/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.24673296]

Daily tx-count/block-size is yet again bumping against the ceiling. The solution so far in the last months for people has been to not make multiple small txs anymore and instead make single big ones. This has allowed everyone to still make txs, but the average tx value has climbed to $100k. If Bitcoin keeps gathering hype again this cycle, something has to give. Poor people wont be allowed to use the chain anymore soon.

What will happen? Thoughts?

[Anonymous No.24673355]

>>24673296
alts will moon because buttcoin is cripple.

[Anonymous No.24673365]

Don't transaction fees increase when this happens? As transaction fees rise, mining becomes more profitable, so more miners should come online, which should speed up transactions until fees start dropping again. If anything this is bullish for miners (even if mining is limited to people who live next to geothermal plants and electric dams who also own highly specialized ASIC equipment).

Who knows? Maybe GPU mining will become profitable again if ASICs can't be brought online fast enough.

[Anonymous No.24673399]

>>24673365
pico brainlet detected. You have no idea how this shit works, do you?!

[Anonymous No.24673522]

>>24673399
Everything I know about the bitcoin blockchain I learned in 2009 lurking /g/ threads and being stupid and not participating. Where am I wrong? I know blocks get completed on a preset schedule every ten minutes or so, and that they contain a preset maximum number of transactions, but can't the block size just be increased to allow more transactions if there's enough mining capacity?

I don't see how this isn't bullish for miners who should be getting more tx fees per block right now.

[Anonymous No.24673540]

>>24673365
Yes tx fees will rise. That is how poor people will get denied using the chain.

As more miners come online the chain will temporarily get faster until difficulty gets adjusted again because of it. This readjustment happens every ~10 days. After that, blocks are again slow, but the amount of people wanting to do transactions hasnt been fixed.

[Anonymous No.24673641]

>>24673540
How has it not been fixed when there are now more transactions per block?

[Anonymous No.24673668]

The occupation of private detectives is getting more popular nowadays. That’s why after the prospective pre-sale the GTX price can increase x10!

[Anonymous No.24673669]

>>24673641
A blocksize increase would fix it. More miners wouldnt.
Blocksize increase would be BCASH territory though and that is not cool. GTFO cashie

[Anonymous No.24673723]

>>24673669
noob

[Anonymous No.24673745]

>>24673522
so you do understand. Cuckstream did not go with increasing the block size, meaning the capacity is roughly constant, which will inevitably lead to
>>24673355

[Anonymous No.24673860]

I need more opinions. How will these charts look like when Bitcoin is at the ATH of this cycle, ~500k?

[Anonymous No.24673906]

>>24673296
gee if only there was a cryptocurrency with dynamic blocksize.

[Anonymous No.24673922]

>>24673669
>>24673745
I'm still confused, why would blocksize not be increased when capacity is maxed out? I understand not going full retard like BCH and increasing blocksize before it's getting maxed out, but increasing blocksize as adoption increases and maxes out network capacity seems like a good idea to allow tx fees to replace the nominal block mining reward as it decreases. Larger blocksize + more miners = blocks continue to get mined on schedule.

[Anonymous No.24674073]

>>24673355
now the question is which alts will gain the most from this
As boomer as it sounds I bet on LTC pumping more than anyone expects since its so widely available, almost as much as btc and they are still improving their chain and are in the middle of implementing privacy

[Anonymous No.24674107]

>>24673922
You just confirmed yourself as either a troll or a newfag.
Blocksize increase would mean a hard fork.

[Anonymous No.24674217]

>>24674107
>Blocksize increase would mean a hard fork.
Okay, this is what I didn't know.
Not a newfag, just never really paid attention to the technical details all these years.

[Anonymous No.24674253]

>>24674217
>Not a newfag
https://blog.plan99.net/the-resolution-of-the-bitcoin-experiment-dabb30201f7

[Anonymous No.24674342]

>>24674253
Hey, it is entirely possible to not be a newfag and still be an ignorant retard. Thanks for the info.

[Anonymous No.24674996]

>>24674107
>Blocksize increase would mean a hard fork.
And that's only a problem because Blockstream is fearmongering
Projects like Monero went through several hardforks by now