Pieter Wuille [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2015-06-23 📝 Original message:On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at ...

📅 Original date posted:2015-06-23
📝 Original message:On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:12 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Peter Todd <pete at petertodd.org> wrote:
>
>> Wladimir noted that 'The original presented intention of block size
>> increase was a one-time "scaling" to grant time for more decentralizing
>> solutions to develop'
>>
>> Comments?
>>
>
> Consensus is that this process is too painful to go through once a year.
> I agree.
>

If you believe we will need to go through this process once a year, we are
not talking about a one-time scaling to grant time for more decentralizing
solutions. It means you think we should keep scaling. I don't disagree
there - as long as we're talking about scaling as availability of
bandwidth, storage and processing power increase, there is no reason
Bitcoin's blockchain can't grow proportionally.

However, an initial bump 8 MB and the growth rate afterwards seem more like
a no-effectively-limit-ever to me.

I fear that the wish of not wanting to deal with - admittedly - a very hard
problem, resulted here in throwing away several protections we currently
have. And yes, I know you believe 8 MB won't be created immediately. I
truly, honestly, do not think so either. But I prefer a system where I
don't need to rely on anyone's guesses for the future.

--
Pieter
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150623/a2560dc8/attachment.html>;