September 6, 2015 at 21:11The battle for the maximum block size: Bitcoin XT will not take off, the BIP 100 is gaining momentum
If you did not delve into the subject of the battle for the maximum block size, the previous article described the situation as of mid-August. Hashflare continues to keep you up to date and publishes the latest news from the field of fierce bitcoin battles.
In short, the problem revolves around the potential of Bitcoin to scale. At the moment, cryptocurrency remains a relatively specific phenomenon and is not used massively as a unit of payments. But if Bitcoin (as it is now) will ever be used by a couple of billions of people, the network will stall due to the fact that the block size of 1 MB does not allow the network to process more than seven transactions per second. And who wants to wait for transactions for years? Even more likely, intermediaries will intervene and become, in the end, those financial institutions with which Bitcoin is called to fight.
Trying to find a solution has split the community. There are those who oppose any changes in the block size: they say, leave Bitcoin as it is. All the same, no one will pay Bitcoin for pizza (what if it becomes?). There are many people who want to raise the limit, but everyone wants to do it their own way: in the BIP 100 it is assumed that miners will vote for a block size not exceeding 32 MB; Mike Hearn and Gavin Andersen offer to solve the problem radically - with the help of a hard fork, within the framework of Bitcoin XT's own protocol, the Lightning network offers to conduct transactions outside the blockchain, through branched payment channels with only the final balance placed on the blockchain, and so on.
The debate around Bitcoin, in the end, even got to television broadcasts. Julia Turiansky from BraveTheWorld.com performs on the Alex Jones show
There is no collective decision yet, but it gradually becomes clear which winner will not come out of this battle.
Recall that BitcoinXT allows you to increase the block size to 8MB in January 2016 and then doubles it every 2 years until, in the end, the blocks reach 8GB. However, this process will not begin until at least 750 of the 1,000 consecutive blocks are mined using Bitcoin XT. Once this threshold is reached, miners will have 2 weeks to switch to Bitcoin XT - or stay on the other side of the fork.
Heads of some large Bitcoin companies, such as BitPay , Blockchain.info , Circle , KNCMiner , previously spoke in support of Bitcoin XT ., Bitnet.io, itBit, Xapo, and BitGo . The jointly prepared manifesto of the representatives of these projects reads as follows :
Nevertheless, this cohesion of a number of corporations did not at all cause solidarity among the majority of mining pools, most of the Bitcoin Core developers joined them. Gregory Maxwell compared Hearn and Andresen to “the guys on the side of the road with a bottle of beer.” Nick Szabo likened the fork to the crash of the shuttle Challenger . Some have expressed concern that Tor users will be included in the “blacklist” wired in Bitcoin XT, which may reveal their IP addresses. True or not, the privacy-conscious discussion participants sound the alarm, considering the update done hastily, casually and potentially harmful for the Bitcoin project.
Against the backdrop of all the criticism that has fallen on Bitcoin XT, the offer of Bitcoin Core developer Jeff Garzhik, namely the BIP 100, has again gained relevance and sparkled with new colors. In fact, the BIP 100 project appeared even earlier than BIP 101, in June of this year, Jeff Garzhik Already proposed to increase the block size, but without a specific limit. Garzhik’s proposal, not yet invested in the code, is that the miners themselves, by voting, determine the size of the block, instead of setting the size by the authoritarian method, which contradicts the general spirit of bitcoin.
Garzhik believes that such a privilege cannot belong to a selected group of people, and judging by the fact that his proposal continues to gain popularity, he hit the mark.
In the draft BIP 100, Garzhik writes following:
Despite the fact that the voting process has not yet been finalized, in general terms, Garzhik offers the following: For starters, 90% of the bitcoin hashing power must go to the BIP 100 side to activate the project. When the BIP 100 is activated, together with each newly found block, miners will be able to send out public messages with their suggestions on the optimal block size. When 12,000 blocks are found, which takes about 3 months, the minimum block size will be calculated. According to preliminary estimates, this size can be 32 MB.
Naturally, criticism of this project was also not without. At Reddit, concerns have already been raised about the possible consolidation of hashing power in the hands of a minority, which negates free voting. Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn said that 32 MB is not enough block size, and the system will require further changes.
Garzhik himself believes that “BIP is a guarantee that the entire network will not fly off the knurled rails and remain independent.
We at Hashflare think the following about this:
We hope the crypto community supports our point of view: let the block increase, but the spirit of bitcoin will be preserved.
Mine in the old way:
In short, the problem revolves around the potential of Bitcoin to scale. At the moment, cryptocurrency remains a relatively specific phenomenon and is not used massively as a unit of payments. But if Bitcoin (as it is now) will ever be used by a couple of billions of people, the network will stall due to the fact that the block size of 1 MB does not allow the network to process more than seven transactions per second. And who wants to wait for transactions for years? Even more likely, intermediaries will intervene and become, in the end, those financial institutions with which Bitcoin is called to fight.
Trying to find a solution has split the community. There are those who oppose any changes in the block size: they say, leave Bitcoin as it is. All the same, no one will pay Bitcoin for pizza (what if it becomes?). There are many people who want to raise the limit, but everyone wants to do it their own way: in the BIP 100 it is assumed that miners will vote for a block size not exceeding 32 MB; Mike Hearn and Gavin Andersen offer to solve the problem radically - with the help of a hard fork, within the framework of Bitcoin XT's own protocol, the Lightning network offers to conduct transactions outside the blockchain, through branched payment channels with only the final balance placed on the blockchain, and so on.
The debate around Bitcoin, in the end, even got to television broadcasts. Julia Turiansky from BraveTheWorld.com performs on the Alex Jones show
Bitcoin HT is a terrible idea. In my opinion, a b of lshim care should be taken to ideas other developers base protocol. The decision must be collegial.
There is no collective decision yet, but it gradually becomes clear which winner will not come out of this battle.
Recall that BitcoinXT allows you to increase the block size to 8MB in January 2016 and then doubles it every 2 years until, in the end, the blocks reach 8GB. However, this process will not begin until at least 750 of the 1,000 consecutive blocks are mined using Bitcoin XT. Once this threshold is reached, miners will have 2 weeks to switch to Bitcoin XT - or stay on the other side of the fork.
Heads of some large Bitcoin companies, such as BitPay , Blockchain.info , Circle , KNCMiner , previously spoke in support of Bitcoin XT ., Bitnet.io, itBit, Xapo, and BitGo . The jointly prepared manifesto of the representatives of these projects reads as follows :
We support the BIP101 proposal (Mike Hearn project). We find Gavin Andresen's arguments convincing. Our companies will be ready for large blocks by December 2015
Nevertheless, this cohesion of a number of corporations did not at all cause solidarity among the majority of mining pools, most of the Bitcoin Core developers joined them. Gregory Maxwell compared Hearn and Andresen to “the guys on the side of the road with a bottle of beer.” Nick Szabo likened the fork to the crash of the shuttle Challenger . Some have expressed concern that Tor users will be included in the “blacklist” wired in Bitcoin XT, which may reveal their IP addresses. True or not, the privacy-conscious discussion participants sound the alarm, considering the update done hastily, casually and potentially harmful for the Bitcoin project.
Against the backdrop of all the criticism that has fallen on Bitcoin XT, the offer of Bitcoin Core developer Jeff Garzhik, namely the BIP 100, has again gained relevance and sparkled with new colors. In fact, the BIP 100 project appeared even earlier than BIP 101, in June of this year, Jeff Garzhik Already proposed to increase the block size, but without a specific limit. Garzhik’s proposal, not yet invested in the code, is that the miners themselves, by voting, determine the size of the block, instead of setting the size by the authoritarian method, which contradicts the general spirit of bitcoin.
Garzhik believes that such a privilege cannot belong to a selected group of people, and judging by the fact that his proposal continues to gain popularity, he hit the mark.
In the draft BIP 100, Garzhik writes following:
Some economists will try to dictate their rules to the free market, appeal to the main creator, the "developers" of the kernel, to each individual and society as a whole, to lure carrots, gingerbread cookies, etc. And the further, the more united their lobby will become. And yet, there is not a single isolated person on the planet or a one-person solution capable of universally determining the size of a block.
Despite the fact that the voting process has not yet been finalized, in general terms, Garzhik offers the following: For starters, 90% of the bitcoin hashing power must go to the BIP 100 side to activate the project. When the BIP 100 is activated, together with each newly found block, miners will be able to send out public messages with their suggestions on the optimal block size. When 12,000 blocks are found, which takes about 3 months, the minimum block size will be calculated. According to preliminary estimates, this size can be 32 MB.
Naturally, criticism of this project was also not without. At Reddit, concerns have already been raised about the possible consolidation of hashing power in the hands of a minority, which negates free voting. Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn said that 32 MB is not enough block size, and the system will require further changes.
Garzhik himself believes that “BIP is a guarantee that the entire network will not fly off the knurled rails and remain independent.
We at Hashflare think the following about this:
We can say that the topic with Bitcoin XT has already been closed. We do not care how much the block size increases, it is important for us that the changes pass through Bitcoin Core, and not through the fork. In this case, we will support the majority.
We hope the crypto community supports our point of view: let the block increase, but the spirit of bitcoin will be preserved.
Mine in the old way: