On 2015-05-11 16:28, Thomas Voegtlin wrote: > My problem is that this seems to lacks a vision. If the maximal block > size is increased only to buy time, or because some people think that 7 > tps is not enough to compete with VISA, then I guess it would be > healthier to try and develop off-chain infrastructure first, such as > the > Lightning network.
If your end goal is "compete with VISA" you might as well just give up and go home right now. There's lots of terrible proposals where people try to demonstrate that so many hundred thousand transactions a second are possible if we just make the block size 500GB. In the real world with physical limits, you literally can not verify more than a few thousand ECDSA signatures a second on a CPU core. The tradeoff taken in Bitcoin is that the signatures are pretty small, but they are also slow to verify on any sort of scale. There's no way competing with a centralised entity using on-chain transactions is even a sane goal. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
