The bitcoin core development team chose to implement the top option. The bitcoin XT, Classic, and Unlimited development teams chose to implement the middle option. Sadly, no team chose to implement the bottom option.
Two years ago, the XT, Classic, and BU camp(s) saw the high Tx fees and long confirmation times we have in place today – it was clear as day. But rather than paying attention to their concerns and incorporating a max block size increase into their SegWit design, the majority of the Core team and their backers chose to ignore, censor, and ostracize anyone who didn’t agree with their chosen path. As a result, we now have an existential crisis going on within the bitcoin community which may lead to the total collapse of the ground-breaking cryptocurrency. Bummer.
..and here’s why fees are skyrocketing as more and more “unbanked” people try to escape the tyranny of governments that continuously debase their fiat currencies…
So, what’s this “Bitcoin scaling” hullaboo all about? Checkout this graphic that I snipped from the excellent movie “Banking On Bitcoin“:
No further comment needed.
This tweet from a #NoEstimates advocate is interesting food for thought:
Let’s say you are one member of a software development team of 5, and each of your salaries is $100K per year. Now, assume that an executive in your org requests that your team build software product “WhizzBang” for $500K. If your team accepts the request, then your deadline date becomes automatically set in stone as one year from the selection date. If you don’t accept the request…. well, then you and your teammates should look for other work.
An alternative approach for getting “WhizzBang” built is for the executive to ask the team for an estimate of how long it will take to get the software built.
I, as a software developer, would prefer the bidirectional “asking for an estimate” approach rather than the unidirectional “setting of a price” approach. Neither approach is ideal, but the “asking for an estimate” approach gives me the opportunity to provide information to the executive that allows him/her to decide whether or not to move forward on his investment.
In either case, history sadly shows that neither approach is likely to lead to the derived deadline being met. In those cases where the deadline is met, the team has most likely worked tons of unpaid overtime over a sustained period of time and has cut quality corners to do so 😦
The latest BTC movie, “Banking On Bitcoin“, which was released on January 6th, has hit the top of the charts:
Of course, being a staunch Bitcoin fan, I loved it. I was disappointed, however, that neither Roger Ver nor Andreas Antonopoulos has any speaking scenes in the movie.
The best part of the movie is the segment on the first attempt in the nation to formally regulate Bitcoin. The effort was led by Ben Lawsky, New York State’s first Superintendent of Financial Services. The resulting set of regulatory requirements, which apply to New York state businesses and individuals, can be found in the “BitLicense“. BitLicense is so onerous and bureaucratic that many Bitcoin companies fled the state when it went into effect. From Wikipedia:
It came into effect on August 8, 2015. At least ten bitcoin companies announced they were stopping all business in New York State because of the new regulations. The New York Business Journal called this the “Great Bitcoin Exodus”.
In a classic, self-serving, crony capitalist move, after leaving his government post, Mr. Lawsy started a consulting company which provides $ervices to help companies apply for BitLicenses.
Here are the other excellent Bitcoin movies that I’ve watched over the past year:
Amazon Prime customers please take note that ALL of these movies are available to you at no additional charge. I enlarged the graphic for “The End Of Money As We Know It” because it is currently my all time favorite.
Remember this guy?
Well, Roger Ver (a.k.a Bitcoin Jesus) has a similar beef:
I’ve been a fan of Roger Ver ever since I got sucked down into the Bitcoin rabbit hole well over a year ago. His passionate, pro-Bitcoin words and startup investments have helped Bitcoin grow to where it is today. Roger has also been the most vocal Bitcoin celebrity to rage against the Bitcoin Core development team’s refusal to raise the maximum block size above 1MB.
Hard-limiting the maximum block size to 1MB causes more competition among users to get their transactions into a block – which causes the average per-block user fee to rise – which causes fewer people worldwide to use Bitcoin as “money” – which stunts the global growth of Bitcoin. In the worst case, fees may get so high so that we only see wealthy people using Bitcoin in the future.
As Roger has said, the more expensive it is to use a thing, the fewer the people are who will use the thing. Economics 101.
To support Roger’s claim, I submit a relatively recent tweet of his for your perusal:
And, if you navigate to the Bitcoin transaction that Roger links to in the tweet, you’ll see this:
At the time of the tweet, the BTC price was hovering around $1000 USD. Thus, the fee of 72 millibits that his company, Bitcoin.com, paid, translated to around $70+ USD. However, at 89KB in size, it sure is a big ass transaction to stuff into a block. 🙂