📅 Original date posted:2015-05-08
📝 Original message:This isn't about "everyone's coffee". This is about an absolute minimum
amount of participation by people who wish to use the network. If our
goal is really for bitcoin to really be a global, open transaction
network that makes money fluid, then 7tps is already a failure. If even
5% of the world (350M people) was using the network for 1 tx per month
(perhaps to open payment channels, or shift money between side chains),
we'll be above 100 tps. And that doesn't include all the
non-individuals (organizations) that want to use it.
The goals of "a global transaction network" and "everyone must be able
to run a full node with their $200 dell laptop" are not compatible. We
need to accept that a global transaction system cannot be
fully/constantly audited by everyone and their mother. The important
feature of the network is that it is open and anyone *can* get the
history and verify it. But not everyone is required to. Trying to
promote a system where the history can be forever handled by a low-end
PC is already falling out of reach, even with our miniscule 7 tps.
Clinging to that goal needlessly limits the capability for the network
to scale to be a useful global payments system
On 05/07/2015 03:54 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Alan Reiner <etotheipi at gmail.com
> <mailto:etotheipi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
> (2) Leveraging fee pressure at 1MB to solve the problem is
> actually really a bad idea. It's really bad while Bitcoin is
> still growing, and relying on fee pressure at 1 MB severely
> impacts attractiveness and adoption potential of Bitcoin (due to
> high fees and unreliability). But more importantly, it ignores
> the fact that for a 7 tps is pathetic for a global transaction
> system. It is a couple orders of magnitude too low for any
> meaningful commercial activity to occur. If we continue with a
> cap of 7 tps forever, Bitcoin *will* fail. Or at best, it will
> fail to be useful for the vast majority of the world (which
> probably leads to failure). We shouldn't be talking about fee
> pressure until we hit 700 tps, which is probably still too low.
>
> [...]
>
> 1) Agree that 7 tps is too low
>
> 2) Where do you want to go? Should bitcoin scale up to handle all the
> world's coffees?
>
> This is hugely unrealistic. 700 tps is 100MB blocks, 14.4 GB/day --
> just for a single feed. If you include relaying to multiple nodes,
> plus serving 500 million SPV clients en grosse, who has the capacity
> to run such a node? By the time we get to fee pressure, in your
> scenario, our network node count is tiny and highly centralized.
>
> 3) In RE "fee pressure" -- Do you see the moral hazard to a
> software-run system? It is an intentional, human decision to flood
> the market with supply, thereby altering the economics, forcing fees
> to remain low in the hopes of achieving adoption. I'm pro-bitcoin and
> obviously want to see bitcoin adoption - but I don't want to sacrifice
> every decentralized principle and become a central banker in order to
> get there.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150508/aa6f7b9a/attachment.html>;
Alan Reiner [ARCHIVE] /
npub1sm…mnq7h
2023-06-07 15:33:19
in reply to nevent1q…5t7l
Author Public Key
npub1sm6zhjmk5scuz294jmpkw99wwwjzetjgwp4fu4gn6utqgdz87hkqamnq7hPublished at
2023-06-07 15:33:19Event JSON
{
"id": "562b9cde9fc8bc51f89eec091192d33d9d4c4c66e2c4ea989fcc7c0bee0b4970",
"pubkey": "86f42bcb76a431c128b596c36714ae73a42cae48706a9e5513d716043447f5ec",
"created_at": 1686151999,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"0def597b074aa190bf159e12f9433ea74d157ee52321b38d195ba644ad5c177f",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"89e2f4e9cedc958938f26e15760e22a6236f7d31f12b3d62fdfad6b83f9f6df9",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"86f42bcb76a431c128b596c36714ae73a42cae48706a9e5513d716043447f5ec"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-05-08\n📝 Original message:This isn't about \"everyone's coffee\". This is about an absolute minimum\namount of participation by people who wish to use the network. If our\ngoal is really for bitcoin to really be a global, open transaction\nnetwork that makes money fluid, then 7tps is already a failure. If even\n5% of the world (350M people) was using the network for 1 tx per month\n(perhaps to open payment channels, or shift money between side chains),\nwe'll be above 100 tps. And that doesn't include all the\nnon-individuals (organizations) that want to use it.\n\nThe goals of \"a global transaction network\" and \"everyone must be able\nto run a full node with their $200 dell laptop\" are not compatible. We\nneed to accept that a global transaction system cannot be\nfully/constantly audited by everyone and their mother. The important\nfeature of the network is that it is open and anyone *can* get the\nhistory and verify it. But not everyone is required to. Trying to\npromote a system where the history can be forever handled by a low-end\nPC is already falling out of reach, even with our miniscule 7 tps. \nClinging to that goal needlessly limits the capability for the network\nto scale to be a useful global payments system\n\n\n\nOn 05/07/2015 03:54 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:\n\u003e On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Alan Reiner \u003cetotheipi at gmail.com\n\u003e \u003cmailto:etotheipi at gmail.com\u003e\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e\n\u003e (2) Leveraging fee pressure at 1MB to solve the problem is\n\u003e actually really a bad idea. It's really bad while Bitcoin is\n\u003e still growing, and relying on fee pressure at 1 MB severely\n\u003e impacts attractiveness and adoption potential of Bitcoin (due to\n\u003e high fees and unreliability). But more importantly, it ignores\n\u003e the fact that for a 7 tps is pathetic for a global transaction\n\u003e system. It is a couple orders of magnitude too low for any\n\u003e meaningful commercial activity to occur. If we continue with a\n\u003e cap of 7 tps forever, Bitcoin *will* fail. Or at best, it will\n\u003e fail to be useful for the vast majority of the world (which\n\u003e probably leads to failure). We shouldn't be talking about fee\n\u003e pressure until we hit 700 tps, which is probably still too low. \n\u003e\n\u003e [...]\n\u003e\n\u003e 1) Agree that 7 tps is too low\n\u003e\n\u003e 2) Where do you want to go? Should bitcoin scale up to handle all the\n\u003e world's coffees? \n\u003e\n\u003e This is hugely unrealistic. 700 tps is 100MB blocks, 14.4 GB/day --\n\u003e just for a single feed. If you include relaying to multiple nodes,\n\u003e plus serving 500 million SPV clients en grosse, who has the capacity\n\u003e to run such a node? By the time we get to fee pressure, in your\n\u003e scenario, our network node count is tiny and highly centralized.\n\u003e\n\u003e 3) In RE \"fee pressure\" -- Do you see the moral hazard to a\n\u003e software-run system? It is an intentional, human decision to flood\n\u003e the market with supply, thereby altering the economics, forcing fees\n\u003e to remain low in the hopes of achieving adoption. I'm pro-bitcoin and\n\u003e obviously want to see bitcoin adoption - but I don't want to sacrifice\n\u003e every decentralized principle and become a central banker in order to\n\u003e get there.\n\u003e\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150508/aa6f7b9a/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "c136bdba4767b14558644c194543bc4e4055ccbd9dc1230fa38213a516d150e521aa8b0b9c4d44d59f380d57266311c11949332e5c78cdd6da4de7aedb9840ad"
}