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

291–300 of 501 posts

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

#291

Post by theWatcher37 »

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…

The lighting network completely undermines the entire purpose of bitcoin, and blockstreams seeming desire to sabotage bitcoin for daily use coincides suspiciously with their outside “investment”.

If you read the original bitcoin white paper it is clearly evident that the purpose of bitcoin was as a currency. These insane fees, wait times, and rediculous technical decisions by core have made it such that bitcoin is becoming “bank coin” aka only used for settling between large groups and useless for individuals (unless you’re a speculator).

This has to change

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

#292

Post by gruez »

Beejeepa wrote: post #267
etr-strike wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lightning isn’t vaporware. Follow the project on github, they are very active. Better yet, watch the first lightning transaction happen on mainnet which occurred just last week: https://youtu.be/a73Gz3Tvx3k With regards to blocksize, the only reason it’s not widely embraced is because it’s known to directly impact propagation delay. One side couldn’t care less about centralization, the other side cares dearly. SegWit…

It's not only vaporware, it's uneconomical. That demo doesn't withdraw Bitcoin - it locks it up. Two transactions for every channel. Lightning Network is just another bank, a third party with fees.

>Lightning Network is just another bank, a third party with fees.

source? afaik it's open source and it charges no fees.

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

#293

Post by theWatcher37 »

jondubois wrote: post #286
etr-strike wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lightning isn’t vaporware. Follow the project on github, they are very active. Better yet, watch the first lightning transaction happen on mainnet which occurred just last week: https://youtu.be/a73Gz3Tvx3k With regards to blocksize, the only reason it’s not widely embraced is because it’s known to directly impact propagation delay. One side couldn’t care less about centralization, the other side cares dearly. SegWit…

The lightning network is not a decentralized solution. It gives more power/trust to a few large exchanges.

This is by design. If you break bitcoin, such that it’s only usable by large financial institutions, you completely remove the decentralized nature that made it attractive in the first place.

Congratulations guys, you made the banks SWIFT 2.0. I’m sure they appreciate it very much.

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

#294

Post by theWatcher37 »

moduspol wrote: post #212
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.

What Bitcoin does absolutely is impressive, just not in terms of transaction volume. Comparing it to a rails app is pointless. If we can improve the transaction rate without risk, then let’s do it. It just gets tiring seeing post after post suggesting it’s a valueless failure if it can’t be used for coffee. Let’s just keep it in perspective. It doesn’t need to supplant Visa to be successful.

The entire purpose is to replace fiat. It’s objectively a failure if you can’t buy coffee with it.

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

#295

Post by jacobr »

jstanley wrote: post #106
username223 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It only has value because people believe it does,... Have you ever asked yourself why they believe that? It's because they can pay their taxes with it, but also, as it says right on the front, "this note is legal tender for all debts, public and private." As long as the US government is still a thing, this phrase means what it says. I haven't seen anything so far to convince me that BTC has more stability or longev…

You're confusing the value of 1 US dollar with the agreement that a dollar bill is worth 1 US dollar. The dollar bill is worth 1 USD because the government asserts that. That doesn't make 1 USD anything. It just means the dollar bill is worth 1 USD. The government has no power to prop up the value of the USD if the world decides it's worthless.

> The government has no power to prop up the value of the USD if the world decides it's worthless.

The US government has plenty of military power that it can and does use for this exact reason.

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

#296

Post by theWatcher37 »

wildmusings wrote: post #259
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.

I’m not sold on Bitcoin but I don’t agree with your definition of what it needs to be successful. There is no reason that actual bitcoin end-users need to deal directly in bitcoin. If Bitcoin were to ever become a major currency, a big if, there would be financial institutions (banks) issuing instruments (physical or digital notes) backed by real bitcoins held by those institutions. Real bitcoin transactions would be…

This defeats the entire purpose of bitcoin. The goal is a decentralized currency that isn’t controlled by shady political interests, and can reasonably replace normal currency.

Why would you want Bank 2.0?

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

#297

Post by akira2501 »

moduspol wrote: post #89
mchristen wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The size of blocks is not core to the algorithm of Bitcoin though. What would you say to the person trying to send $30 only to have $20 of it eaten up in fees? Come back later when you can afford to use Bitcoin?

Use a different cryptocurrency. Seriously. And I'm not trying to be cheeky. If Bitcoin ends up only being a settlement layer, it'll still be a colossal success just being a decentralized, supply-limited, uncensorable, world-accessible payment system and store of value. If someone else solves the scaling debacle better, I'll be the first to recommend that normal people switch to it. But it's not easy, and the world is…

> If Bitcoin ends up only being a settlement layer, it'll still be a colossal success just being a decentralized, supply-limited, uncensorable, world-accessible payment system and store of value.

So, what happens when all the bitcoin are generated and mining is complete?

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

#298

Post by [deleted] »

theWatcher37 wrote: post #296
wildmusings wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sold on Bitcoin but I don’t agree with your definition of what it needs to be successful. There is no reason that actual bitcoin end-users need to deal directly in bitcoin. If Bitcoin were to ever become a major currency, a big if, there would be financial institutions (banks) issuing instruments (physical or digital notes) backed by real bitcoins held by those institutions. Real bitcoin transactions would be…

This defeats the entire purpose of bitcoin. The goal is a decentralized currency that isn’t controlled by shady political interests, and can reasonably replace normal currency. Why would you want Bank 2.0?

[deleted]

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

#299

Post by moduspol »

akira2501 wrote: post #297
moduspol wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Use a different cryptocurrency. Seriously. And I'm not trying to be cheeky. If Bitcoin ends up only being a settlement layer, it'll still be a colossal success just being a decentralized, supply-limited, uncensorable, world-accessible payment system and store of value. If someone else solves the scaling debacle better, I'll be the first to recommend that normal people switch to it. But it's not easy, and the world is…

> If Bitcoin ends up only being a settlement layer, it'll still be a colossal success just being a decentralized, supply-limited, uncensorable, world-accessible payment system and store of value. So, what happens when all the bitcoin are generated and mining is complete?

Mining is still very profitable due to transaction fees.
Post reply on HN