Holliday
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1120
Merit: 1003



View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
March 19, 2017, 08:54:59 PM

It's the people who are against growth that have some explaining to do.

Yeah, 'cuz no one has given any reasons anywhere why it's a good idea to keep blocks small.

:/
Then why not a tenth of the current size? What could possibly be wrong with that?

We have consensus at 1 MB now.
I did not ask about that. What would be wrong with lowering the limit to a tenth of what it currently is? Do you see any problems with that at all?

You say that you want your car to be able to drive further on 1 tank of gas.

I say, increasing the size of the tank may cause problems.

You say, then let's reduce the size of the tank.

No, man. The network is functioning on 1 MB blocks. Everyone has agreed to 1 MB blocks for the past 7 odd years.

You want me to say that 1 MB blocks have more utility than 1/10th MB blocks so that you can argue that increasing the block size will increase utility. I'm saying that increasing the block size also comes with additional risks and trade-offs and it would be a mistake to ignore those additional risks and trade-offs.

I'm not going to bother continuing the discussion if you want to continue to be ridiculous.

Then explain at least some of the downside to bigger blocks, if you actually believe what you say. Simply making assertions is not enough.

RAM requirements due to UTXO set. Bandwidth requirement due to increased data per block and increased historical chain size. Storage requirements due to increased block chain size. Processing requirements due to the need to verify more transactions.