In the world of Cryptocurrency and Blockchain, there is a commonly discussed issue referred to as the Blockchain Trilemma, which refers to the challenge of finding a balance between Scalability, Decentralization, and Security. However, this issue is often exaggerated and it is possible to have a fast blockchain that is both decentralized and secure. Many existing blockchains prove this to be true, at least in their early stages.

One of the main issues that needs to be considered, especially for long-running blockchains, is storage. Nodes that support a blockchain usually store the entire blockchain in their memory, but as the blockchain grows, it becomes increasingly difficult for nodes to store all of it. This can be solved through innovation, such as splitting the storage among nodes or having a few supercomputer-run nodes store the full chain.

For most blockchains, this is not yet a problem, as long as they maintain a good balance and do not overdo the number of transactions they can handle. However, it highlights the need to be mindful of the speed of transactions and not waste node storage capacity.

A chain may also be considered stronger if it utilizes its full capacity. A fast and cheap chain has a competitive advantage, but it is wasteful to allow for greater transaction capacity than what is actually needed. Capacity should grow if the need arises, but if not, it is better to conserve storage capacity and not make things unnecessarily complex for nodes.

Fusion currently has a block time of 13.1 seconds and a block gas limit of 30 million units. If the need arises, Fusion nodes can adjust the block time, increase block capacity, and minimize the need to store the full chain, thereby increasing its transaction capacity. However, changing any of these factors affects the tokenomics of staking, so it should not be done recklessly.

Fusion currently has a daily transaction range of 300,000 to 800,000, and there is no urgency to increase capacity unless we see a significant increase in transactions or gas costs. Fusion is also interoperable with over 40 other blockchains, some of which have high transaction capacity, so there is already the capability to off-load transactions to these chains.

​

Also not to be dismissed is the question of tokenomic balance when it comes to recycling gas as rewards.

​

In its current state gas is rather irrelevant (as in nearly free, which logically makes it highly competitive) on the Fusion blockchain. A majority of txs, are either FREE claims or swaps/functions of Chainge. Neither of which currently costs much gas (though Chainge does pay a little extra for its txs), very much in contrast to the same actions on Ethereum, which are quite costly. 

​

But for the future of time value , it's actually important for the gas price to become higher (or at least the total amount of gas used per block. Ideally that should be able to measure up to 2.5 FSN [the initial block reward from 2019], for a predictable time value of FSN to exist).

​

This is important, because the easier this is to determine or at least guess, the easier it is to trade with TL assets (or TF-FSN) spanning more vast periods of time.

​

Some things to consider, when trying to estimate the future potential of gas rewards:

 

1. Currently Fusion is doing around 200 txs/block, with blocks seeming to be tough to fill with more than 400 txs.

 

2. Gas cost/tx is to a large extent determined by supply and demand.

 

If current network use (1) goes up 2x (so we have a situation of around 400 tx/block), we will to an extent begin to see the effects of 2, which will cause gas price to increase for regular txs. And that is probably what we need if the gas use/block is to become significant. 

​

Until this happens there's litle reason to worry about scaling at all. Because healthy tokenomics around node validation should take priority until people begin complaining about costly transactions.

 

In conclusion, while scalability is an important factor to consider, it is important to balance it and to not waste storage capacity or make things unnecessarily complex. As the need arises, capacity can be increased, but it should be done mindfully and in consideration of tokenomics and sustainability. The true Trilemma is more about Cost/Storage/Scalability than Security/Decentralization/Scalability,

​

​

​

​