Author: Tom Harding 2016-12-19 01:42:38
Published on: 2016-12-19T01:42:38+00:00
In a discussion on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, a user named James expressed support for the Block75 proposal, which would allow miners to determine the maximum block size. Another participant in the discussion replied, acknowledging that miners are the natural gatekeepers of the maximum block size but expressing concern about the linear growth proposed by Block75. They also noted that the proposal is sensitive to randomness in block timing and transaction rate, which could incentivize miners to manipulate their block content unnaturally. The participant suggested that Bitcoin Unlimited's EB/AD scheme, which recognizes implementation of the max blocksize by miners, may be superior as it expects forks of unpredictable length as network behavior evolves. They also mentioned BIP100, which recognizes miner implementation of the max blocksize but has a change support threshold and defines the timing of max blocksize increases.James had previously expressed confusion about concerns that miners might stuff blocks with insincere transactions to increase the block size, arguing that miners have no incentive to do so. He suggested that allowing miners to choose the block size would incentivize them to include as many legitimate transactions as possible while keeping the block small enough to propagate effectively. He argued that there were no strong arguments against this proposal and expressed trust in miners to act in their own best interests.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T20:52:01.166227+00:00