Author: Luke Dashjr 2015-11-13 19:37:02
Published on: 2015-11-13T19:37:02+00:00
Erik, a bitcoin developer, expressed concerns about the BIP proposals concerning the maximum block size in Bitcoin. He believes that if BIP101 is fully implemented, it will centralize Bitcoin, as it will outperform consumer hardware eventually. Therefore, he proposed a different approach to address this issue. However, another developer, Luke, pointed out that Erik did not consider newer BIPs, such as BIP103, and advised him to work with John Sacco, who recently posted a draft BIP similar to Erik's proposal. Luke also criticized Erik's proposal, stating that it was unnecessarily complicated and underspecified. Luke questioned how the 2^(1/2) block size limit would actually work and suggested it might produce rounding errors in different implementations. Moreover, Luke believed that the miner voting process was pointless since miners could already softfork lower limits. Instead, he suggested expressing the current possibility so that full nodes can enforce it, but this would be done through an unlimited simple-majority vote to reduce the limit. Luke recommended separating this from the hardfork BIP as it is fairly tangent to it.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T01:08:58.753390+00:00