rich1.0npub1e46n428mcyfwznl7nlsf6d3s7rhlwm9x3cmkuqzt3emmdpadmkaqqjxmcuhttps://nostr.ae/npub1e46n428mcyfwznl7nlsf6d3s7rhlwm9x3cmkuqzt3emmdpadmkaqqjxmcunjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-05-07 📝 Original message:On 05/07/15 14:52, Gavin Andresen wrote: > For reference: the blog post that (re)-started this debate, and which > links to individual issues, is here: > http://gavinandresen.ninja/time-to-roll-out-bigger-blocks > > In it, I asked people to email me objections I might have missed. I > would still appreciate it if people do that; it is impossible to keep up > with this mailing list, /r/bitcoin posts and comments, and > #bitcoin-wizards and also have time to respond thoughtfully to the > objections raised. People have been sharing the same objections as on this list for months, I'm not sure what is new here. > I would very much like to find some concrete course of action that we > can come to consensus on. Some compromise so we can tell entrepreneurs > "THIS is how much transaction volume the main Bitcoin blockchain will be > able to support over the next eleven years." I think this is a huge issue. You've been wandering around telling people that the blocksize will increase soon for months, when there is very clearly no consensus that it should in the short-term future. The only answer to this that anyone with a clue should give is "it will very, very likely be able to support at least 1MB blocks roughly every 10 minutes on average for the next eleven years, and it seems likely that a block size increase of some form will happen at some point in the next eleven years", anything else is dishonest.