rich1.0npub1tjephawh7fdf6358jufuh5eyxwauzrjqa7qn50pglee4tayc2ntqcjtl6rhttps://nostr.ae/npub1tjephawh7fdf6358jufuh5eyxwauzrjqa7qn50pglee4tayc2ntqcjtl6rnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-08-10 📝 Original message:On Aug 11, 2015 12:52 AM, "Pieter Wuille" <pieter.wuille at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Aug 11, 2015 12:18 AM, "Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev" < bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > Have you ever been to a concert that was far away from public transport? They > > typically set up bus shuttles, or taxis to get people back into town > > afterwards. > > The result there is always you end up waiting forever and it actually may be > > easier to just walk instead of wait. > > The amount you pay is irrelevant if everyone is paying it. There still is more > > demand than there is capacity. > > That's an incorrect analogy. You choose the rate you pay, and get higher priority when you pay more. Taxi drivers can't pick out higher-paying customers in advance. I'm sorry, I missed your "if everyone is paying it". This changes a lot. I agree with you: if everyone wants to pay much then it becomes unreliable. But I don't think that is something we can avoid with a small constant factor block size increase, and we don't do the world a service by making it look like it works for longer. Let's grow within bounderies set by technology and centralization pressure that we can agree on. Let the market decide whether how they will that will low volume reliable transactions and/or high volume unreliable ones. -- Pieter -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150811/59b198e8/attachment.html>