To address this [scaling] problem, two main schools of thought emerged. On one side are miners, who deploy costly computers to verify transactions and act as the backbone of the blockchain. They’re proposing a straightforward increase to the block size limit.On the other is Core, a group of developers instrumental in upholding bitcoin’s bug-proof software. They insist that to ease blockchain’s traffic jam, some of its data must be managed outside the main network. They claim that not only would it reduce congestion, but also allow other projects including smart contracts to be built on top of bitcoin.But moving data off the blockchain effectively diminishes the influence of miners, the majority of whom are based in China and who have invested millions on giant server farms. Not surprisingly, Core’s proposal, called SegWit, has garnered resistance from miners, the most vocal being Wu Jihan, co-founder of the world’s largest mining organization Antpool.“SegWit is itself a great technology, but the reason it hasn’t taken off is because its interest doesn’t align with miners,” Wu said.Do what they want, pure cash will price it.
In the sandbox all queues are observable. It the block chain jammed? No problem we just leave our bitcoins on account and collect deposit interest or we borrow the bitcoins we need. The rates are all properly adjust to account for ledger risk. Really, much ado about nothing, this little debate is peanuts compared to the sweeping revolution that is the sandbox.
No comments:
Post a Comment