earlier replies
Replying to @stilkov
I consider that under total system cost. E.g. settling one bitcoin block transaction costs upward of $10 just to cover the used kWh
1
That canโ€™t possibly be true. Maybe a block has that cost, but definitely not a transaction.
1
Settlement happens in blocks. Whatever gets into that block is determined by how many tx the winner scoops up before trying.
2
A block will contain about 1,000 transactions and earn the miner 12 Bitcoins, i.e. more than 12k โ‚ฌ
1
For any block they win settling in the hash collision lottery, which isn't very often.
1
Of course. Yet there are people and companies doing it. Theyโ€™re not doing it for charity.
1
yes, but the margins aren't really that great and the trend isn't promising blockchain.info/charts/avg-cโ€ฆ

Blockchain.com | Charts - Average Confirmation Time

The most trusted source for data on the bitcoin blockchain.

blockchain.com
1
1
Thatโ€™s something we can agree on โ€“ scaling is definitely an issue. Something will have to change, donโ€™t know what the best way is
2
alright, now we can talk arch :) The BC premise is that you can achieve globally converged, strongly consistent ledgers...
1
... which should light up your b/s caution lamp. The BC tradeoff trick is to play for time.
2
1
Replying to @clemensv
BC currently works fine, if you accept the limit to the number of tx/s it can handle. Do you dispute that?

Mar 18, 2017 ยท 10:18 AM UTC

1
Replying to @stilkov
I'm not disputing, I'm underlining. The tx rate cap and thus its scalability ceiling is its foundation.
1
There is an assumption that some expensive work needs to be performed โ€“ what you do with that work can change from 6tx/s to 25k
1
more replies