rich1.0npub1fx98zxt3lzspjs5f4msr0fxysx5euucm29ghysryju7vpc9j0jzqtcl2d8https://nostr.ae/npub1fx98zxt3lzspjs5f4msr0fxysx5euucm29ghysryju7vpc9j0jzqtcl2d8njumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-08-11 📝 Original message:On Aug 11, 2015 8:46 PM, "Michael Naber" <mickeybob at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Jorge: Many people would like to participate in a global consensus network -- which is a network where all the participating nodes are aware of and agree upon every transaction. Constraining Bitcoin capacity below the limits of technology will only push users seeking to participate in a global consensus network to other solutions which have adequate capacity, such as BitcoinXT or others. Note that lightning / hub and spoke do not meet requirements for users wishing to participate in global consensus, because they are not global consensus networks, since all participating nodes are not aware of all transactions. Even if you are right, first fees will raise and that will be what pushes people to other altcoins, no? Can we agree that the first step in any potentially bad situation is hitting the limit and then fees rising as a consequence? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150811/b23a80e6/attachment.html>