Connect with us

Bitcoin

Bitcoin [BTC] developer Luke Dash Jr defends small block size in the LA Bit Conference

Namrata Shukla

Published

on

Bitcoin [BTC] developer Luke Dash Jr defends small block size in the LA Bit Conference
Source: Pixabay

The core developer of Bitcoin, Luke Dash Jr, recently put forward his version of Bitcoin scaling roadmap at LA Bit conference in Chile on December 7.

While talking about scaling Bitcoin, Dash Jr spoke about the possible changes that can be expected in the future. He informed the audience that there are certain changes still on the back burner. Dash introduced Segwit v1, which is a revised script and not the same as Segwit v0 released last year.

Dash Jr roadmap includes siding with many active Blockstream projects like the Lightning Network and Liquid side chains. While talking about the trivial changes in Segwit v1, Dash Jr said:

“Lightning is probably everyone knows about lightning, it’s the real peer to peer transactions, instead of just flooding the whole network with every transaction. Uses a lot less blockchain space, and the transactions can confirm instantly that’s a layer two change. So it doesn’t need any more consensus change at this point, just a matter of implementation testing and people adopting it.”

Dash went ahead talking about the Signature aggregation where the miners while producing blocks, can combine all the signatures pertaining to each transaction into one. This would help in reducing transaction time and verification time.

Dash called for a decentralized sidechain, which could be a possible solution for mining centralization. Blockstream’s Liquid sidechain would be able to carry confidential transactions while making use of their new release Simplicity, which is an “entirely new script language for smart contracts”. Dash believes that this will allow for safer smart contracts, with flexibility.

Dash has been advocating smaller blocks, a contradictory view to many crypto-patrons. He believes that this move can contribute to the sustainability of BTC blockchain. The reason behind this is that it would assure that the scaling is achieved via two-layer solution rather than increasing the block size limit to get linear scaling on layer one chain.

The debate of block size caused the split of Bitcoin protocol and led the formation of Bitcoin Cash. Which also split recently forming Bitcoin Cash ABC and Bitcoin SV, as SV wanted to move to on-chain scaling with large blocks.



The roadmap, when published on Reddit, was questioned by many on the inclusion of small blocks. Dash Jr came on to defend it and said:

“The block size is larger than the rate of technological improvement. It’s not sustainable. We’re at 200GB now, and will get to 300GB in a year. There are already too few full nodes, and we’re just making it harder and harder to set them up!”

Dash concluded his note in the conference after providing an explanation for a smaller block size:

“A lot of people talk about increasing the block size, but with some of these other improvements, especially lightning, we hopefully they use the block size we need will be a lot less and it may be more palatable to actually reduce the block size at least in the short term.”





Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter




Follow us on Telegram | Twitter | Facebook



Namrata is a full-time journalist and is interested in covering everything under the sun, with a special focus on the crypto market.

Bitcoin

Bitcoin’s [BTC] dump may have triggered migration of BTCs worth hundreds of millions

Avatar

Published

on

Bitcoin's [BTC] dump may have triggered migration of BTCs worth hundreds of millions
Source: Unsplash

Bitcoin dropped by 3.55% over 3 hours, an approximate drop of $200, causing many altcoins to dip by more than 8%. Although it might be a coincidence, thousands of Bitcoins started to migrate from wallets to exchanges, wallets to wallets, and exchanges to wallets.

Whale Alert, a Twitter user, pointed out the same in his tweets. A total of  25,000 BTC were sent in under 20 minutes, in multiples of 5000 BTC each, in a wallet to wallet transaction. Two of these transfers were initiated from an unknown wallet [3BYv2L9zCFYpvRQXakqkVWa7JyRw6Q9ZAm] to two other unknown wallets [3PWNGS2357TnjRX7FpewqR3e3qsWwpFrJH, 3CAF6ZjtJKaHiJixViXncTRwG3N5ss9vn4].

These 5 transfers were worth approximately $140 million. The third transfer took place from multiple wallets to a single wallet [3HuUiXmKN3beQSoM97kWjK1fesWWJvKvaZ].

Additionally, there were two massive transactions that took place two hours after the drop; the first transaction involved 14,999 BTC, while the second involved 11,000 BTC.

The former transaction was sent from two wallets to a single wallet [3GaB3nRWA1PLc3XQkkbpVtFwYYZEuMxD4i], which is the balance of the wallet. The latter transaction was similar to the one mentioned above, as the transaction originated from two wallets.

Another transaction containing 9,000 BTC was transferred from 357R3FeNmySYeHuRfyhFd6nMwzoLDdjfwV to 3NmHmQte2rP8pS54U3B8LPYQKkpG1pFF69. The sender has approximately 9,412 BTC after the transfer, while the recipient has 9,000 BTC.

All of the above transactions were worth approximately $332 million. The massive BTCs transferred could be due to the recent fall in the price. It can also be speculated that BTC whales were securing their profits earned from the shorts.

A Twitter user @Emperor_YZ commented,



“and who say the fee is high, just 30,360 sat ($1.67)🤔 for a $82.37 million transfer …”

Another user, @Omarin0, commented,

“It would have also been 1.67$ for a 1.67$ transfer. 100% fee. How nice”

@Emperor_YZ replied,

“wrong, you can use LN or other layer 2 apps to do small amount payments 😎 for BTC base layer, network security is always top priority, L2 is super cheap and can settle at base layer later”





Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter


Continue Reading

Trending