📅 Original date posted:2015-08-28
📝 Original message:On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 12:35 AM, Chris Pacia via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> When discussing this with Matt Whitlock earlier we basically concluded the
> block size will never increase under this proposal do to a collective action
> problem. If a miner votes for an increase and nobody else does, the
> blocksize will not increase yet he will still have to pay the difficulty
> penalty.
>
> It may be in everyone's collective interest to raise the block size but not
> their individual interest.
It is clear from recent events that miners are willing to collaborate
together for the greater good of their industry. Miners have also
publicly shown support for raising the blocksize collaboratively.
Obviously, as transaction volume grows they want to collect as many
transaction fees as possible so if there isnt enough space in blocks,
they're going to vote for increases because it's in their collective
financial interests. The proposal specifically encourages
collaboration and hinders antisocial behaviour, and it specifically
encourages the blocksize to be raised according to demand without
neutering the fee market.
Btc Drak [ARCHIVE] /
npub1lh…zg7ed
2023-06-07 17:37:58
in reply to nevent1q…wks8
Author Public Key
npub1lhe3qfx2q5m7mq5d39waepf9lzhsy0cdey66svn63fyk6rt6n7ps7zg7edPublished at
2023-06-07 17:37:58Event JSON
{
"id": "0e0a468ce221c23da33e16d6c6b530839ebddb81a3a7b9cfe8e7c1b83f5e4588",
"pubkey": "fdf31024ca0537ed828d895ddc8525f8af023f0dc935a8327a8a496d0d7a9f83",
"created_at": 1686159478,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"89feefa8fe3dbd95b7d3a6c8b355b09f064e01d014925a52bfb3842ed0275076",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"8130eed31472667843dc2b7c3d6a0e66c1e92b071c3ef4e9e9ac0ba55e8a4195",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"b61e2e7ccbf4abd7f49715c62f4ac7a93cbdd5ead0316279c5f5fe9b18dd0aaa"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-08-28\n📝 Original message:On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 12:35 AM, Chris Pacia via bitcoin-dev\n\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e When discussing this with Matt Whitlock earlier we basically concluded the\n\u003e block size will never increase under this proposal do to a collective action\n\u003e problem. If a miner votes for an increase and nobody else does, the\n\u003e blocksize will not increase yet he will still have to pay the difficulty\n\u003e penalty.\n\u003e\n\u003e It may be in everyone's collective interest to raise the block size but not\n\u003e their individual interest.\n\nIt is clear from recent events that miners are willing to collaborate\ntogether for the greater good of their industry. Miners have also\npublicly shown support for raising the blocksize collaboratively.\n\nObviously, as transaction volume grows they want to collect as many\ntransaction fees as possible so if there isnt enough space in blocks,\nthey're going to vote for increases because it's in their collective\nfinancial interests. The proposal specifically encourages\ncollaboration and hinders antisocial behaviour, and it specifically\nencourages the blocksize to be raised according to demand without\nneutering the fee market.",
"sig": "d1ffa3a06ea2dafe47f9c88cbd25c9ac37163d46e9745d80db26561690ffb1245a21c8ad9dc372e7b1136e4f4377e26c737e8e9b7daa3b13bfcb225de9350de2"
}