Replying to _

But why not allow it to support the world’s population? It is a finite number. It’s not like the world’s population is growing. At least support weekly transfers or even monthly. Lightning is going to concentrate all Bitcoin into the hands of a few. Now you have the old banking system.
7e
_ 2y ago

To be clear the issue here is Bitcoin rather than Lightning. It needs to support more transactions per block.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Hans Karlsborn 2y ago

To what cost?

7e
_ 2y ago

Mostly more storage. Now you could say that will mean less raspberry pis. But what is the point of rpis when all Bitcoin is owned by a few and hardly anyone has their own keys?

So there must be a balance and 200k tx/day doesn’t seem to be enough.

Avatar
Hans Karlsborn 2y ago

Exactly how many more transactions per block? 10 times more? 100 times more? And what is the COST of that?

7e
_ 2y ago

What is the cost of not having it?

Avatar
Hans Karlsborn 2y ago

I’m shure that your intentions are good. But there are things you’ve not completely understood.

7e
_ 2y ago

Even from a simple Moore’s law perspective, shouldn’t the block size be able to double every 18 months? If not, why?

Originally you needed a multi thousand dollar computer to run Bitcoin now you can run it on a $20 computer.

Avatar
Des Imoto マキシ 2y ago

It will all balance when it’s needed. Bitcoin is a multi-variable optimum at any given time.

7e
_ 2y ago

I like your optimism!

Avatar
Des Imoto マキシ 2y ago

It’s just math.