Bitcoin Forum

So we're in this great scaling debate.  I thought this might make an interesting thread.  State which side of the debate you are on, and
what is the ONE most important thing you wish everyone (perhaps especially the other side) acknowledged , understood, or agreed on?

This is a moderated thread.

Rules:  You have to make your own post first before you can comment on someone else's.  Keep it on topic.  Keep it civil.  thanks.

Smaller blocks.

Drastically increasing the size of blocks increases the amount of information peers must share in order to keep the network functional.

Increasing that amount of information makes Bitcoin more vulnerable to attack from outside sources. A network with fewer requirements is more robust and easier to defend.

Authorities around the world have continued to increase capital controls, and this trend shows no sign of reversing, or even slowing down. Imagining that they will simply continue to allow people to side-step those capital controls via Bitcoin is naive.

Decentralization is the key property which allows Bitcoin to provide censorship-proof transactions and seize-proof store of value. These two unique utilities are the very reason why Bitcoin has value.

Attempting to increase the transaction rate while ignoring and actually harming the very thing which makes Bitcoin valuable, is akin to cutting off the nose to spite the face.

Bitcoin can not be all things to all people. It is a tool that is extremely good at a few specific things. Trying to make it into a "swiss army knife" will simply mean that it can do several things, poorly.

If we must increase the transaction rate, it should be with additional layers which can be removed should the need arise.

Attempting to include mundane, everyday transactions in the block chain, which every full node must keep a complete record of forever, is a ridiculous waste of resources.

All transactions do not need to be censorship-proof as long as the option exists.