Discussing Potential Improvements to Bitcoin’s Transaction Throughput

[foniwe]

Hello

With the ongoing discussions about Bitcoin scalability; I’ve been thinking about how we could further optimize transaction throughput without sacrificing security or decentralization. While the Lightning Network has made significant strides, it still doesn’t seem like it’s fully adopted at a large scale. Are there any potential changes or upgrades to the Bitcoin network protocol that could help alleviate congestion during periods of high transaction volumes?

For example; I’ve read about SegWit and the Taproot upgrades, but I’m curious if there are any more immediate or incremental changes to the base protocol that could improve throughput. Is it worth considering an increase in the block size limit again, or are there alternative solutions that the community is leaning toward?   I have checked https://asktom.cf/index.php?board=6.0AWS guide for reference .

Additionally, what’s the consensus on second-layer solutions for increasing transaction throughput? Is there room for improvement there, or do we still need more time for these technologies to mature before they can handle mainstream adoption?



Thank you !

[BlackHatCoiner]

Are there any potential changes or upgrades to the Bitcoin network protocol that could help alleviate congestion during periods of high transaction volumes?

Covenants.

Is it worth considering an increase in the block size limit again, or are there alternative solutions that the community is leaning toward?

I highly doubt it. The best argument for 4 MB block size is that we already have 4 MB block size. The roadmap since 2017 is focused on second layer solutions, as arbitrarily messing with the block size introduces a lot of problems, and it has already attempted and failed in the past. (Bitcoin Cash & SV)

Is there room for improvement there, or do we still need more time for these technologies to mature before they can handle mainstream adoption?

From the ones that are currently developed, I can only count on Ark: https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=5505515.msg64404038#msg64404038.

[Mia Chloe]

~snip

Just like Blackhatcoiner mentioned, how larger could it be increased to without causing potential loopholes in the network? The SEGWIT upgrade is enough for now if you ask me. Basically the issues that make it seem like the upgrade isn't good enough to satisfy the net transaction demands of the network are usually a one time problem and more of a sentimental one ,  with something like sudden FOMO causing people to move coins in a rush with high fees and then congestion becomes a problem for a while.

Other Layer 2 solutions like the lightning network is ok to use for relatively smaller transactions in rare cases of congestion but most people seldom make use of them it seems most persons are more familiar with going on chain.

[ABCbits]

Is it worth considering an increase in the block size limit again, or are there alternative solutions that the community is leaning toward?

I believe Bitcoin block size limit should be increased, with reasonable limit and testing. But majority of Bitcoin community prefer continue to develop LN, sidechain or other L2 solutions.

Is it worth considering an increase in the block size limit again, or are there alternative solutions that the community is leaning toward?

I highly doubt it. The best argument for 4 MB block size is that we already have 4 MB block size.

Or rather up to 4MB block size. In last year, block have average size 1.66MB[1] since only part of TX considered as witness data.

The roadmap since 2017 is focused on second layer solutions, as arbitrarily messing with the block size introduces a lot of problems, and it has already attempted and failed in the past. (Bitcoin Cash & SV)

That's true. Although it's worth to mention that BSV failed since it's created by fraud and scammer, while BCH riddled with many controversy (such as supported by Jihan Wu who implement covert ASICBoost[2] which isn't compatible with SegWit).

[1] https://statoshi.info/d/000000002/blocks?orgId=1&from=now-1y&to=now
[2] https://thebitcoinmanual.com/articles/asicboost/