{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub10z4xjfgftd3fm9dfu7dw6mkemgyhxgumcmhd7yd0ggjq7rsaw4wqa3xfzw","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub10z4xjfgftd3fm9dfu7dw6mkemgyhxgumcmhd7yd0ggjq7rsaw4wqa3xfzw","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-08-10\n📝 Original message:Gavin,\nThey are not analogous.\n\nIncreasing performance and making other changes that will help allow\nscaling can be done while at small scale or large scale.\nDealing with full blocks and the resultant feedback effects is something\nthat can only be done when blocks are full.  It's just too complicated a\nproblem to solve without seeing the effects first hand, and unlike the\nblock size/scaling concerns, its binary, you're either in the situation\nwhere demands outgrows supply or you aren't.\n\nFee estimation is one example, I tried very hard to make fee estimation\nwork well when blocks started filling up but it was impossible to truly\ntest and in the small sample of full blocks we've gotten since the code\nwent live, many improvements made themselves obvious.  Expanding mempools\nis another issue that doesn't exist at all if supply \u003e demand.   Turns out\nto also be a difficult problem to solve.\n\nNevertheless, I mostly agree that these arguments shouldn't be the reason\nnot to expand block size, I think they are more just an example of how\nimmature all of this technology is, and we should be concentrating on\nimproving it before we're trying to scale it to world acceptance levels.\nThe saddest thing about this whole debate is how fundamental improvements\nto the science of cryptocurrencies (things like segregated witness and\nconfidential transactions) are just getting lost in the circus debate\naround trying to cram a few more users into the existing system sooner\nrather than later.\n\n\n\nOn Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Jorge Timón \u003cjtimon at jtimon.cc\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e On Aug 7, 2015 5:55 PM, \"Gavin Andresen\" \u003cgavinandresen at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e \u003e\n\u003e\u003e \u003e I think there are multiple reasons to raise the maximum block size, and\n\u003e\u003e yes, fear of Bad Things Happening as we run up against the 1MB limit is one\n\u003e\u003e of the reasons.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e What are the other reasons?\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e \u003e I take the opinion of smart engineers who actually do resource planning\n\u003e\u003e and have seen what happens when networks run out of capacity very seriously.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e When \"the network runs out of capacity\" (when we hit the limit) do we\n\u003e\u003e expect anything to happen apart from minimum market fees rising (above\n\u003e\u003e zero)?\n\u003e\u003e Obviously any consequences of fees rising are included in this concern.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e It is frustrating to answer questions that we answered months ago,\n\u003e especially when I linked to these in response to your recent \"increase\n\u003e advocates say that not increasing the max block size will KILL BITCOIN\"\n\u003e false claim:\n\u003e   http://gavinandresen.ninja/why-increasing-the-max-block-size-is-urgent\n\u003e   https://medium.com/@octskyward/crash-landing-f5cc19908e32\n\u003e\n\u003e Executive summary: when networks get over-saturated, they become\n\u003e unreliable.  Unreliable is bad.\n\u003e\n\u003e Unreliable and expensive is extra bad, and that's where we're headed\n\u003e without an increase to the max block size.\n\u003e\n\u003e RE: the recent thread about \"better deal with that type of thing now\n\u003e rather than later\" :  exactly the same argument can be made about changes\n\u003e needed to support a larger block size-- \"better to do that now than to do\n\u003e that later.\"  I don't think either of those arguments are very convincing.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e --\n\u003e --\n\u003e Gavin Andresen\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150810/e46ab2bb/attachment.html\u003e"}