Author: Adam Back 2015-06-14 21:23:55
Published on: 2015-06-14T21:23:55+00:00
The author, Adam, shares his thoughts on Jeff Garzik's outline draft BIP 100 and suggests that discussions should be centralized rather than scattered. He provides a link to the latest draft and notes that it may have changed since the original. Adam proposes three changes to the original proposal: a hard cap, a growth limiter, and not giving miners a vote with no costs to cast. He believes Greg Maxwell's difficulty adjust is better as it puts quadratic cost via higher difficulty for miners to vote to increase block-size.Adam mentions that Bitcoin will have to involve layering models that uplift security to higher layers and smart-contracts even, with protocols that improve the algorithmic complexity beyond O(n^2) in users, like lightning. However, he expresses concern over few in the industry taking development initiatives or integrating a library. He suggests exposing companies to the back-pressure actually implied by an O(n^2) scaling protocol rather than immediately increasing the block-size to levels that are dangerous for decentralization security. In conclusion, Adam stresses the importance of avoiding interventionist subsidies to save companies from having to do basic integration work and preventing the whole saga repeating in a few years, when no algorithmic progress has been made and even more protocol inertia has set in. He provides links to the original proposal comments on Reddit, flexcap proposal by Greg Maxwell, and growth limited proposal for flexcap by Greg Maxwell.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T23:07:50.646286+00:00