I'm just gonna count blocks over 100kb:
584744 200 kb, 548 transactions
584742 187 kb, 461
584739 139 kb, 429
584738 690 kb, 1,698
584737 200 kb, 561
584735 131 kb, 411
584730 225 kb, 630
584729 101 kb, 344
584728 191 kb, 523
584727 238 kb, 518
584726 358 kb, 843
584723 153 kb, 437
584722 357 kb, 1,128
584719 311 kb, 927
584718 643 kb, 54
584715 127 kb, 419
584713 263 kb, 810
584712 499 kb, 1388
584710 242 kb, 749
584709 306 kb, 863
584708 198 kb, 557
584707 151 kb, 431
584706 571 kb, 1,537
584704 188 kb, 600
584703 129 kb, 352
584702 489 kb, 1,497
584700 267 kb, 767
584699 206 kb, 544
584698 116 kb, 347
584694 787 kb, 2,159
584691 228 kb, 551
So, out of the last 60 blocks, ten-hour's worth, 32 are more than 100 kb, with 19 of them being over 200 kb and 10 being over 300 kb.
If we had a 1mb blocksize limit, this would already be extremely alarming levels of activity, meaning that we are too close to the blocksize cap, and this looks similar to what BTC looked like in roughly 2015 / 2016, back when Mike Hearn was ringing the alarm bells about the need to raise the BTC blocksize, and the Core crowd had just taken over control of the Bitcoin Core Github due to Wladimir and realized they could therefore do anything they wanted to BTC as long as they convinced the BTC community that it was in their best interests.
Using this position of authority and control of both Bitcointalk.org and r/bitcoin, they implemented censorship so that their push to change the direction of bitcoin would be effective, they pushed out mods from r/bitcoin that weren't on board with them.
You might also note that the BCH price is currently about the same as what BTC was back in 2016 when it had this level of activity, shortly before the 2016 Halvening. At this time BTC was worth $400 and after the halvening quickly shot to $700, and increased during the 2017 bull-run.
But it was during the 2017 bull run that it finally happened, the limit of the blocksize was completely reach. Blocks were 1 mb and maxed out, and the only way to get your transaction through next block was to pay ridiculous fees. I myself paid a $5 fee that was stuck for an entire week, and a friend of mine paid a $50 fee that was stuck for 2 hours.
Mike Hearn was making noise and ringing the alarm bells for the need for a bigger block cap all the way back in 2015, he knew this would happen, and the Core devs, today known as Blockstream, iced him out of BTC development, ignored his Github pushes, and attacked his character behind his back like guttersnipes. So he left.
Cryptocurrency lost one of its greatest developers.
They did the same to Gavin Andresen, the man that Satoshi Nakamoto himself entrusted with caring for the bitcoin project. He has since left as well.
Make no mistake, the Core devs are enemies of bitcoin as a concept, they have hijacked the project, completely changed its direction and are currently painting it into a corner while lulling their community and stoking tribalistic anger at all competitors.
This "no one uses bitcoin cash" line is going to die very soon, because it looks like it will not be long before BCH surpasses BTC on transactions. And I predict right now that their new line will be that these are simply spam transactions and not legitimate activity.
Even though we all know that paying a transaction fee means a transaction is legit, it's a use of the system, regardless of intent. There is no such thing as a spam transaction that pays a miner's fee.
Anyone claiming no one uses BCH is a liar or a shill, let this be the end of that idiotic claim.
[link] [comments]
from Bitcoin - The Internet of Money http://bit.ly/2XlJ5KZ
No comments:
Post a Comment
We have received your message and would like to thank you for writing to us, we will reply by email as soon as possible.
Talk to you soon,
[Pakcoin Worker]
[Pakcoin Global]