Replying to Avatar kidwarp

Agreed but at least with a bigger block size we could in theory handle more transactions on chain thus hypothetically keeping transactions cheaper while opening the possibility for even bigger transactions?

I mean bitvm is going to cost a fuck ton to use on chain. I would assume that will get moved to the LN to be cost effective?
Avatar
Jijo Bose 2y ago

Yes you’re right, they should consider increasing block size.

Or maybe have an Adjustable block-size depending on the traffic in the Mempool.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
kidwarp 2y ago

Yes a dynamic block size would probably be the best idea.

(Would still probably have to limit from huge blocks ie scale that with bandwidth limits. We don’t want gb sized blocks yet right lmfao.)