| > you are going to have a really bad day once the other miners notice that you can be fooled into wasting hash power on bogus headers. What are you even talking about here? 900KB takes a fraction of a second to transfer on a modest internet connection, any miner with $10 a month for a VPS can transfer that is a millisecond. No one said anything about downloading fractions of blocks, you hallucinated that. > Anyone sitting at the 32MB buffer would be getting their lunch eaten. This is about as fundamental as it gets, so you might want to do some reading - because you've clearly got a big blindspot. What is it that you think is even happening? Blocks get sent out. One has 32x the transaction throughput. Why do you think 32MB or more would be anything other than trivial to send and receive? Any miner can send and receive that in a second. > I don't pay much attention to the joke coins. Bitcoin cash already has more sustained transactions than bitcoin. Maybe you should reach beyond the propaganda of /r/bitcoin > it even has a name: the selfish miner strategy. Miners that do that take the risk that someone else will propagate a block before them since they didn't share the previous block they found. Empty blocks have much more of an impact on bitcoin because the throughput is so constrained. Empty blocks do not have much of an impact on the usability of bitcoin cash because it has plenty of throughput. A miner maliciously mining empty blocks on bitcoin will also leave a lot of money on the table because they won't get transaction fees. > you obviously thought you knew how things worked, and you obviously don't Everything you said is either completely made up or an exaggeration of some minor effect. In your last message you compared something with a 10 minute window to millionths of a second. For some reason you ignored this and ignored the actual numbers of modern bandwidth. You keep using hyperbole but won't quantify anything because the numbers don't add up. |
You are assuming that there are no bad actors in the network who might not want to transfer a block in a fraction of a second, and don't have to because they control the packet rate. Also you seem really hung up on this 900KB figure, you've repeated it in 8 recent posts. You know bitcoin's 30 day average block size has been above 900KB since 2018-10-24? But why would you harp on bitcoin's block size when you are advocating for a max block size that could accommodate all of Visa's transactions? Is is because you know that a 300MB+ block guarantees the death of decentralization and you'd look ridiculous pretending otherwise? To quote you before you presumably exchanged your BTC to double down on your bcash airdrop:
"Once again, whatever people's views on bitcoin at least realize that mining hashes don't dictate how many transactions can be processed by a miner. They mine a block, then they include as many transactions as they think they can get away with and keep the latency low enough to propagate."
2016 -- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11689765
> ...a VPS can transfer that is a millisecond.
Ah yes, that has worked out great for several exchanges and various other cryptocurrency related services. The cloud has been great, fill it with all the things.
> No one said anything about downloading fractions of blocks, you hallucinated that.
You don't seem to understand how packet switched networks function either. Go lookup "MTU", I look forward to hearing how even the most modest internet connection enjoys IPV6 with a 300MB jumboframe policy spanning the entire network path!
> Why do you think 32MB or more would be anything other than trivial to send and receive? Any miner can send and receive that in a second.
Except for everyone transiting a sub 256mb peering point... so alot of people: https://www.peeringdb.com/advanced_search?info_traffic__in=0...
It isn't that it'd take them 10 minutes to download the entire block... it is that they are at a 0.92 second disadvantage to their competition - this drives the physical centralization.
> Bitcoin cash already has more sustained transactions than bitcoin. Maybe you should reach beyond the propaganda of /r/bitcoin
lol, the salty salty tears.
> Miners that do that take the risk that someone else will propagate a block before them since they didn't share the previous block they found.
And yet they do it, because it has been mathematically demonstrated to be a winning strategy - even before block bloat induced propagation delay. The rest of the statement is simply nonsensical.
> In your last message you compared something with a 10 minute window to millionths of a second. For some reason you ignored this and ignored the actual numbers of modern bandwidth. You keep using hyperbole but won't quantify anything because the numbers don't add up.
Yeah, you clearly don't understand the comically simple idea that a consistent head start on your competitors guarantees eventual domination. The 10 minute window is completely immaterial to the point. If you can consistently verify the newest announced block 1 second before every other miner - then your average solve rate is guaranteed to be 1 second faster than their average solve rate.