The Bitcoin Blocksize Showdown Continues With “Bets” – Trustnodes

The Bitcoin Blocksize Showdown Continues With “Bets”


The bitcoin blocksize “debate” has now devolved into bets on whether 1x or 2x would be more valuable in November, with Adam Back, Blockstream’s CEO, suggesting 250 btc is not sufficient, so needing “at least 25,000 BTC to make this useful.” He says:

“Roger Ver take Gregory Maxwell’s offer to atomic swap BTC for B2X/Segwit2x per Charlee Lee’s proposal. We need at least 25,000 BTC to make this useful. It seems that Roger is chickening out after a weak 250 BTC bet, which is nothing. We want to see conviction.”

25,000 btc is currently worth around $107 million, which is more than Blockstream has received in total VC investment so far. While 250 btc is worth a million dollars, which doesn’t appear to be convincing to Back. Ver said in reply:

“When and where was this offer? I’m not aware of any such offer. The last time your side came up with an offer, it turned out to be a complete bluff. Loaded was dishonest from the very start.”

So missing the chance to say $100 million is not cool, you know what’s cool, $1 billion, just to make it more clear how completely ridiculous and childish the situation is as you would expect with any situation once it devolves to “bets.”

Not least because a proper way to make such bets would be to set up an objective and unbiased futures or prediction market where everyone can bet in the open with clear and defined rules that apply to all.

But that is far too simple, far too objective, and might show support for the opposing side, with too much control lost while gaining no rhetorical advantage.

Another way might of course be to just organize a coin vote, but again that might actually provide an answer at the end of it and that is most likely not what Blockstream would like because most probably they know full well almost everyone, themselves included, support an increase to 2MB.

With the 1mb or 2mb being besides the point in any event because it makes no real difference either to small blockers or big blockers, raising the question of why either side keeps arguing with each other about it when in reality probably neither side really cares whether it is 1mb or 2mb.

As both sides should have realized by now, it is obvious bitcoin will have to scale both on-chain and off-chain. The so called fee-market has failed because as econ 101 says demand and supply are a curve.

Once supply can’t meet demand, and once a certain price level is reached, that demand leaves, so lowering fees and making an increase and decrease in fees cyclical, something which doesn’t quite allow for a settlement system.

But engaging in objective analysis or undertaking thorough studies is far too much hard work, especially when you can “win” by placing useless bets that have no meaning whatever to anyone.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>