Important Analysis of the Practical Limitations of the Lightning Network and the Future of Bitcoin
The Lightning Network has been growing rapidly in the past couple of months and there is lots of room for excitement and optimism. Fast and cheap off-chain transactions finally seem within grasp, and with that comes the promise of Bitcoin potentially being able to function as global currency and achieve mainstream adoption, taking us all to the moon in the process. All the good news recently got me wondering: how effective can the Lightning Network be as a scaling solution with the current block size? In other words, what's the absolute best case scenario for the LN supporting an active user base if blocks are kept under ~2MB. So I looked up some basic stats on the Bitcoin blockchain and made some assumptions about how using the Lightning Network would translate to on-chain transaction volume for opening and closing payment channels. What I found is that 2MB blocks can support approximately 5 million active LN users in the best case scenario. To support 100 million active LN users would require ~32MB blocks. Basically, if on-chain scaling and the Lightning Network are the only two scaling solutions implemented, a significant block size increase is entirely inevitable in order for Bitcoin to achieve mass adoption even if the Lightning Network is a massive success. Most people I've talked to seem to be in favor of either one solution or the other - on-chain scaling only or 2nd layers scaling only and keep the block size small. After this analysis, I've come to the conclusion that BOTH types of scaling will be necessary in the near future if Bitcoin is to achieve the adoption we are hoping for. If you'd like to check the analysis in depth and see the assumptions I made plus the rational behind them, you can find them here: https://www.investinblockchain.com/bitcoin-lightning-network-block-size-analysis/ I'd love to hear some feedback on the analysis and my conclusions based on it, positive or negative are both welcome. Thanks for taking the time to read this! TL;DR: I believe that the Lightning Network can support at best a user base of 5 million active wallets given the current Bitcoin block size.
GMax is talking that the current 1M block size limit is too large, and "the recent improvements" in bitcoin is just a plan to do something to kill(limit) Miners or profit blockstream?
As seen in red circled text http://m.imgur.com/rT4eKR0 "the block size limit was set too large" Amazing, 1M is too large!!! "this created outsized returns for large consolidations." it looks like he is very jealous of the profit of miners "More recent improvements have caught things up a bit but it will take a while for the damage to equalize out." how to equalize out? Here are the only two methods I can figure out: 1, Via " recent improvements", we let blockstream profit more or equally compared with miners, this is kind of "equalize out", 2, Via " recent improvements", we try to kill big miners or limit the profit of those miners GMax(Blockstream) is actually talking about how to divide the cake before making the cake big
Dear mods: let's either get rid of the Scaling Bitcoin stickied thread and allow block size discussion in other threads, or restrict everything to the stickied thread. The current system frustrates everybody.
I asked Viabtc (Pool with 10 % of global hashing power) why they are not mining BIP109 blocks. They replied: "We need some mechanism to dynamically adjust the block size limit. Hence, in my view, Bitcoin Unlimited’s protocol is more appropriate at the current stage."
Keeping the block size as 1 MB won't save centralization. Neither will increasing it to 2 MB. That's because bitcoin in it's current state is doomed to inevitable centralization. Only new research can stop this.
If we keep it at 1 MB, transactions fees increase and online bitcoin wallets gain power. Since they need trust, they centralize. Also, the blockchain becomes too big anyways, so the cost of entry for starting a full node becomes to high, leading to centralization. Having less full nodes makes it more likely and profitable for them to collude with miners to change the protocol.
If we change to 2 MB, transaction fees increase anyways, albeit later, and the blockchain becomes too big, albeit sooner.
If we make the block size dynamic, the blockchain becomes too big even sooner. Even worse, eventually the blocks will get too big for smaller full nodes that are already running to transmit in time, making the ownership of full nodes even more centralized.
As we can see, whether or not we change the block size does not affect centralization in the long run, since bitcoin naturally scales at a quadratic rate in the number of users. Therefore we need new research if we want to solve this. The question is simply what option delays centralization the longest. Lightning network should buy us plenty of time, allowing bitcoin transactions to be processed faster and in larger quantities than any currently existing payment system, but it still doesn't solve the intrinsic quadratic nature of the block chain, so I'm thinking eventually we will need to invent something not based on block chains if we want to keep decentralization.
04-03 06:33 - 'BCH is currently a better coin in terms of speed and fees because of its block size increase. Unless lightning really takes off or some other second layer scaling solution takes hold, BCH will remain a legitimate competi...' by /u/AbrahamSTINKIN removed from /r/Bitcoin within 49-59min
Bitcoin Cash (BCH) has a very low rate of adoption, and block sizes currently average less than 100 KB, making the… https://t.co/UIiQxwPMG2 - Crypto Insider Info - Whales's
Posted at: December 28, 2018 at 10:08PM By: Bitcoin Cash (BCH) has a very low rate of adoption, and block sizes currently average less than 100 KB, making the… https://t.co/UIiQxwPMG2 Automate your Trading via Crypto Bot : http://bit.ly/2GynF9t Join Telegram Channel for FREE Crypto Bot: Crypto Signal
Average Block Size (MB) Average Transactions Per Block. Total Number of Transactions. Median Confirmation Time. Average Confirmation Time. Mining Information. Network Activity . Wallet Activity. Market Signals. Sponsored Content. Blockchain Size (MB) The total size of the blockchain minus database indexes in megabytes. 30 Days 60 Days 180 Days 1 Year 3 Years All Time. Raw Values 7 Day Average ... Block Size: 873.666 KBytes: Blocks last 24h: 122: Blocks avg. per hour (last 24h) 5: Reward Per Block: 6.25+0.5332 BTC ($88,929.66 USD) next halving @ block 840000 (in 185688 blocks ~ 1276 days) Reward (last 24h) 762.50+65.05 BTC ($10,849,418.32 USD) Fee in Reward (Average Fee Percentage in Total Block Reward) 8.2%: Difficulty: 19.997 T next retarget @ block 657216 (in 2904 blocks ~ 21 days 14 ... Block size of Bitcoin mining . No issue in the history of cryptocurrencies has been debated as passionately, as often, or as forcefully as the bitcoin block size. To an outsider, it must be quite comical to witness folks debating a consensus parameter within the bitcoin network — no joke — as if it were a matter of life or death. Bitcoin Cash is a Bitcoin hard fork that raises the Bitcoin (Cash) block size to 32MB, allowing the BCH network to process around 65 transactions per second. The Bitcoin Cash hard fork took place in August 2017, just before the conclusion of the SegWit and SegWit2x debacle. In many ways, the Bitcoin Cash movement and hard fork was a result of the lack of direction by the latter project. Effectively, the theoretical maximum size is 3999997B although in practice this limit cannot be reached. In Bitcoin Core v0.15.1 the default value for blockmaxweight in block creation is 3996000B.. Using the following formula with a limit of block weight = 4000000 (yes, decimal MB):
Bitcoin explained and made simple Guardian Animations ...
Can bitcoin scale on chain by using bigger blocks? If Bitcoin uses todays hardware can it compete with VISA? TPS - Transactions per second Visa on average handles 2,000 TPS reaching a daily peak ... Baffled by bitcoin? Confused by the concept of crypto-currencies? Well, fear no more. In 190 seconds we explain what bitcoin actually is, where the idea came... Whether the block size should be increased to 20MB has created more controversy than any other question in Bitcoin's recent history. For some, it is an urgent and necessary step in Bitcoin's ... bitcoin blockchain size, b bitcoin, bitcoin b font, plan b bitcoin, plan b bitcoin podcast, bitcoin miner .b, bitcoinnordic-b, jb bitcoin faucet, basic bitcoin, plan b bitcoin jupiter, b z ... Bitcoin's protocol schedules a block reward 'halving' roughly every four years, as designed by Satoshi Nakamoto. But the artificial block size cap currently sanctioned by Core developers and a ...