Author: Ángel José Riesgo 2015-06-01 16:06:14
Published on: 2015-06-01T16:06:14+00:00
The author of this email expresses their opinion on the ongoing debate regarding the block size limit in Bitcoin. They agree with Oliver Egginger's suggestion to keep the numbers as powers of 2 rather than introducing arbitrary numbers, which would make it easier to count the level of support for each discrete level. The author believes that a temporary increase to a value like 8 or 16 would buy time for both the user base to continue growing and for newer technologies like the lightning network to be developed and tested. Personally, the author wants Bitcoin to become a payment network accessible to people all over the world. They do not believe in the idea that Bitcoin can exist as just a form of digital gold for a geeky financial elite. They also do not believe that the scarcity of block space is an economic fundamental of Bitcoin. The author's sympathies lie with those who want to remove the maximum block size cap, as this was the original idea of Bitcoin. However, they also believe that a consensus at this point would be much better than a head-on confrontation between two incompatible pieces of software. The author suggests accepting a consensus that raises the hard-coded limit to a value like 8MB as a compromise that should be palatable to everyone. While this may not be what staunch supporters of the 1MB limit want, it is not what the author and others want either. They believe finding common ground is key. The author acknowledges that a compromise based on a one-off maximum-size increase is not a solution they like, but it could be a reasonable compromise if people like Greg Maxwell or Pieter Wuille find a new maximum-size cap acceptable. This would let the Bitcoin environment react and see how it handles the situation, providing a better understanding of the implications for future discussions.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T21:54:27.733602+00:00