3 ms·
I'm surprised this comes out now, right in the middle of the noise about the UASF (User Activated Soft Fork) and Segregated Witness controversies. The communit
by Uberphallus 9y ago
I'm surprised this comes out now, right in the middle of the noise about the UASF (User Activated Soft Fork) and Segregated Witness controversies.
The community is pushing to enable larger blocks among other functionalities that would cult down on the fees that miners (read: Chinese miners) collect.
Obviously the miners won't agree on that, but the network agreement depends on what the Bitcoin processing power decides, not on what the majority of the users do. At some point either the miners join, the users give up, or the chain forks in two (obviously with wildly different valuations).
I'm not familiar with People.cn, but my first reaction with the headline is that the piece of news has second intentions.
- rebuilder 9y agoThis s a bit tangential, but it's not clear that larger blocks, or any other way of getting a higher on-chain transaction throughout, would result in less total fees collected by miners. The fees are set by the miners, after all.
- rc_kas 9y agoTHANK YOU FOR SPELLING OUT YOUR ACRONYM!!!! So many internet idiots just use acronyms all the time on the assumption that everyone speaks the same language as them. I wish more people would take your approach.