Is it true that satoshi said in whitepaper that btc can scale to visa levels by just increasing the blocksize when needed?
how did samson/blockstream argument aganst this? by simply saying its not true or what?
if roger is right about blockstream, how was it even possible in the first place to take over btc and decide about consensus? how did they win in the end?
please no shilling/fudding. just straight facts, im new and want to learn. if satoshi really said that, why wouldnt u hedge with bch?
on the other hand, nick szabo is very respected in the cryptosphere and many believe he could be satoshi, he said publicly that bch is fraud.
here is all you need to know. look at the early adopters of btc, and how they invision scaling with satoshi input as well!
atm binance is like a btc bank. u dont really need to scale on chain when u can trust binance to do micro tx's
traders trust binance so thats more then good enough for a coffee imo
Nathaniel Perry
Satoshi did talk about an increase in blocksize on the forums. However, the visa thing I believe is an extrapolation based on the (tps of Visa / tps of 1 mb Bitcoin).
and btw, schnorr signatures and other cryptography stuff didn't even exist back then when satoshi made the wallpaper. He made a great product, but don't think that BTC doesn't need to improve. Scaling is a problem. Now think about this. Do you want 10x the same amount of transactions, or do you want infinite? no matter how much you increase the blocksize, that by itself won't scale to visa levels. Not to mention all the tradeoffs which would be devastating for bitcoin. Blocksize will increase in the future, but not until it's needed. segwit and LN are like using cache in a computer instead of having a giant hard disk.
Nathaniel Barnes
>Effectively, if you want to post a transaction there must be a fee awarded to the individual who gets it posted in a block. There should also be some kind of fee for propagating the transaction to all of the nodes to begin with. Thus propagation isn't automatic it comes at a price. Each node that passes along your transaction to other block creators should get a cut of the transaction fee. In this way the network can load balance based upon economic incentive and the "most valuable" transactions get highest priority at a price.
in other words, exactly what samson said to roger in that discussion lol.
Ryder Green
they missed the btc train and want a repeat. Most got stuck bagholding during the 'flippening' event. The shilling was otherwordly back then so many fell for it. After it dumped they refused to sell and they turned into the new shills. The ones with a brain got out in the mini pumps. BCH will never, ever replace BTC
