{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub17qxssk9sj2r7jswvh3y32e7vwz7mcckhz33gk9nurdmw0lhsfkgswupwet","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub17qxssk9sj2r7jswvh3y32e7vwz7mcckhz33gk9nurdmw0lhsfkgswupwet","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-08-28\n📝 Original message:This is the best proposal I've seen yet. Allow me to summarize:\n\n• It addresses the problem, in Jeff Garzik's BIP 100, of miners selling their block-size votes.\n• It addresses the problem, in Gavin Andresen's BIP 101, of blindly trying to predict future market needs versus future technological capacities.\n• It avoids a large step discontinuity in the block-size limit by starting with a 1-MB limit.\n• It throttles changes to ±10% every 2016 blocks.\n• It imposes a tangible cost (higher difficulty) on miners who vote to raise the block-size limit.\n• It avoids incentivizing miners to vote to lower the block-size limit.\n\nHowever, this proposal currently fails to answer a very important question:\n\n• What is the mechanism for activation of the new consensus rule? It is when a certain percentage of the blocks mined in a 2016-block retargeting period contain valid block-size votes?\n\n\nhttps://github.com/btcdrak/bips/blob/bip-cbbsra/bip-cbbrsa.mediawiki\n\n\nOn Friday, 28 August 2015, at 9:28 pm, Btc Drak via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e Pull request: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/187"}