Author: jl2012 at xbt.hk 2015-08-30 17:13:54
Published on: 2015-08-30T17:13:54+00:00
In a bitcoin-dev forum post, Jorge Timon discussed the recent block size debate. He questioned the need for a lower moving size maximum and suggested that if 8 MB is safe for mining centralisation, then it should be immediately adopted. He proposed that once objective tools become available for determining a mining-centralisation-safe block size, blocks could periodically adapt to better technology or lower mining centralisation. Timon also suggested that miners may want to limit the block size for various reasons and that such limiting through a soft fork or 51% attack is violent. Instead, he proposed that miners should be allowed to vote for a lower limit within a range. If responsible miners keep the limit as low as possible until legitimate tx volume catches up, even in the worst case, the block size will remain mining-centralisation-safe. The upper limit may increase linearly, if not exponentially, until a better long-term solution is found. Timon agreed with a fellow member that there was no actual urgency at the moment but argued that we have already debated for five years, so why not have another five years of debate plus five years of deployment delay? He warned that if Bitcoin Core stuck to 1MB for ten years, a schism fork would occur, and Bitcoin Core would be abandoned by the economic majority.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T20:54:29.565819+00:00