rich1.0npub13rv3raner7hu6npy7vxxvdswdapae65pnw8jjs4c80wtp2nmg4xq9cy5l4https://nostr.ae/npub13rv3raner7hu6npy7vxxvdswdapae65pnw8jjs4c80wtp2nmg4xq9cy5l4njumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-06-27 📝 Original message:Demand to participate in a low-fee global consensus network will likely continue to rise. Technology already exists to meet that rising demand using a blockchain with sufficient block size. Whether that blockchain is Bitcoin Core with an increased block size, or whether it is a fork, market forces make it almost certain that demand will be met by a blockchain with adequate capacity. These forces ensure that not only today’s block size will be increased, but also that future increases will occur should the demand arise. In order to survive, Bitcoin Core must remain the lowest-fee, highest-capacity, most secure, distributed, fastest, overall best solution possible to the global consensus problem. Attempting to artificially constrain the block size below the limits of technology for any reason is a conflict with this objective and a threat to the survival of Bitcoin Core. At the same time, scheduling large future increases or permitting unlimited dynamic scaling of the block size limit raises concerns over availability of future computing resources. Instead, we should manually increase the block size limit as demand occurs, except in the special case that increasing the limit would cause an undue burden upon users wishing to validate the integrity of the blockchain. Compromise: Can we agree that raising the block size to a static 8MB now with a plan to increase it further should demand necessitate except in the special case above is a reasonable path forward? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150627/5e051f1b/attachment.html>