Before betting against bitcoin, consider it should have died a million times -- and yet somehow it never does.
-
-
Replying to @AriannaSimpson
Curious what you make of the fact that fee / transaction is close to
$US 10 now?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @michael_nielsen
1) actually less than half that 2) how much does a wire cost again?
pic.twitter.com/EPQGlcvsjD
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @AriannaSimpson
Good compared to wires, but much higher than the fees on 99% of transactions I carry out day to day. Presumably, in a better protocol the block limit would be tied to the total value of transactions, not total byte size; this would make fees proportional to the value.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @michael_nielsen
Temporary issue. Once live, things like
@lightning will enable way more txns at way lower cost. Not all txns need to be on chain1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @AriannaSimpson @lightning
I'm mostly interested from the POV of finding a better protocol design. It seems plausible that the right way to limit blocks is by total transaction value, not total byte size.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Computers don’t care about txn value, they care about bytes
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
The artificial scarcity currently imposed is on block size. However, that's a largely arbitrary protocol decision. (Not completely: bandwidth really is scarce. But at current levels that's not the limiter). Satoshi could have chosen block total value instead.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.