Bitcoin Forum
December 12, 2017, 02:56:22 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: 32MB Blocks: The Newest (Old) Solution to Bitcoin Scalability  (Read 262 times)
Offline Offline

Activity: 1

View Profile
September 03, 2016, 01:37:25 PM

There has been an ongoing Bitcoin block size debate, and most recently a radical, old idea resurfaced: instead of increasing the block size from 1MB to 2,4 or 8MB, the protocol should be changed to accommodate 32MB blocks. This probably pissed off Bram Cohen.

Are 32MB Blocks Too Big?
Here’s why that’s not a radical idea: it’s how Satoshi Nakamoto, creator of Bitcoin, for a time had designed Bitcoin before settling on a 1MB transaction size — a decision which, perhaps, led to Bitcoin being christened “digital gold.”

Read more her:

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513090582

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Reply with quote  #2

Report to moderator
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330

★★ Play Plinko or Invest!

View Profile
September 03, 2016, 02:04:49 PM

Yea, it's too big.... Uhm, where did I hear that before?  Roll Eyes ... We manage fairly well with the current block size, so 32MB is way over kill. We should

not just increase block sizes because we can, but rather as needed. This is still in a experimental stage, but SegWit and side chains will fill the gap as

needed. We do not need to scale for something that is not needed now...  Wink... just kick the can down the road.








Daily Quests
Online Online

Activity: 1876

View Profile
September 03, 2016, 02:16:53 PM

i guess this topic is more about allowing a BU concept that decentrally allows NODES to decide on the limit, rather than relying on DEVs (the Controlled Operations Rule Engineers) to allow or veto growth specific sizes,
without trying be specific to poke the Core bear that they should not be kings of decisions/control(but im not that subtle)

as for discussions of 32mb being acceptable bloat.. i have not seen anything in regards to this, apart from old discussions about the limitations of the messaging structure of bitcoin in code. rather than an acceptable bloat that nodes can cope with.
everyone can se 32mb is not acceptable bloat this year, but i understand that allowing freedom to scale decentrally when needed so that one day in distant future 32mb is acceptable.

but so far, stickiing to current allowances the community:
last year conceeded that 2mb was acceptable bloat..
this year 4mb seems to be acceptable bloat, by the same crew that were even against 2mb.. (funny that)

i too think that who makes the decisions should be decentralized and end all the political band camp control debate that just delays and avoids actual progression.

so even with a 32mb hard limit i see no problem with decentrally having nodes increase to 2mb. 4mb without requiring consent from dev teams

i now wait for the fanboys to argue that going decentralized will take control away from from their faithful leaders

Don't take any information given on this forum on face value. Please do your own due diligence & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. If you wish to seek legal FACTUAL advice, then seek the guidance of a LEGAL specialist.
Pages: [1]
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!