/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>18436637
>>18436742
>"increasing the gas limit per block forever" is the same thing as larger physical block sizes
this strikes me as incorrect; having to pay an insanely high gas fee every time you use ETH simply means that people sending transactions are indefinitely punished every single time they want to use ETH, whereas bigger blocksizes are shouldered entirely by miners' investment in electricity and hardware that does all the work, and thus the total cost of this work can be integrated in an economically sensible way into the value of bitcoin
>"the point of big blocks is to force bitcoin mining out of the hands of independent miners and into the hands of big data centers"
this is the same sort of mistake that people make when comparing communism to capitalism; they say "we should instate communism because in capitalism, successful entities can become monopolies", not taking into consideration the fact that a government *is* a monopoly—one that has the special power, exercised by no completely private corporate entity, of being able to take your money on *the mere promise* of adequate goods and services via taxation. worth noting, of course, is that nobody under government has any means to escape tax, unless they have enough existing financial power to exploit loopholes in laws
as ever, social hierarchies that are built on coercion only exist to maintain the status quo (for better or for worse), and nothing more
with BSV, it seems that the only thing stopping a small miner from developing and applying a technology that puts them head-and-shoulders above data centers is the laws of reality, which are intuitive and fair—with blockstream, the thing stopping a small miner from having the incentive in the first place to bring objectively superior tech into existence—tech that may be applied to their mining—is blockstream, and their endless regulatory manipulation of the blockchain under the guise of "fairness" or what have you