📅 Original date posted:2017-03-28
📝 Original message:Thank you for the proposal Wang Chung!
It is clear that, spam aside, blocks are getting full and we need increase
them soon. What I don't like about your proposal is it forces all node
operators to implicitly accept larger blocks in 2020, even maybe against
their will. 32 MB blocks might result in a loss of decentralization, and it
might be too difficult to coordinate for small blocks before it's too late.
So I think Core can't decide on hard forks like this. It must be left up to
the users. I think only choice is for Core to add a run-time option to
allow node operators to increase block size limit, so that this very
controversial decision is not coming from Core. It must come from the
community.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170328/df218008/attachment-0001.html>;
Paul Iverson [ARCHIVE] /
npub1tt…0gtzm
2023-06-07 17:58:13
in reply to nevent1q…65vn
Author Public Key
npub1ttkq82l7hflyj6r3vxuw9c9pu7ce0fmaky98x3awz3cqpk7t5l0sz0gtzmSeen on
wss://relay.nostr.bandPublished at
2023-06-07 17:58:13Event JSON
{
"id": "1b3d788670f370fb50c625cd3ecacf798250b64c402217291308bd3b92f1f638",
"pubkey": "5aec03abfeba7e49687161b8e2e0a1e7b197a77db10a7347ae147000dbcba7df",
"created_at": 1686160693,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"f66fb8ea0b053d3b896ce377aea38775ffc7975376c3ee96291861cf920b456b",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"699c4186dc89c3f842e4e530e71443262552dd0863da8ee272abde4a58900cb2",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"a2711d6616d348a3542bb2a791a9e51fcbc7b7d1d20652e5abe16d3e179321df"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-03-28\n📝 Original message:Thank you for the proposal Wang Chung!\n\nIt is clear that, spam aside, blocks are getting full and we need increase\nthem soon. What I don't like about your proposal is it forces all node\noperators to implicitly accept larger blocks in 2020, even maybe against\ntheir will. 32 MB blocks might result in a loss of decentralization, and it\nmight be too difficult to coordinate for small blocks before it's too late.\n\n\nSo I think Core can't decide on hard forks like this. It must be left up to\nthe users. I think only choice is for Core to add a run-time option to\nallow node operators to increase block size limit, so that this very\ncontroversial decision is not coming from Core. It must come from the\ncommunity.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170328/df218008/attachment-0001.html\u003e",
"sig": "4691e7daea35cc9ce03619e5db2a8a633b8693b0527e64d34436b5097ffaa89fd3d6a03fd9d0e889e8008c3df8f37cc66f87e613bdc7f9f4f5867e02708a1310"
}