4 ms·
I believe a drop-in replacement called Bulletproofs is being developed to reduce the transaction size. It's been a while since I looked into what else is being
by Casseres 9y ago
I believe a drop-in replacement called Bulletproofs is being developed to reduce the transaction size. It's been a while since I looked into what else is being worked on.
Smaller transaction sizes with adaptive block sizes seems like a good scaling solution. Is there something I'm missing?
The fee in terms of XMR actually reduces when there's more transactions. However if its value in terms of USD rises, then the fee in terms of USD still might go up with more adoption. Perhaps that's something the developers can adjust in their regularly-scheduled hardforks.
- hanniabu 9y agoI could totally be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I read that Bulletproofs only reduce transaction size by about 40%. While that's still a nice decrease, it won't get the project to the scalability that it needs. It may buy them a years worth of time at the pace the transactions are growing before they'll need a better solution.
- Casseres 9y agoI just skimmed through their subreddit, and it appears to be between an 80% to 90% reduction. That still makes it a little larger than the average Bitcoin transaction, but the mentality there seems to be that privacy has its price. While next-to-free is preferable, I don't disagree.
- hanniabu 9y agoThanks for the clarification! And yes, I agree as well that privacy does have a price. However, with transactions growing tremendously with the increased popularity and speculation of crypto-assets, there will be a point where enough is enough. I hope that a further iteration for greater efficiency will be found in the future.
- ringaroundthetx 9y agoYes so we could imagine a new upper bound of 100 tx/s This isnt future proof but should alleviate some pressures while internet and widespread computational infrastructure improves