth of computation to validate their transaction.

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#202

Post by rspeer »

etr-strike wrote: post #182
KirinDave wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin is a lot of things, and many of them interesting, but suggesting that ~4 t/s is impressive or "scaling" is an insult to kids in high school writing rails apps that can do 100x the volume. We already know at least 2 obvious ways to improve the transaction flow rate of bitcoin in trustless ways, and many others are being proposed that do not also create energy arms races. Please don't redefine success.

If proof of stake proves itself to actually work, Bitcoin will adopt it. Migrating a 200 billion dollar network to an untested PoW proposal would be irresponsible. Arbitrarily increasing blocksize without addressing propagation delay and centralization impacts is also irresponsible. Bitcoin has been tirelessly working on the scaling problem in a responsible way. SegWit will allow up to 12t/s. Mimble Wimble and Schnor…

20 entire transactions per second? Amazing! Who has ever heard of software that could do 20 things in a second?

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#203

Post by Phenomenit »

blondie9x wrote: post #141

As engineers and technologists we must always be mindful of our impact on the planet. Bitcoin has been a disaster when it comes to environmental concerns. It is a shadow on techs efforts to lead the way toward a sustainable future. We need to figure out a way to solve this issue, especially if cryptocurrency utilization is to increase, in particular through Bitcoin: Bitcoin uses about 32 terawatts of energy every yea…

Is that really a fare comparison? I mean Visa and Mastercard use the global banking infrastructure to complete its transactions. I cant open a Visa or Mastercard account but I can generate a wallet in one second and use it instantly.

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#204

Post by lawn »

jon_smark wrote: post #181
lawn wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Segwit isn't a a block size increase. It allows for a tiny amount more transactions but it's very clear it's not enough. An actual block size increase (say to 8MB) would solve the current problems. LN is years from being actually usable by the masses. This is from their developers themselves. > Maybe it's more proof that no one cares? That's a pretty idiotic thing to say. The technology isn't ready yet despite the de…

> Segwit isn't a a block size increase. It allows for a tiny amount more transactions but it's very clear it's not enough. An actual block size increase (say to 8MB) would solve the current problems. But what about the new problems it would introduce? I run a full node and even now it eats a significant portion of my bandwidth. With even larger blocks I would probably drop off the network altogether. And I'm sure I'm…

> But what about the new problems it would introduce? I run a full node and even now it eats a significant portion of my bandwidth.

Not everyone need to run a full node.

> Moreover, wouldn't increasing the block size simply kick the can down the road?

If you see it only as a temporary measure then sure. But it would for the time being solve Bitcoin's very urgent current problems.

Also any 2nd layer solutions require a blocksize increase, so the argument is kinda backwards.

> One advantage of the current fee pressure is that it strongly encourages the development of 2nd layer solutions.

Which is basically Core/Blocktream's plan. 2nd layer solutions is their whole business model...

But why opt out of something that we know works for a solution which isn't ready and may not even work?

Scaling should be done both on-chain and off-chain. Favoring one to the exclusion of the other is just wrong.

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#205

Post by rspeer »

spookthesunset wrote: post #189
hbosch wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fairness (I'm personally not a Bitcoin supporter) from the outside, it seemed more like the problem is no one can agree on who should be pushing changes and innovation: Core Dev or the coalition of miners?

> In fairness (I'm personally not a Bitcoin supporter) from the outside, it seemed more like the problem is no one can agree on who should be pushing changes and innovation: Core Dev or the coalition of miners? If you step back and look at any kind of "libertarian" driven project this becomes a problem. When everybody who makes something inherently distrusts authority or having anybody "in charge", you can never real…

Your thoughts are fine, don't undermine yourself by saying "I dunno... just a thought" like that.

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#206

Post by mrgordon »

I’m not sure why so many people ignore that Bitcoin and all other serious cryptocurrencies are focused on their next generation scalability improvements. Several of the most viable blockchains like EOS are built to be scalable and the legacy coins like Bitcoin are working to adopt similar ideas. When the entire 2018 roadmap is about scalability, it gets boring reading these same posts about how it’s too slow and doesn’t scale without any reference to their work in progress.

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#207

Post by lawn »

dr_win wrote: post #121
lawn wrote: post #65

You are both right and wrong. There have been multiple attempts at scaling Bitcoin on-chain by raising the blocksize. They have all been unsuccessful because they have been blocked by the Core developers and their supporters using censorship, troll campaigns, ddos and abuse. It's not due to technical reasons but because they want to redirect scaling off-chain, using technology they coveniently develop. The very same…

Maybe you are right and it would be technically feasible to bump the block size limit 2x, then 2x again and maybe later 2x again... Basically every time people demand extra cheap block space for their transactions someone would have to lead the charge and coordinate a hard-fork (probably with a lot of drama). But then we (as a community) would set a dangerous moral hazard there and be like the U.S. Senate increasing…

Which is why a dynamic block size should be implemented. (This is on the roadmap for Bitcoin Cash).

For reference here's a paper by Peter R, a prominent Bitcoin Unlimited developer, arguing that a blocksize limit is unnecessary: https://www.bitcoinunlimited.info/resources/feemarket.pdf

Who's right I do not know. But even if Greg is right he's worrying about a potential problem decades from now. We have very real problems right now we should solve first.

I would also be wary of any claims Greg makes as he has clear conflict of interests against raising the blocksize. He's one of the founders of Blockstream whose goal is to earn money developing 2nd layer solutions. With working on-chain transactions what use would their 2nd layer solutions have?

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#208

Post by lawn »

runeks wrote: post #195
codecamper wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And a kWh of power is of course done with coal. How pathetic.

I believe most mining operations make use of hydro-electric power, simply because it’s much cheaper than burning off coal.

Also practically free hydro-electric power which would otherwise be wasted.

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#209

Post by thatcat »

eterm wrote: post #104
thatcat wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say stop storing your spending money as btc, it's an asset not cash. Can you liquidate your 30$ peice of gold in < 4 hours for market value? Probably not.

"Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" Peer to peer cash. Not "Gold", not "asset", but "Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash".

The IRS classifies and taxes it as an asset because functionally it is an asset. Satoshi was doing a bit of marketing with the title of his paper.

Re: Did Bitcoin just prove it can't scale?

#210

Post by Bombthecat »

natch wrote: post #190
Bombthecat wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, It literally stopped accepting transactions. After 72 hours your transaction is dropped. Without further notice. Until then you must guess if it was processed or not.

Citation needed.

https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/43155/do-unconfi...
Post reply on HN