rich1.0npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwethttps://nostr.ae/npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwetnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-12-08 📝 Original message:On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 11:48 PM, Jonathan Toomim <j at toom.im> wrote: > I understood that SegWit would allow about 1.75 MB of data in the average > case while also allowing up to 4 MB of data in the worst case. This means > that the mining and block distribution network would need a larger safety > factor to deal with worst-case situations, right? If you want to make sure By contrast it does not reduce the safety factor for the UTXO set at all; which most hold as a much greater concern in general; and that isn't something you can say for a block size increase. With respect to witness safety factor; it's only needed in the case of strategic or malicious behavior by miners-- both concerns which several people promoting large block size increases have not only disregarded but portrayed as unrealistic fear-mongering. Are you concerned about it? In any case-- the other improvements described in my post give me reason to believe that risks created by that possibility will be addressable.