rich1.0Tom Harding [ARCHIVE] (npub1ms…pmwjy)https://nostr.ae/npub1msef5qkfwz4t7qacwxz775wgdtlytph78g2g2z903x90874u263sypmwjynjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-07-30 📝 Original message:On 7/30/2015 11:14 AM, Jorge Timón wrote: > The blocksize limit (your "production quota") is necessary for > decentralization, not for having a functioning fee market. > If we can agree that hitting the limit will JUST cause higher fees and > not bitcoin to fail, puppies to die or the sky to turn purple I think > that's a great step forward in this debate. It's interesting how people see things differently. I think your first statement above represents a great step forward in the debate. Unlike Adam Back, you state that a block size limit is not necessary to create a functioning fee market. As to your second statement, unfortunately for immediate harmonious relations, I was merely separating out the elevated fee market concern, not at all saying it is the only or even the biggest concern with limited capacity. Alan Reiner, Ryan X. Charles and others have eloquently explained how restrictive a 1MB limit is, even with "layer 2". What's missing from the decentralization dialog is a quantitative measure of decentralization. Why not slam users with higher fees now, if we accept that they may be necessary someday? For the same reasons you don't ask a child, age 5, to work in a factory.