rich1.0npub1a3zpmn53lhv8jv7vjg3daletu2e6e9ce88737ga2r7dkr7yc7dss7r6s85https://nostr.ae/npub1a3zpmn53lhv8jv7vjg3daletu2e6e9ce88737ga2r7dkr7yc7dss7r6s85njumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-08-07 📝 Original message:That's a good question. An argument has been put forward that a larger block size would reduce the security of the network, so does the converse hold? On 08/07/2015 11:17 AM, jl2012 via bitcoin-dev wrote: > What if we reduce the block size to 0.125MB? That will allow 0.375tx/s. > If 3->24 sounds "almost the same", 3->0.375 also sounds almost the same. > We will have 50000 full nodes, instead of 5000, since it is so > affordable to run a full node. > > If 0.125MB sounds too extreme, what about 0.5/0.7/0.9MB? Are we going to > have more full nodes? > > No, I'm not trolling. I really want someone to tell me why we > should/shouldn't reduce the block size. Are we going to have more or > less full nodes if we reduce the block size? > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev