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

491–500 of 501 posts

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

#491

Post by Rmilb »

CryptoPunk wrote: post #454
etr-strike wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your link is a news article and not actual research. The details of their specific test are barely provided. Please provide actual research as I have provided you.

This overcautious, "let's test everything for 10 years before trying it" approach is exactly what Bitcoin doesn't need when it has 0.001% of world transaction throughput.

Bitcoin is the conservative approach to any change that decreases the keystone of decentralization that allows it to survive. The market is deciding what it values.

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

#492

Post by Rmilb »

ben_w wrote: post #359
etr-strike wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think I ever claimed 20 t/s was sufficient. Just pointing out the throughput has increased by an order of magnitude and there is a tremendous amount of ongoing innovation in this space.

Marvellous, one whole order of magnitude! If you manage another factor of 5000 and Bitcoin will reach what Visa and Mastercard (and, separately, another cryptocurrency) managed several years ago .

This is low level trolling. Visa and Mastercard are not decentralized. Centralization is an easy way to scale. They are not apples and oranges.

Also, Bitcoin settles transactions in 30 days, merchants get their funds in 30 days if they are lucky to not have the charge back.

Apples and oranges.

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

#494

Post by jiggunjer »

wmnwmn wrote: post #278
jiggunjer wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You must not have any experience with international transfers or currencies other than euro and USD.

Indeed I don't. Nor do most other people. That's one of the reasons why, to first approximation, zero people are using them. And even if lots more people suddenly begin needing to transfer non-reserve currencies internationally, these transfers are going to run into legal issues which, despite fantasies of bitcoin enthusiasts, are not going to be evaded just by putting "crypto" in a prefix.

Your claims are fallacious. Most people, i.e. 51%+ don't use USD or EUR. Many people also make international transfers. There is a use-case and your observations that zero people use btc are anecdotal at best.

Pray tell what kind of legal issues would suddenly arise if it became mainstream.

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

#495

Post by jiggunjer »

busyra wrote: post #441
jiggunjer wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You never use the same address twice. scatter received coins over other addresses.

The fees to move the coins to another wallet just to pay for coffee would be 4x the coffee.

you don't have to pay fees to transfer to yourself, assuming there is no rush.

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

#496

Post by scotty79 »

jpamata wrote: post #456
scotty79 wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right although I don't fully understand your analogy but bitcoin never guaranteed all transactions will go through because it couldn't because noone could make a system with infinite capacity. 20$ transaction fee is an incentive for the users to restrain themselves to smaller number of larger transfers. Is the limit too strict? Probably. Miners still get a lot from mining rewards and don't need to be incentiv…

> 20$ transaction fee is an incentive for the users to restrain themselves to smaller number of larger transfers. In my country (the Philippines) everyone is buying from high school kids to office workers. The current minimum transaction fee is around $40. To exchange your bitcoin to Philippine Peso (PHP), the fixed conversion fee is 5%. If those don't seem a lot, get this: 83% of Filipinos earn below $400 a month. M…

5% is a ripoff. In Poland I can trade bitcoin to local currency at pretty much no cost except bitcoin neteork fee. Maybe additional 0.10%-0.30% for transaction at the exchange and 0.50$ for bank transfer.

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

#497

Post by CryptoPunk »

Rmilb wrote: post #491
CryptoPunk wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This overcautious, "let's test everything for 10 years before trying it" approach is exactly what Bitcoin doesn't need when it has 0.001% of world transaction throughput.

Bitcoin is the conservative approach to any change that decreases the keystone of decentralization that allows it to survive. The market is deciding what it values.

The market is reacting to the fact that Bitcoin is in the public consciousness, and that is a result of years of advocacy done for Bitcoin, when its advocates (e.g. Roger Ver, Coinbase, PayPal, and all of the other signatories of the SegWit2x agreement) still believed that it would scale with large blocks and thousands of transactions on-chain per second.

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

#498

Post by oldsklgdfth »

One of the questions I have is why is that a requirement? Why does one network need to support the entire global populations? I mean if it's to be used as fiat currency then I only need it to pay for things roughly in my extended community. Why aren't there seperate networks developing in distinct geographic areas?

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

#499

Post by ben_w »

Rmilb wrote: post #492
ben_w wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Marvellous, one whole order of magnitude! If you manage another factor of 5000 and Bitcoin will reach what Visa and Mastercard (and, separately, another cryptocurrency) managed several years ago .

This is low level trolling. Visa and Mastercard are not decentralized. Centralization is an easy way to scale. They are not apples and oranges. Also, Bitcoin settles transactions in 30 days, merchants get their funds in 30 days if they are lucky to not have the charge back. Apples and oranges.

> Centralization is an easy way to scale

That is one reason why I prefer centralised to decentralised. I have yet to see a justification for the cost of decentralisation. This cost is an important thing, not a trivial thing.

Other reasons include but are not limited to the governance mechanism of things like bitcoin not being demonstrably better than the governance systems of any other currency, but that’s a much longer topic of discussion.

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

#500

Post by he0001 »

rescripting wrote: post #142
noobermin wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds a hell lot like changing the goal posts.

Does that matter? If you're looking to develop a drug to treat hypertension but end up with Viagra by accident instead, do you throw it away because that wasn't the original goal?

Tell that to the FDA...
Post reply on HN