{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1fx98zxt3lzspjs5f4msr0fxysx5euucm29ghysryju7vpc9j0jzqtcl2d8","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1fx98zxt3lzspjs5f4msr0fxysx5euucm29ghysryju7vpc9j0jzqtcl2d8","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-08-28\n📝 Original message:On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 1:38 AM, Mark Friedenbach via bitcoin-dev\n\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e It is in their individual interests when the larger block that is allowed\n\u003e for them grants them more fees.\n\nI realize now that this is not what Greg Maxwell proposed (aka\nflexcap): this is just miner's voting on block size but paying with\nhigher difficulty when they vote for bigger blocks.\nAs I said several times in other places, miners should not decide on\nthe consensus rule to limit mining centralization.\nPeople keep talking about miners voting on the block size or\n\"softforking the size down if we went too far\". But what if the\nhashing majority is perfectly fine with the mining centralization at\nthat point in time?\nThen a softfork won't be useful and we're talking about an \"anti-miner\nfork\" (see https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/181/files#diff-e331b8631759a4ed6a4cfb4d10f473caR158\nand  https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/181/files#diff-e331b8631759a4ed6a4cfb4d10f473caR175\n).\n\nI believe miner's voting on the rule to limit mining centralization is\na terrible idea.\nIt sounds as bad as letting pharma companies write the regulations on\nnew drugs safety, letting big food chains deciding on minimum food\ncontrols or car manufacturers deciding on indirect taxes for fuel.\nThat's why I dislike both this proposal and BIP100."}