3 ms·
Well there is this famous post by Greg Maxwell where fees almost reached the block reward amount (pull out "champaign"): https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/piper
by hackernudes 4y ago
Well there is this famous post by Greg Maxwell where fees almost reached the block reward amount (pull out "champaign"): https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-December/015455.html https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017...
As long as there is demand for block space, a market will exist. Also, block size can be increased. Bitcoin will need a hard fork anyway to fix the year 2106 problem (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=760 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=760).
- Stevvo 4y ago"Also, block size can be increased". Politically, no, it can't. That is the hill that "Bitcoin" has chosen to die on.
- kybernetikos 4y agoThat's fairly literal. There are a few ways of fixing the core problem (e.g. continued issuance, increased blocksize, proof of stake) but bitcoin political ossification makes it look more likely the chain will die rather than make the necessary changes.
- aaaaaaaaata 4y agoOther forks have done it. They've already chosen, no?
- ETH_start 4y agoFees have come down significantly since the Maxwell post, and haven't returned to that level since. Hence the problem. >>As long as there is demand for block space, a market will exist. Of course a market exists. But the current demand will not be enough to secure the network once the subsidy sees a couple halvings. >>Also, block size can be increased Both a block size increase and raising the 21 million coin limit are unacceptable according to Bitcoin's current leadership.