The Bitcoin Triangle

This is the most basic way I could describe the dynamics of the blocksize debate. Here are the rules….Pick any two sides of the triangle. You can have those two things but they come at the expense of the 3rd.



The Bitcoin Triangle. Pick any 2 sides at the expense of the 3rd.

For example, you can keep scale bitcoin and do so in a relatively short amount of time (increase blocksize) but inso-doing you sacrifice decentralization. Similarly, you can make bitcoin super-decentralized (smaller blocks) quickly as well, but inso-doing you sacrifice scale.

Fortunately, I believe the way things will play out for bitcoin is the best of the three possibilities. I believe we will see a scenario where we focus on scale and decentralization at the acceptable expense of time. I don’t know about you but I’m willing to wait on a sound solution… even if it takes some a couple more months, that’s all.


One thought on “The Bitcoin Triangle

  1. Hi Ryan,

    Somewhat nit-picky, but the scaling issue is one of increasing the transaction throughput rate, and not simply increasing the blocksize. Which explains, for what it is worth, why I am in favor of the Segregated Witness approach, which among other things, scales up the throughput rate without an an immediate increase in the actual blocksize.

    I suppose that the interior of your triangle needs to be “economics” because that is what binds it all together. Which includes the “transaction fee”, because that will hopefully adjust to keep all in balance…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s