Author: Raystonn . 2015-06-08 22:01:34
Published on: 2015-06-08T22:01:34+00:00
In a discussion about the block size limit and the potential for spam attacks, Peter Todd explains that there will always be a block size limit due to the network's finite bandwidth limit. He notes that while bandwidth is unique to every individual, the block size limit applies to everyone and is necessary to prevent an attacker from flooding the network until consensus fails, rendering Bitcoin worthless and insecure. However, Raystonn argues that without a block size limit, the spam doesn't harm Bitcoin but rather enriches miners at the cost of spammers, which is an antifragile quality. In response, Peter Todd counters that without a block size limit, it would still be possible for an attacker to flood the network with transactions until bandwidth usage becomes so great that consensus fails. The worst an attacker can do with a block size limit in place is raise costs without harming security, but if the fees become high enough, real end-users may give up on Bitcoin as it becomes unusable. Ultimately, Todd emphasizes that there will always be a block size limit based on technological considerations.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T22:39:44.919091+00:00