So BSV just mined a 128mb block

Can someone please tell me why that is a bad thing?
Hard mode: No, muh raspberry pi

Attached: 1553827025057.jpg (564x846, 284K)

Centralized shitcoin desu

it's 128mb of EMPTINESS which will remain on the blockchain forever to bloat it.
if you can't understand why that is bad on your own, you're retarded.

>128mb of EMPTINESS
Why do you care why it is what you define as "emptiness"? The fact is that the person uploading said emptiness paid fees for miners to accept the transaction. Isn't that what bitcoin is all about, economic incentives?

zero hashrate, basically just a single miner mining it, its literally confido tier

It has the same hashrate btc had in 2016. The big blocks equals MUCH more fees to the miners. This will in time incentivise miners to mine bsv. This will especially become apparent after the next halving

dumb as it can get. Not even worthy of a greentext.

It's a huge deal, big blocks are the future

won't the next halving mean that they'll get half of the amount of shitcoins they were getting before for mining?

Why are big blocks the future?

They aren't. Sidechains are

>multi-purpose bad!

Attached: blockstream.jpg (1242x1423, 93K)

Excactly. They will have to rely on transaction fees to generate a profit. How will they get enough transaction fees if they only can mine tiny 1mb blocks?

poor fellas, I guess they'll have to go mine some other coin

huh?

Attached: 1543752538208.jpg (641x530, 51K)

You're saying the halving will make it more difficult for BSV miners to generate a profit. Isn't that an incentive to dedicate their hash power to mine a different coin? There are plenty out there that give you a profit.

With a cap of 1MB on BTC you'll never get enough transactions to replace the current block reward. Therefore mining profits will sink.

This is true for all Bitcoins, but BTC is the most fucked. Miners aren't making money, so they're going to stop, reducing costs of attacking the network. After enough halvenings and a 1MB cap, BTC will fail.

BTC is a literal shitcoin.

>its spam!!
Just lol kiddo

The issue of transaction fees needing to replace new block issuance is a problem literally decades out, by which there will have been much improvement to the protocol you short-sighted faggot

OP you should change picture

Attached: HUUUUUUGE.jpg (460x288, 27K)

you fags talk about the 1mb limit like it's set in stone when in fact it's far from that. a few btc devs want to find any other solution because they are convinced it's unsustainable to just keep increasing the block size with adoption. but most people know if it really needs be it will be increased in fact it almost had been increased with segwit 2x.

Lol 128mb block? You can’t figure out why that is bad?

no he is right sv only needs like 10k to 50k blocks rest is just bullshit.

>mfw my gf looks almost exactly like OP's pic related
feels chad desu

Attached: 0%mad.jpg (540x606, 90K)

some user said with every halving the block size max should have been doubled. we would be at 4mb blocks right now that would be quiet sustainable. 128mb is probably a bit retarded. but wait for the few gigabyte blocks that are coming according to creg to see what full retard looks like!

Here he comes again out of the woodwork lmao

prove it or not chad

sv has 3k transactions per day (except when they are spamming full throttle)
btc has 150k to 250k per day and is reasonably fine with a 1mb block for now (altho i do believe it should have been increased to 2mb at least by now)

this
retard
And I say this as someone who thinks BSV and Wright are nutters
double commie retard

>Caring about thots like an utter normie in a thread discussing the future of Bitcoin and crypto.
That is going to be a big yikes from me.

This woman is literally from my town, lmao.