According to this reddit post on r/bitcoin, Bitcoin Blockchain would need to grow by 214 GB per day to actually reach VISA levels.
Unsustainable.
If only...
there was a blockchain with sub 3 second blocks, scalable, incorruptible, decentralized and with VISA level TX per second...
.jpg)
But Wait...
BitShares, the graphene based decentralized Exchange is capable of running all of VISA and all of crypto on one chain!
Learn More...
BitShares Tutorials on Steem
How to fix: Transactions, Trades, User Names not working in BitShares
BitShares/OL Affiliate Program Review Added to Ad/Affiliate Platform
BitShares Newbie How-To: Transfer your Money + Freebie Inside
Buy and Sell Steem & Steem Dollar at best rates!
Bitcoin Cash will easily eat 1GB+ blocks. Unlimited Bitcoin block space got us here in the first place.
214 GB per day is only unsustainable when you take the 'everyone must be a fully validating and archiving node' approach. This was not what Satoshi described.
Quotes collated via this Reddit post
214GB per day is perfectly affordable for a datacentre. That's 78 TeraBytes in a year and a single hard drive can store more than that today. The other issues of bandwidth and replay time are also perfectly solvable even with huge blocks.
The cost of this is that yes, as Satoshi expected, not everyone will be able to run full nodes on consumer grade hardware. There is an argument that this makes the network more vulnerable to state attack, but on the contrary, keeping it small to the point of irrelevance makes it more vulnerable in truth. History shows us that clandestine organizations are well capable of amassing resources to run large scale operations.
which would centralize bitcoin even more.
I think there are much better alternatives for the "VISA" approach, bitcoin should be used as what it it. a storage of value.
2nd layers, lightning and whatnot will only centralize it even further.
Small scale "store of value" is irrelevance and death thanks to Metcalfe's Law and competitive network effects. That suits me ok now though, DPoS is superior to PoW anyway, and I no longer hold Bitcoin, only alts.
Thanks for your vital information sharing with us @ash
How does ETH compare?
depending on which terms?
Block size of ETH I mean
different rate of blocks + diff sizes, easier to compare top speeds.
btc now about 7 tx/sec top, eth top range given around 10-20. bts & steem 100 k/sec
Keep in mind eth blockchain grows roughly 7-10x faster at similar loads. http://bc.daniel.net.nz/
Also many btc tx are bunched together into 1 to save tons on fees which doesn't show up in tx counts https://bitcointechtalk.com/saving-up-to-80-on-bitcoin-transaction-fees-by-batching-payments-4147ab7009fb
ETH doesn't have native ability to do from accounts. Can do a work around each time by creating and then sending to a new smart contract (not cheap) and then it sends to many outputs.
Thanks for the info, I don't understand all of it, looking up
I am holding bitshares since last three months! It keeps moving between $0.11 to $.14, sometimes goes up but take downturn easily. Not sure which activity of billionherocampaign will make it huge. Makes me uneasy!
It needs to be decentralized also. 25 block creators (witness system) is not a decentralized network.
Is it not?
On the Bitcoin network, 4 block producers produce over 50% of all blocks among themselves. 8 together create 75% of blocks, and 12 produce 90%.
On Ethereum it's even worse, where only 2 pools produce over 50% of blocks.
The reply is often that there are more miners than there are pools, but individual miners do not produce blocks. They only allocate their hashpower to those who do, which is effectively a form of voting. Thus non-block-producing miners are the closest equivalent to voting stakeholders, not witnesses.
Japan and Russia are also going into the mining buisness. We will be seeing more decentralization quite soon. But you're right, China has mining monopoly now.
delegation of stake to 25-100 block creators by unlimited number of users
vs
delegation of hash power to 3-4 mining pools by unlimited number of users
it's very similar in how validators are chosen through decentralization
but you can argue less time tested with less understood attack surface
users also have the ability to fire bad validators on dpos costing them income or change total numbers via committee/DAO like on pow they have to point hash power to different pool
I have made a post about a Bitcoin testnet using 1GB blocks
https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@grunzwanzling/buip-065-gigablock-testnet-initiative-1gb-blocks-for-btc-201792t21453363z
I found your post interesting thus, I had to upvote and follow you.
Kindly do same for me. Check out my latest post here:
https://steemit.com/news/@mickyscofield/meet-couple-who-bear-same-name-with-hurricane-harvey-and-irma
Do play they miss give so up.