I would love to be able to increase block size. But I have serious doubts about being able to do this safely at this time given what we presently know about the Bitcoin network. And I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in this sentiment.
Had we been working on fixing the known issues that most complicate bigger blocks in the last six years, or even in the last three years after many issues had already been well-identified, perhaps we'd be ready to increase the limit. But other things have seemed more important, like specifying the use of X.509 overlay protocols or adding complex filtering mechanisms to the p2p protocol to make it practical to use tx merkle trees...and as a result we're not ready for safely allowing larger blocks. - Eric On Jul 30, 2015 11:43 PM, "Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev" < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Thursday 30. July 2015 16.33.16 Eric Lombrozo via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > I don’t think it’s really a matter of whether we agree on whether it’s > good > > to raise the block size limit, Gavin. I think it’s a matter of a > difference > > in priorities. > > Having different priorities is fine, using your time to block peoples > attempts > to increase block size is not showing different priorities, it shows > conflicting > priorities. > Different priorities means you can trust someone else to do things they > care > about while you do things you care about. > -- > Thomas Zander > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
