[bitcoin-dev] Capacity increases for the Bitcoin system.
mark at friedenbach.org
Mon Dec 21 04:50:03 UTC 2015
I am fully in support of the plan laid out in "Capacity increases for the
This plan provides real benefit to the ecosystem in solving a number of
longstanding problems in bitcoin. It improves the scalability of bitcoin
Furthermore it is time that we stop bikeshedding, start implementing, and
move forward, lest we lose more developers to the toxic atmosphere this
hard-fork debacle has created.
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:07 AM, Wladimir J. van der Laan wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 10:02:17PM +0000, Gregory Maxwell via
> bitcoin-dev wrote:
> >> TL;DR: I propose we work immediately towards the segwit 4MB block
> >> soft-fork which increases capacity and scalability, and recent speedups
> >> and incoming relay improvements make segwit a reasonable risk. BIP9
> >> and segwit will also make further improvements easier and faster to
> >> deploy. We’ll continue to set the stage for non-bandwidth-increase-based
> >> scaling, while building additional tools that would make bandwidth
> >> increases safer long term. Further work will prepare Bitcoin for further
> >> increases, which will become possible when justified, while also
> >> the groundwork to make them justifiable.
> > Sounds good to me.
> Better late than never, let me comment on why I believe pursuing this plan
> is important.
> For months, the block size debate, and the apparent need for agreement on
> a hardfork has distracted from needed engineering work, fed the external
> impression that nothing is being done, and generally created a toxic
> environment to work in. It has affected my own productivity and health, and
> I do not think I am alone.
> I believe that soft-fork segwit can help us out of this deadlock and get
> us going again. It does not require the pervasive assumption that the
> entire world will simultaneously switch to new consensus rules like a
> hardfork does, while at the same time:
> * Give a short-term capacity bump
> * Show the world that scalability is being worked on
> * Actually improve scalability (as opposed to just scale) by reducing
> bandwidth/storage and indirectly improving the effectiveness of systems
> like Lightning.
> * Solve several unrelated problems at the same time (fraud proofs, script
> extensibility, malleability, ...).
> So I'd like to ask the community that we work towards this plan, as it
> allows to make progress without being forced to make a possibly divisive
> choice for one hardfork or another yet.
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the bitcoin-dev