Published on: 2015-08-10T22:31:33+00:00
In an email exchange on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, Sergio Demian Lerner proposed a one-time hard fork to either double the block size or reduce the block rate to half, resulting in average 5-minute blocks. Lerner argued that reducing the block interval would save real time and address the issue of long waiting periods for confirmations. However, another member, Pieter, disagreed, stating that reducing the interblock time would double propagation delay problems and have a stronger impact on mining centralization than block size. He also criticized SPV mining and its implications for security assumptions. The email also discussed the possibility of increasing the target block creation rate to reduce the fundamental mismatch between transaction creation and block discovery. Dave Hudson's arguments supported this idea, suggesting that it could reduce miner variance and potentially aid in decentralization. However, the author questioned why this idea did not gain more traction despite its logical basis. Links to original messages, Twitter posts, and analyses were provided.Another topic of discussion was the importance of reducing payment times within the minute scale. Sergio Lerner suggested working on payment channel networks to improve Bitcoin's payment time, citing examples like paying for parking where seconds matter. Multisignature notaries were proposed as a means of ensuring double-spend protection from publication to the first block confirmation.The issue of inter-block times and their impact on the Bitcoin network was further explored. The lightning network and green address-style payment escrow were mentioned as potential solutions to eliminate the need for short inter-block times. However, risks such as channel exhaustion and larger SPV proofs needed to be considered. The significance of seconds as a time scale was emphasized, highlighting the need for some variant of multisignature notaries.In conversations with Mark and Natanael, Sergio Demian Lerner discussed the importance of response time in Bitcoin transactions. Lerner acknowledged that even a few minutes could make a difference in completing a transaction, but emphasized that seconds were what truly mattered. Multisignature notaries like Greenaddress.it and the lightning network were suggested as means of ensuring double-spend protection.In another exchange with Mark Friedenbach, the benefits and drawbacks of doubling the block size or reducing the block rate were debated. Lerner argued that most users would prefer reducing the block interval to save real time, while Friedenbach highlighted the costs to SPV proofs and mining centralization associated with halving the block interval. The question was raised as to why discussions often focused on doubling the block size rather than reducing the block interval.Overall, the context delves into various perspectives on inter-block times, block size adjustments, SPV mining, and the importance of response time in Bitcoin transactions. Different viewpoints were presented, discussing the potential benefits and concerns associated with different proposals.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T15:03:35.319157+00:00