Author: Adam Back 2015-06-30 19:54:47
Published on: 2015-06-30T19:54:47+00:00
The issue of block size and scaling to improve decentralization, privacy and throughput has been discussed by Bitcoin experts such as Greg Maxwell, Jeff Garzik and Gavin Andresen. While increasing block size is important, it needs to be done within tech limits, while pre-allocating some bandwidth to decentralization improvements. Miners also need to be considered in the block-size increase plan. It is suggested that the growth should scale more smoothly rather than creating unforeseen side-effects. The market and game theory can surprise you so it is better to have mutual control of the cap. Tests of achievable network bandwidth on a range of networks should be conducted for illustration purposes. Decentralization is key to Bitcoin's security model and alternative designs are more network efficient while achieving the same effective decentralization. Therefore, relying on lightning or a semi-centralized trade-off being in the side-chain model or similar is more appropriate for high scale. An experiment like that could run in parallel with lightning, maybe it could be done faster, or offer different trade-offs, so could be an interesting and useful thing to see work on. Another factor to consider is that if we can choose something conservative that has widespread support, it can be safer to do it with moderate lead time. Additionally, there should be a commitment to improving decentralization, and any proposal should be reasonably analyzed in terms of bandwidth assumptions and game-theory. It is suggested that BIPs need a security, privacy and decentralization/fungibility section. Finally, while increasing capacity along with hardware is a good idea, it is essential to bear in mind that core functionality must remain for Lightning and other scaling approaches to remain secure by using the Bitcoin as a secure anchor.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T01:50:11.964294+00:00