DireMunchkin on Nostr: Are you conservative about changes, or do you want to eff with the block size limit? ...
Are you conservative about changes, or do you want to eff with the block size limit? I have a lot of sympathy for ossification, but if you believe that you should keep the current block size. Because we know Bitcoin works today, and you shouldn't fix what isn't broken. All updates to consensus code are risky, and should be avoided as long as possible.
I'm not a core dev, so take it for what it's worth, but altering the block size feels 10x more reckless than even the most risky soft forks being talked about now (I.E drivechains, OP_CAT et cetera). That alters the entire economics around using L1 for miners, hodlers and everyone else. Nobody could possibly predict all the consequences of doing that ahead of time. Which IMO means you shouldn't do it.
I'm not a core dev, so take it for what it's worth, but altering the block size feels 10x more reckless than even the most risky soft forks being talked about now (I.E drivechains, OP_CAT et cetera). That alters the entire economics around using L1 for miners, hodlers and everyone else. Nobody could possibly predict all the consequences of doing that ahead of time. Which IMO means you shouldn't do it.