Timeline for Can blocks remain capped to 1MB forever?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 27, 2018 at 23:38 | comment | added | mulllhausen | @NateEldredge what is good for bitcoin is good for holders of bitcoin. that includes miners. | |
| Jan 26, 2018 at 13:44 | comment | added | Nate Eldredge | @mulllhausen: Okay. But it's not clear to me how you could give miners an incentive to prioritize in any way except highest fee. | |
| Jan 26, 2018 at 11:58 | comment | added | mulllhausen | @NateEldredge yes i think it is a semantic argument. you misunderstood my usage of the word "rules" in the question. i was not necessarily intending "rules" to mean "the bitcoin protocol". i was mainly thinking of economic rules, which is why i said, "this is perhaps more of an economics question than a bitcoin question" and went on to talk about incentives. | |
| Jan 25, 2018 at 14:33 | comment | added | Nate Eldredge | @mulllhausen: There might be a semantic argument here. You could say segwit adds additional data to the blockchain. Alternatively, under segwit you can still validate the blockchain after the fact if you have some additional data which can itself be validated after the fact. But for any prioritization rules I can imagine, I can't think of any way that you could prove after the fact that they were obeyed, that doesn't create severe vulnerabilities or centralize the currency. Even allowing for a soft or hard fork. | |
| Jan 25, 2018 at 8:42 | comment | added | Willtech | Actually, I believe it fits the classical definition of a soft fork, since no previously invalid block would be declared valid. Enforcement would require only that previously valid blocks/transactions are made invalid, which is a soft fork. Soft Fork on investopedia.com | Softfork and Hardfork in Bitcoin terminology on bitcoin SE | |
| Jan 25, 2018 at 6:19 | comment | added | mulllhausen | "eg" means "for example". You could really put anything in the dot points in the original question - it doesn't have to be exactly what I wrote there. And likewise with the example of gyft. Also what you write here, is not true: "But remember that it has to be possible to validate the blockchain after the fact." segwit is one case where it is no longer possible to validate a block by purely relying on the bitcoin protocol (signatures are no longer stored on the blockchain with segwit). | |
| Jan 25, 2018 at 4:30 | history | edited | Nate Eldredge | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 558 characters in body
|
| Jan 25, 2018 at 4:24 | history | answered | Nate Eldredge | CC BY-SA 3.0 |