📅 Original date posted:2015-09-08
📝 Original message:This is true, but miners already control block size through soft caps.
Miners are fully capable of producing smaller blocks regardless of the max
block limit, with or without collusion. Arguably, there is no need to ever
reduce the max block size unless technology advances for some reason
reverse course - aka, WW3 takes a toll on the internet and the average
bandwidth available halves. The likelihood of significant technology
contraction in the near future seems rather unlikely and is more broadly
problematic for society than bitcoin specifically.
The only reason for reducing the max block limit other than technology
availability is if you think that this is what will produce the fee market,
which is back to an economic discussion - not a technology scaling
discussion.
On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 4:49 AM, Btc Drak via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > but allow meaningful relief to transaction volume pressure in response
> to true market demand
>
> If blocksize can only increase then it's like a market that only goes
> up which is unrealistic. Transaction will volume ebb and flow
> significantly. Some people have been looking at transaction volume
> charts over time and all they can see is an exponential curve which
> they think will go on forever, yet nothing goes up forever and it will
> go through significant trend cycles (like everything does). If you
> dont want to hurt the fee market, the blocksize has to be elastic and
> allow contraction as well as expansion.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150908/a1ce797b/attachment.html>;
Ivan Brightly [ARCHIVE] /
npub1hn…4p3n4
2023-06-07 17:39:48
in reply to nevent1q…hjjg
Author Public Key
npub1hn9vjtvdlnllrltesscgtnplu0ev2sreey03kjh3k07zmvd9zgus24p3n4Published at
2023-06-07 17:39:48Event JSON
{
"id": "097f0f514ba8653585db3fce40e0bc07753c0e35ef347235b28b4f53464e6ad0",
"pubkey": "bccac92d8dfcfff1fd79843085cc3fe3f2c54079c91f1b4af1b3fc2db1a51239",
"created_at": 1686159588,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"5db98b1bb8a695c5ded066d359dd1edd37b2315bd6a400566e7871f0b2f043bb",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"cd1a84555c103fdd1799a9f84b46621320a50ceab54895990a95a97d607c09cb",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"fdf31024ca0537ed828d895ddc8525f8af023f0dc935a8327a8a496d0d7a9f83"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-09-08\n📝 Original message:This is true, but miners already control block size through soft caps.\nMiners are fully capable of producing smaller blocks regardless of the max\nblock limit, with or without collusion. Arguably, there is no need to ever\nreduce the max block size unless technology advances for some reason\nreverse course - aka, WW3 takes a toll on the internet and the average\nbandwidth available halves. The likelihood of significant technology\ncontraction in the near future seems rather unlikely and is more broadly\nproblematic for society than bitcoin specifically.\n\nThe only reason for reducing the max block limit other than technology\navailability is if you think that this is what will produce the fee market,\nwhich is back to an economic discussion - not a technology scaling\ndiscussion.\n\nOn Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 4:49 AM, Btc Drak via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e \u003e but allow meaningful relief to transaction volume pressure in response\n\u003e to true market demand\n\u003e\n\u003e If blocksize can only increase then it's like a market that only goes\n\u003e up which is unrealistic. Transaction will volume ebb and flow\n\u003e significantly. Some people have been looking at transaction volume\n\u003e charts over time and all they can see is an exponential curve which\n\u003e they think will go on forever, yet nothing goes up forever and it will\n\u003e go through significant trend cycles (like everything does). If you\n\u003e dont want to hurt the fee market, the blocksize has to be elastic and\n\u003e allow contraction as well as expansion.\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150908/a1ce797b/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "997ca6fac84a702a8a59293789196c51158ebdddb1bd0258d1a99f88ca3deeb988b90417ee69053f59391ec4c4584ed9cb8d49b3c04bc921f8f3327e210d6bc0"
}