That's what is nice about proposals, they are constructive and help move the conversation forward!
On 30 July 2015 at 18:20, Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev <[email protected]> wrote: > Specific comments: > > So we'd get to 2MB blocks in the year 2021. I think that is much too > conservative, and the most likely effect of being that conservative is that > the main blockchain becomes a settlement network, affordable only for > large-value transactions. But, if we agree that 17%/year is consistent with network improvements, by arguing this is too conservative, does that not mean you are actually going beyond suggesting throughput increases to benefit from bandwidth improvements, and explicitly arguing to borrowing from Bitcoin's already very weak decentralisation to create more throughput? (Or arguing to subsidise transaction fees if borrowing so deeply that excess capacity pushes beyond demand). I think the logical implication of this would be that we should be first focussing on improving decentralisation, to make security room to reclaim extra throughput. (To be clear there are concrete things that can be done and actually are being done to improve decentralisation via ecosystem education and mining protocol improvements, but it's safer to wait a few months and see if those things take effect well). Secondly in this assumption are you considering that lightning will likely be online for many years by 2021 and the situation will be hugely different? I think an incremental and conservative approach is safer. People can probably get a lightning prototype running about as fast as a hard-fork could be safely rolled out. I do think it is normal to be conservative with security and with $4b of other peoples money. It's no longer an experimental system to consider fail fast experiments on. > I don't think your proposal strikes the right balance between centralization > of payments (a future where only people running payment hubs, big merchants, > exchanges, and wallet providers settle on the blockchain) and centralization > of mining. What criteria should we be using in your opinion to balance? I think throughput increases trading off decentralisation would be more reasonable if decentralisation wasnt in very bad shape. Adam _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
