techfeudalist on Nostr: To me, dynamic block sizes sounds like a way to make blocks bigger and subject to ...
To me, dynamic block sizes sounds like a way to make blocks bigger and subject to political whim.
My view is that we should maximize decentralization of the main L1 to maximize bitcoin’s resistance to state attack. Generally speaking, the larger the blockchain, the fewer the number of nodes that can run it.
Does that mean we should shrink the blocks to the size of one transaction? No. But if people are putting large volumes of non-financial data in the blockchain, then maybe the block size is too big.
My view is that the main L1 should serve the global role analogous to FedWire today. A global settlement system for large transactions. All smaller transactions should move to L2s and L3s.
My view is that we should maximize decentralization of the main L1 to maximize bitcoin’s resistance to state attack. Generally speaking, the larger the blockchain, the fewer the number of nodes that can run it.
Does that mean we should shrink the blocks to the size of one transaction? No. But if people are putting large volumes of non-financial data in the blockchain, then maybe the block size is too big.
My view is that the main L1 should serve the global role analogous to FedWire today. A global settlement system for large transactions. All smaller transactions should move to L2s and L3s.