Update . to , for consistency

01_introduction.asciidoc

@@ -19,12 +19,12 @@ Because blockchains are gossip protocols, each node is required to know and vali
 [NOTE]
 ====
 The side effects of increasing the block size or the decreasing the block time with respect to centralization of the network are severe as a few calculations with the numbers show. 
-Let us assume the usage of Bitcoin grows so that the network has to process 40.000 transactions per second.
+Let us assume the usage of Bitcoin grows so that the network has to process 40,000 transactions per second.
 Assuming 250 Bytes on average per transaction this would result in a data stream of 10 Megabyte per second or 80 Mbit/s just to be able to receive all the transactions.
 This does not include the traffic overhead of forwarding the transaction information to other peers.
 While single hosts on the internet could handle such a load of traffic our current internet would not be able to support this traffic for a large fraction of hosts.
-Also storing this information locally would result in 864000 Megabyte per day. This is roughly 1 Terabyte of data or the size of a hard drive.
-While verifying 40.000 ECDSA signatures per second seems barely feasible (c.f.: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/95339/how-many-bitcoin-transactions-can-be-verified-per-second) nodes could hardly catch up initial sync of the blockchain. 
+Also storing this information locally would result in 864,000 Megabyte per day. This is roughly 1 Terabyte of data or the size of a hard drive.
+While verifying 40,000 ECDSA signatures per second seems barely feasible (c.f.: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/95339/how-many-bitcoin-transactions-can-be-verified-per-second) nodes could hardly catch up initial sync of the blockchain. 
 ====
 
 But what if each node wasn't required to know and validate every single transaction? What if there was a way to have scalable off-chain transactions, without losing the security of the Bitcoin network?