š
Original date posted:2015-06-27
š Original message:On 6/27/2015 at 1:04 PM, "Wladimir J. van der Laan" <laanwj at gmail.com> wrote:
> Then you won't risk the other 'passengers' who don't consent to it.
But you can look at it the other way: what about risking the 'passengers' when the plane suddenly doesn't fly anymore?
Increasing block limit increases the risk of centralization, but it also keeps the current status quo of blocks not being filled, rather then risking an unknown option of hitting the limit hard.
>... and pretending is only going to cause damage by creating false expectations, or eventually even double-spending possibility because of conflicting forks.
So you personally see the risks of a hard-fork outweigh the risks of not increasing the block size.
It's a valid opinion, but you probably don't want to decide the fate of Bitcoin single-handedly by denying any change, which is not a technical emergency.
That's why there should be a mechanism where the whole community can vote. Lacking that, that's what Gavin and Mike are doing: creating their own mechanism for consensus changes.
NxtChg [ARCHIVE] /
npub1ywā¦z8l47
2023-06-07 15:40:39
in reply to nevent1qā¦5sp2
Author Public Key
npub1yw9mz9gsrukq2seu9w9wljqw6k62l8fllpz8fzze673znzc3ddysaz8l47Published at
2023-06-07 15:40:39Event JSON
{
"id": "87ec76a5805601c4a48532942ed33570ea595e7b56c9ac71b843147ebebf1eca",
"pubkey": "238bb115101f2c05433c2b8aefc80ed5b4af9d3ff844748859d7a2298b116b49",
"created_at": 1686152439,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"6b97b8772e4c3c0f5eb751746063b4217197a3eb7cab2fa3b16264082ad573c4",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"eb4eb8131e29ff817f6f4dbbebc129039ab8fb58e06586280b41e1996908e7ee",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"5c0b7fca51fd4830b4d9f840de063faebeeabd3bb5dd118de9cdf50a6feaaf98"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2015-06-27\nš Original message:On 6/27/2015 at 1:04 PM, \"Wladimir J. van der Laan\" \u003claanwj at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e Then you won't risk the other 'passengers' who don't consent to it.\n\nBut you can look at it the other way: what about risking the 'passengers' when the plane suddenly doesn't fly anymore? \n\nIncreasing block limit increases the risk of centralization, but it also keeps the current status quo of blocks not being filled, rather then risking an unknown option of hitting the limit hard.\n \n\n\u003e... and pretending is only going to cause damage by creating false expectations, or eventually even double-spending possibility because of conflicting forks.\n\nSo you personally see the risks of a hard-fork outweigh the risks of not increasing the block size.\n\nIt's a valid opinion, but you probably don't want to decide the fate of Bitcoin single-handedly by denying any change, which is not a technical emergency.\n\nThat's why there should be a mechanism where the whole community can vote. Lacking that, that's what Gavin and Mike are doing: creating their own mechanism for consensus changes.",
"sig": "c6c155ef3f373cfbedcea20f2dca366286c55a2c7c199accf6e9b640ba091ed124b804dac3502a1579ccacbea2e69cc8e5b18c955dcb06667e4ed400495afaa2"
}