It is more than just the technicals, though those alone make your proclaiming of GB and TB blocks out right insane, it is about maintaining the incentives. A big part of with is, I validate my money MYSELF. And that I can afford to do so, MYSELF. Paying hundreds or thousands of dollars a year on special purpose computers to validate my money is not cost effective, and not a sound and motivating incentive structure Roger.
RE: Time to End the Block-Size Blockade - by Roger Ver
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Time to End the Block-Size Blockade - by Roger Ver
And why is 1mb correct? The point is the blocksize should be found as an equilibrium via market forces , not by design of some King. Even if he is satoshi or max or whoever controls core.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It is set by market forces. By the software people run to secure their coins. And right now it is voting 1 MB, and we'll see with the rollout of 0.13 if the market will support and prepare for Segwit rolling out to increase to a blocksize of 2-4 MB. Which is right up to the edge of what the network can handle in terms of latency increases right now.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Nope that is called hard coded. Market forces would mean no blocksize limit and miners deciding how much to put into blocks for what price.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
He wrote " In the not so distant future" - perhaps you need to go back to school and retake the basic English reading comprehension class with the other 5th graders.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit