Why is big blocks bad?

[lecongnhan123]

What is Core's excuse to avoid increasing bitcoin block size to 2mb?

Just imagine when the miners a mining a small rock then they suddently have to mine a really big rock, they will we stuck there for a long time that cause the chain stop.

[ranochigo]

What is Core's excuse to avoid increasing bitcoin block size to 2mb?

Just imagine when the miners a mining a small rock then they suddently have to mine a really big rock, they will we stuck there for a long time that cause the chain stop.

NO, NOT TRUE. The mining speed will not be affected by the block size, at least not significantly. The merkle root is indeed, hashed by the miner to place it into the block header. However, it is not hashed repeatedly, it is only hashed once before it is passed to the miners in a pool. The tradeoff for this is worth it.

However, the propagation time for bigger blocks can potentially be longer and this can cause blocks to get orphaned. It would take more time for nodes to process it too. Miners are generally not very affected*.

*Well SPV mining.

[skorupi17]

I believe that having a bigger block is beneficial in terms of the users. There will be more transaction be confirmed within a single block. If there are more transaction that will be confirmed at a time then lower fees will be imposed. Also, since more transactions are processes per block, there is less waiting time for the confirmation of the transaction be done. This is what I believe at first but due to the arguments laid by others, I think my thoughts are useless to the facts that what will really happen if the increase in blocksize will be implemented.