đź“… Original date posted:2013-02-13
đź“ť Original message:On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 6:58 AM, Raph Frank <raphfrk at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Bitcoin is not a democracy— it quite intentionally uses the consensus
>> mechanism _only_ the one thing that nodes can not autonomously and
>> interdependently validate (the ordering of transactions).
> So, how is max block size to be decided then?
In one sense it already is decided— there is a protocol rule
implementing a hard maximum, and soft rules for lower targets. If
it's to be changed it would only be by it being obvious to almost
everyone that it should _and_ must be. Since, in the long run,
Bitcoin can't meet its security and decenteralization promises without
blockspace scarcity to drive non-trivial fees and without scaling
limits to keep it decenteralized— it's not a change that could be made
more lightly than changing the supply of coin.
I hope that should it become necessary to do so that correct path will
be obvious to everyone, otherwise there is a grave risk of undermining
the justification for the confidence in the immutability of any of the
rules of the system.
Gregory Maxwell [ARCHIVE] /
npub1f2…crwet
2023-06-07 11:32:15
in reply to nevent1q…yqw0
Author Public Key
npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwetSeen on
wss://relay.nostr.bandPublished at
2023-06-07 11:32:15Event JSON
{
"id": "85627235c772aaf0c4f2dc420604592da348ae0bc48d5f093876ce60d2bbebf7",
"pubkey": "4aa6cf9aa5c8e98f401dac603c6a10207509b6a07317676e9d6615f3d7103d73",
"created_at": 1686137535,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"2e561ad47e92fd0bdf1706fe9a8ca4496d0e4a334280ca5b47233a968945935f",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"3dc0e6b2f9d2d209adab7882d73eef57031c6bbbb22d33a91af7107242f9f3bd",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"85b4e94c93847b6f442db74e050fbcd1f417d8832e260879185650977619c50e"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2013-02-13\n📝 Original message:On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 6:58 AM, Raph Frank \u003craphfrk at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e Bitcoin is not a democracy— it quite intentionally uses the consensus\n\u003e\u003e mechanism _only_ the one thing that nodes can not autonomously and\n\u003e\u003e interdependently validate (the ordering of transactions).\n\u003e So, how is max block size to be decided then?\n\nIn one sense it already is decided— there is a protocol rule\nimplementing a hard maximum, and soft rules for lower targets. If\nit's to be changed it would only be by it being obvious to almost\neveryone that it should _and_ must be. Since, in the long run,\nBitcoin can't meet its security and decenteralization promises without\nblockspace scarcity to drive non-trivial fees and without scaling\nlimits to keep it decenteralized— it's not a change that could be made\nmore lightly than changing the supply of coin.\n\nI hope that should it become necessary to do so that correct path will\nbe obvious to everyone, otherwise there is a grave risk of undermining\nthe justification for the confidence in the immutability of any of the\nrules of the system.",
"sig": "e847cd15b05459417b74bd2c293c4a3d90135b6987fd983e81cf129be38afbcca8b7d37d59ee49ca2800c94b2767caca3817873f1630795d687c368b28e71dbc"
}