rich1.0npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwethttps://nostr.ae/npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwetnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2012-09-10 📝 Original message:On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Matt Corallo <bitcoin-list at bluematt.me> wrote: > It seems to me the whole idea of segmenting blocks would add very little > (to nothing) with any sane block size. Sure, if a block were to be > 10GB, it may make sense. However, even in that case, it would be easier As you know there is a hard protocol limit of 1MB. If you're going to talk about doing that you are screwing with the core economic promises of the system. (in particular, removing the cap eliminates the only armwave we have for long term security). But in any case, removing it requires a complete and totally incompatible hardfork, and at that point you can do whatever you want with the protocol. Changing how blocks are fetched is almost incidental to the number of other things that would be changed. I don't think it makes sense to design for that especially when something far simpler (as you pointed out) is prudent for the design of bitcoin.