{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1s4lj77xuzcu7wy04afcr487f0r3za0f8n2775xrpkld2sv639mjqsd44kw","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1s4lj77xuzcu7wy04afcr487f0r3za0f8n2775xrpkld2sv639mjqsd44kw","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-06-22\n📝 Original message:On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 4:46 PM, Gavin Andresen \u003cgavinandresen at gmail.com\u003e\nwrote:\n\n\u003e Excellent point. That could only happen if activation happened on 11 Jan\n\u003e 2016; instead of complicating the code and spec with another condition, I\n\u003e think it would be better to specify that the activation date is the later\n\u003e of the miner supermajority and 11 Jan, with the first big block two weeks\n\u003e later.\n\u003e\n\n.... I take that back, I'm wrong and Tier is correct: if activation\nhappened right at midnight 11 Jan 2016 and the next block's timestamp was\nbefore midnight, that next block would just be limited to 1MB in size.\n\n-- \n--\nGavin Andresen\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150622/385adf94/attachment.html\u003e"}