/biz/ - Business & Finance

can anyone help out a brainlet?

>>17359529
The excuse is that long blocks would let big/fast miners gobble up transactions, set that as the standard for profit margins and price out small miners. The reality is that Bitcoin was never structurally sound to scale to its current popularity and will need second layer solutions if it is to have any hope of achieving that.

>>17360027
Thanks for the easy to understand response anon.

i think of on-chain bitcoin transactions like an ACH transaction. slow, clunky, but good for cheaply moving large sums of money

Small blocks = Decentralized alternative to fiat money and central bank monetary policy. Gold 2.0
Big blocks = Semi-decentralized alternative to point of sale payment systems. PayPal 2.0

However many in favor of small blocks agree that eventually block size will need to increase, but at a much slower pace in order to preserve decentralization. Upgrades like Segwit create blocks that are around 2mb.

>>17360027
You have no clue how bitcoin works

>>17360056
Dont listen to that retard. Bigger blocks are for bigger cocks. BSV is the big dick energy blockchain.

>>17360027
>The reality is that Bitcoin was never structurally sound to scale

How long is going to take to get all you retards out of Bitcoin? Shit is dragging on way too fucking long.

>>17360137
Bitcoin transactions are literally instant.

>>17360774
o ye i forgot thanks anon

>>17359529
At the beginning of Bitcoin, miners were getting 50 BTC for each mined block. 4 years later that was decreased to 25 BTC, and in 2016 it was decreased to 12.5 BTC. Now that reward is going to be cut to 6.25 BTC. I'm not sure how much it costs exactly to mine one BTC in China currently, but it should be something around $7500 - $8500. Now after that halvening from 12.5 BTC to 6.25 BTC, BTC's price MUST go up twice above it's current mining price. If it doesn't do so, some miners will have to bankrupt, until BTC's hash rate goes low enough, to readjust to market's price of BTC. Satoshi has designed Bitcoin, so that after couple of halvenings, miners would have to stop relying on block reward, but on fees, and since everyone is HODLing their precious BTC, miners are not getting fees, and even if people would start to transact with it, the only thing that would happen would be increase of fee, as BTC's blocksize limit is set to 1MB. Because of halvenings, and blocksize limit, BTC is going to die off within the next 2-3 halvenings, as miners will move on BSV, which is going to make miners earn money from microtransactions

>hurr durr Lightening Network is going to scale BTC
Even if it would technologically be capable to do so (which it isn't), it still fucks up BTC's economics, as miners would not get fees from lightning, but BLOCKSTREAM.

part 1

>>17360027
>>17360056
Don't listen to that faggot. Stupid fucking corecuck.
You have to scale bitcoin if it is going to be the global public ledger and peer-to-peer, microtransactional electronic cash system of the future.

>>17359529
You're asking why blocksize is being kept small? There are multiple factors:
1. When blocks are small, regular people are capable of owning their own node. Although these nodes are not validating anything, they're not doing anything except from burning electricity. And in order to use LN, everyone's got to have their own node (although Bitcoin's whitepaper says clearly, that only miners should own nodes, and users should use SPV (simplified payment verification)
2. Around China there is a "Great Chinese Firewall", or whatever it's called. Because of that Chinks have a very bad connection with the outside world. Now with big blocks, it would be impossible to Chinese miners to mine
3. Big blocks make Bitcoin actually work. But the problem is, that (((they))) didn't wanted Bitcoin to work at the time. I'm not sure if (((they))) are still against it. It's a well known fact, that blockstream is funded by Visa, and Bilderberg group

>What does BSV hope to achieve by increasing the block limit and at what cost?
As I said increase amount of micro transactions, thus increasing miner's income, thus making Bitcoin work in the long run, as block reward is getting smaller and smaller every 4 years. The cost is, that miners will have to invest in specialized equipment, like tones of hard drives, good internet connection, more CPUs to manage all of that, and so on. Infrastructure in short. Some people are arguing, that Bitcoin should stay decentralized, but that's against Bitcoin's whitepaper. Bitcoin was designed as a Mandela network (aka small world network). It's not a mesh as corecucks, or cashies try to persuade.

In short BSV is Bitcoin, and CSW is most likely Satoshi. The sooner you understand it, the better for you.

Who created Bitcoin Blockstream or Satoshi?
Saroshi was right fck small blockers.

“The existing Visa credit card network processes about 15 million Internet purchases per day worldwide. Bitcoin can already scale much larger than that with existing hardware for a fraction of the cost. It never really hits a scale ceiling.” – Satoshi Nakamoto (April 2009)