3 ms·

The cost of diskspace is not as limiting as the time needed to do an Initial Block Download, which would become too burdensome with huge blocks. Transacting on

by tromp 6y ago

The cost of diskspace is not as limiting as the time needed to do an Initial Block Download, which would become too burdensome with huge blocks. Transacting on 2nd layer makes a lot of sense as txs are instant, more private, and don't need the whole world to download and verify them (except for an open and close). It improves scalability by orders of magnitude

CyberDildonics 6y ago
> The cost of diskspace is not as limiting as the time needed to do an Initial Block Download, which would become too burdensome with huge blocks. The current throughput is 1.5KB/s. Regular users don't even need to sync with the blockchain. Anyone can rent a server for $10 a month that will download the entire chain of the last 11 years in a single hour. What math are you doing where you think the -current- max block size makes sense? > Transacting on 2nd layer makes a lot of sense as txs are instant No they aren't, they still have to make it to the main chain. > more private Anyone could make a new address and use VPN for each transaction if that's what they want. At least they could if they weren't in danger of transaction fees becoming larger than what is in their address, which essentially disables it until transaction fees go down. Other cryptocurrencies are already much more private if that is what people want. > don't need the whole world to download and verify them Very few people actually need to sync with the whole chain unless they want to. Exchanges, payment processors and of course miners. Most people never sync with the whole chain and few of those that do are doing it out of a neccesity. Even so, syncing with the blockchain was never a technical limitation. There is nothing that a second layer offers that simply using a non-crippled cryptocurrency doesn't already solve. Ethereum and bitcoin cash have already exceeded bitcoin's transaction volume over the last week. Ethereum has had far more transaction volume for a long time now. https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/transactions-btc-eth-bch.html https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/transactions-btc-eth-bc...

by tromp 6y ago

CyberDildonics 6y ago

> The cost of diskspace is not as limiting as the time needed to do an Initial Block Download, which would become too burdensome with huge blocks. The current throughput is 1.5KB/s. Regular users don't even need to sync with the blockchain. Anyone can rent a server for $10 a month that will download the entire chain of the last 11 years in a single hour. What math are you doing where you think the -current- max block size makes sense? > Transacting on 2nd layer makes a lot of sense as txs are instant No they aren't, they still have to make it to the main chain. > more private Anyone could make a new address and use VPN for each transaction if that's what they want. At least they could if they weren't in danger of transaction fees becoming larger than what is in their address, which essentially disables it until transaction fees go down. Other cryptocurrencies are already much more private if that is what people want. > don't need the whole world to download and verify them Very few people actually need to sync with the whole chain unless they want to. Exchanges, payment processors and of course miners. Most people never sync with the whole chain and few of those that do are doing it out of a neccesity. Even so, syncing with the blockchain was never a technical limitation. There is nothing that a second layer offers that simply using a non-crippled cryptocurrency doesn't already solve. Ethereum and bitcoin cash have already exceeded bitcoin's transaction volume over the last week. Ethereum has had far more transaction volume for a long time now. https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/transactions-btc-eth-bch.html https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/transactions-btc-eth-bc...