📅 Original date posted:2015-08-04
📝 Original message:On 4 August 2015 at 01:22, Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> And the preliminary results of using a prediction market to try to wrestle
> with the tough tradeoffs looks roughly correct to me, too:
> https://blocksizedebate.com/
>
The scicast prediction market is shutdown atm (since early July?) so those
numbers aren't live. But...
Network hash rate
3,255.17 PH/s (same block size)
5,032.64 PH/s (block size increase)
4,969.68 PH/s (no replace-by-fee)
3,132.09 PH/s (replace-by-fee)
Those numbers seem completely implausible: that's ~2.9-3.6 doublings of the
current hashrate (< 400PH/s) in 17 months, when it's taken 12 months for
the last doubling, and there's a block reward reduction due in that period
too. (That might've been a reasonable prediction sometime in the past year,
when doublings were slowing from once every ~45 days to once a year; it
just doesn't seem a supportable prediction now)
That the PH/s rate is higher with bigger blocks is surprising, but given
that site also predicts USD/BTC will be $280 with no change but $555 with
bigger blocks, so I assume that difference is mostly due to price. Also,
12.5btc at $555 each is about 23 btc at $300 each, so if that price
increase is realistic, it would compensate for almost all of the block
reward reduction.
Daily transaction volume
168,438.22 tx/day (same block size)
193,773.08 tx/day (block size increase)
192,603.80 tx/day (no replace-by-fee)
168,406.73 tx/day (replace-by-fee)
That's only a 15% increase in transaction volume due to the block size
increase; I would have expected more? 168k-194k tx/day is also only a
30%-50% increase in transaction volume from 130k tx/day currently. If
that's really the case, then a 1.5MB-2MB max block size would probably be
enough for the next two years...
(Predicting that the node count will drop from ~5000 to ~1200 due to
increasing block sizes seems quite an indictment as far as centralisation
risks go; but given I'm not that convinced by the other predictions, I'm
not sure I want to give that much weight to that one either)
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj at erisian.com.au>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150805/164bde23/attachment.html>;
Anthony Towns [ARCHIVE] /
npub17r…x9l2h
2023-06-07 17:32:41
in reply to nevent1q…utx4
Author Public Key
npub17rld56k4365lfphyd8u8kwuejey5xcazdxptserx03wc4jc9g24stx9l2hPublished at
2023-06-07 17:32:41Event JSON
{
"id": "b01918d6c5beda33dd26ea6aa80ab6699e72b45c9a21316fc9e2b1b566836877",
"pubkey": "f0feda6ad58ea9f486e469f87b3b9996494363a26982b864667c5d8acb0542ab",
"created_at": 1686159161,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"0787da466d3be4d422de1a6a937e767e02bfb2898878f3bdf0c107274f06c32f",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"518c624ff68c94b3f047955c3a8ef3e825d959ed8da968af961ae4461e898de2",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"857f2f78dc1639e711f5ea703a9fc978e22ebd279abdea1861b7daa833512ee4"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-08-04\n📝 Original message:On 4 August 2015 at 01:22, Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e And the preliminary results of using a prediction market to try to wrestle\n\u003e with the tough tradeoffs looks roughly correct to me, too:\n\u003e https://blocksizedebate.com/\n\u003e\n\nThe scicast prediction market is shutdown atm (since early July?) so those\nnumbers aren't live. But...\n\nNetwork hash rate\n3,255.17 PH/s (same block size)\n5,032.64 PH/s (block size increase)\n\n4,969.68 PH/s (no replace-by-fee)\n3,132.09 PH/s (replace-by-fee)\n\nThose numbers seem completely implausible: that's ~2.9-3.6 doublings of the\ncurrent hashrate (\u003c 400PH/s) in 17 months, when it's taken 12 months for\nthe last doubling, and there's a block reward reduction due in that period\ntoo. (That might've been a reasonable prediction sometime in the past year,\nwhen doublings were slowing from once every ~45 days to once a year; it\njust doesn't seem a supportable prediction now)\n\nThat the PH/s rate is higher with bigger blocks is surprising, but given\nthat site also predicts USD/BTC will be $280 with no change but $555 with\nbigger blocks, so I assume that difference is mostly due to price. Also,\n12.5btc at $555 each is about 23 btc at $300 each, so if that price\nincrease is realistic, it would compensate for almost all of the block\nreward reduction.\n\nDaily transaction volume\n168,438.22 tx/day (same block size)\n193,773.08 tx/day (block size increase)\n\n192,603.80 tx/day (no replace-by-fee)\n168,406.73 tx/day (replace-by-fee)\n\nThat's only a 15% increase in transaction volume due to the block size\nincrease; I would have expected more? 168k-194k tx/day is also only a\n30%-50% increase in transaction volume from 130k tx/day currently. If\nthat's really the case, then a 1.5MB-2MB max block size would probably be\nenough for the next two years...\n\n(Predicting that the node count will drop from ~5000 to ~1200 due to\nincreasing block sizes seems quite an indictment as far as centralisation\nrisks go; but given I'm not that convinced by the other predictions, I'm\nnot sure I want to give that much weight to that one either)\n\nCheers,\naj\n\n-- \nAnthony Towns \u003caj at erisian.com.au\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150805/164bde23/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "43ecf37fdfd89fdbda802dc204abe17bebec68ab554a7746cbc33878d6125914e506182aa77bb640ad5c140775946ee499e6c0c9a00dfd7621e96d2a7ee0d0f7"
}