Altcoins Talks - Cryptocurrency Forum
Crypto Discussion Forum => Cryptocurrency discussions => Topic started by: Husires on February 26, 2024, 02:49:33 PM
-
Why aren't large blocks the long-term solution to the scalability problem for all cryptocurrencies, as I see most if not all cryptocurrencies moving towards second-layer solutions, so why isn't a cryptocurrency created?
block size: 32 MB
avg block time: 15 seconds.
We can say that the transaction is secure after 8 blocks, and then the network will be able to process thousands of transactions. So why is this not a long-term solution or what are the problems with this solution?
For those who want to say that the costs of running full nodes will be a problem, I say that internet fees decrease, internet speed increases and storage costs per TB decrease.
-
Yeah to me a floating number 2mb to 32mb depending on each adjustment could work.
But and this is a big but.
IF 32MB is big enough then scrypt mining is 12x better than btc.
SO you jump to 32mb with btc rather than a second layer it is a concession to script.
Since 2 ltc and 10 doge blocks merged mining to every btc block means that it is superior. By a 12x to 1 factor.
The reality is script is superior for a world wide payment system if you stay with a chain solution.
-
Why aren't large blocks the long-term solution to the scalability problem for all cryptocurrencies, as I see most if not all cryptocurrencies moving towards second-layer solutions, so why isn't a cryptocurrency created?
block size: 32 MB
avg block time: 15 seconds.
We can say that the transaction is secure after 8 blocks, and then the network will be able to process thousands of transactions. So why is this not a long-term solution or what are the problems with this solution?
For those who want to say that the costs of running full nodes will be a problem, I say that internet fees decrease, internet speed increases and storage costs per TB decrease.
We already have a Bitcoin fork that supports 32 MB block size, BitcoinCash.
Bitcoin Cash was created in 2017 through a hard fork of Bitcoin. The main reason for the fork was to increase the block size of Bitcoin. Bitcoin's block size is limited to 1 MB, which can lead to slow transaction times and high fees. Bitcoin Cash increased the block size to 32 MB, which allows for faster and cheaper transactions[1].
However, the community has chosen to support 1MB Bitcoin instead of 32MB Bitcoin. If there were always enough room for all transactions, no one would pay options trading fees. This is not good for miners. The network not only focuses on performance but also needs to ensure market balance, making it possible for miners to exist and serve the network even if block rewards are insignificant in the future.
[1] Bitcoin vs. Bitcoin Cash: What's the difference between BTC and BCH? (https://cointelegraph.com/learn/bitcoin-vs-bitcoin-cash-whats-the-difference-between-btc-and-bch)