{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1lhe3qfx2q5m7mq5d39waepf9lzhsy0cdey66svn63fyk6rt6n7ps7zg7ed","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1lhe3qfx2q5m7mq5d39waepf9lzhsy0cdey66svn63fyk6rt6n7ps7zg7ed","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-08-21\n📝 Original message:On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:55 AM, Yifu Guo via bitcoin-dev\n\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e I like the intend of this attempt to bring more clarity to the blocksize\n\u003e debate, however it would be more help to make this a information site about\n\u003e the current outstanding BIPs and summarize their differences rather than\n\u003e voting mechanism.\n\u003e  (ofcourse the author of the BIPs would \"vote\" for their own proposals.)\n\u003e\n\u003e It would be good to include supporting and counter statements regards to\n\u003e these BIPs on the site.\n\u003e in addition to highlight certain things like pools in china have voiced\n\u003e their opinion that increase should happen, and 8mb is something they are\n\u003e comfortable with, which is not directly related to a single BIP, but never\n\u003e the less relevant in this discussion.\n\nI was rather surprised by the tweet from AntPool[1] today saying that\nthey support big blocks and would be prepared to upgrade to XT. Pools\nhave stated that they are willing to increase to a maximum of 8MB, but\nupgrading to XT puts them on a schedule towards 8GB which is clearly\nnot what they have agreed to.\n\nDo you have any insights into what's going on there?\n\nAlso do you have any insight into what Chinese pools would accept as a\ncompromise in terms of raising the blocksize limit?\n\nDrak\n\n[1] https://twitter.com/JihanWu/status/633288343338381314"}