yes, the transaction is real slow. the size of the block should be increased ASAP

This is what happens when people with zero understanding of the protocol starts talking about it. If you half block generation time, u'll increase the orphan rate, reduce block halving time and ultimately end up with an alt coin.

Bit of exaggeration, but yes, in general shorter block times are considered less secure. But, as proved by multiple altcoins, it can work quite well. There's nothing magical about "10 minutes" (afaik).

@OP - some old discussion which you might find useful: https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/232297.msg2446457#msg2446457

Here is a quote by Aaron van Wirdum in the Bitcoin magazine

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/everything-need-know-proposed-changes-bitcoin-block-size-cap-1440204699

It seems that the 10 minute interval was chosen based on the computing and bandwidth resources available when Satoshi proposed Bitcoin. (rather like the blocksize). Now that technology has moved on, isn't it time to review the block interval?

That is not how it works. If over a period of 2016 blocks the average block time is more than 10 minutes then the difficulty will be adjusted to bring the average back to 10 minutes.  The protocol does not think "oh, those 6 blocks were a bit slow, we'd better speed up for a few hours" instead it adjusts in quite long periods. Natural variation means that some blocks will be slower and some will be shorter - adjusting difficulty every 2016 blocks means that a lot of that variability is ironed out naturally.

Even if you changed to 5 minute blocks you would still get variability and some blocks would still be more than 10 minutes - what would you want to do then?

Then you will also understand that "occasionally" having 5 minute blocks is much different from "always" having 5 minute blocks (on average of course).

Rather than just saying "change this, it'll be OK" why don't you:

A) analyse the current orphans and cross-reference to the actual block generation times at the point the orphan occurred and

B) show how you will maintain security given a 5 minute block interval (where security is based on the principle of proof of work)

First why do you say the average is now 20 minutes? Average block time is 10 minutes, and since you won't normally submit a transaction immediately after a block is solved, your average "wait" time for a confirm should be more like 5 minutes.

Secondly if the block time is "really" a commercial issue then why isn't Litecoin with 5 minute blocks the coin of choice for commercial users?  There is a solution right there, ready to be used.

You mean copy alts like Doge and ETH? 

Let me clarify one thing. I believe in Bitcoin, and I think it will become the Gold standard of Crypto-currencies. To get there, it need an image enhancement, and to get out of the playground where people throw their toys out if they can't get their way, It also needs faster transaction confirmations and a planned scalability. Putting all your chips on a 2Mb dice roll, isn't the way forward. There are a lot of blocksize options that have been suggested - reduce it, increase it by factors between 1.5 and 64. Make it variable dependant on the transaction pool, vary it based on the hash rate. My belief is that a 512k size is optimum, but that will need to be coupled with a number of other changes. I'm happy to change my opinion if somebody can come up with some reasoned logic. Just telling me that I know nothing, and should keep quiet, just makes me think I am right and the person criticising me knows less than I do.

I think you're having a bit of trouble with the math.

0 confirmations = 0 blocks = instant
1 confirmation = 1 block = 10 minute average
2 confirmations = 2 blocks = 20 minutes average


If you are buying 5 BTC or a car, then you can wait 10 minutes for the confirmation if you are worried about it (or use a trusted service such as Coinbase that allows immediate transfer of funds off-chain).


The average is only 10 minutes (not 20 minutes) for 1 confirmation.  The majority of confirmations occur in less than 8 minutes.


With a 10 minute average time between blocks, some blocks will take much longer, and many blocks (more than 50%) will take less than 10 minutes.  There will even occasionally be blocks that occur at nearly the exact same time (which results in an orphan block).

With a 5 minute averagetime between blocks, some blocks will still take much longer, and many blocks (more than 50%) will take less than 5 minutes.  There will be almost twice as many blocks that occur at nearly the exact same time (which results in almost double the number of orphan blocks).

So, you haven't solved the problem of long periods occasionally occurring between blocks at all, but you have increased the number of orphan blocks significantly.  Are you saying that there are times when someone would be happy to wait nearly 5 minutes for a confirmation, but that nearly 10 minutes would be so much longer that it would change their mind?