Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[TPTB_need_war]

the only Sybil attack is the one going on in your head.

Whatever. You go on and on with your delusion and then you will be disrupted. That is enough wasting my time on you.

Chest thump in front of my face. Surely you are bigger than me? I am only 5'7". It won't help you.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzqn0xsxe-_Zf_B-q-YgZVQ

[cypherdoc]

the only Sybil attack is the one going on in your head.

Whatever. You go on and on with your delusion and then you will be disrupted. That is enough wasting my time on you.

Chest thump in front of my face. Surely you are bigger than me? I am only 5'7". It won't help you.

i'm waiting.  for the disruption.  1,2,3,4....................

[TPTB_need_war]

i'm waiting.  for the disruption.  1,2,3,4....................

Come to me bitch:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzqn0xsxe-_Zf_B-q-YgZVQ

[TPTB_need_war]

Wow, this thread just went full retard (Simple Jack).

I apologize for going off-topic. Maybe something to bring us back to the block size topic?

How much more off-topic can it be to have a blocksize discussion OP in a thread with a title "Gold collapsing.  Bitcoin UP." and in the Speculation thread.  

The thread was retard from the OP.

Chaos is part of life.

And yet the silverback-wannabe monkey who wrote the OP is offended (about life).  

He has staked his self-worth on his insight to buy BTC early, and he will defend his insecurity (about his legacy and self-worth) at any cost to his rationality and more importantly forsaking civility, humility, compassion, etc..

Yet I digress...  

[shmadz]

Wow, this thread just went full retard (Simple Jack).

I apologize for going off-topic. Maybe something to bring us back to the block size topic?

How much more off-topic can it be to have a blocksize discussion OP in a thread with a title "Gold collapsing.  Bitcoin UP." and in the Speculation thread.  

And yet the monkey who wrote the OP is offended. 

Yeah, well, I'm not big on drama, but I kinda wish I woulda said "pics or it didn't happen" cuz that was a hell of a lot of pics. 

Good luck, I hope you get better, or at least get worse really really slowly.

Oh, and publish your bitcoin fix before you go.     

[TPTB_need_war]

Yeah, well, I'm not big on drama, but I kinda wish I woulda said "pics or it didn't happen" cuz that was a hell of a lot of pics.  

I am stressed right now, so exploding is something I probably needed to let it out.

Surely the vitamin D3 is working because of the intense volcano energy I feel right now if one of those detractors would join me in the boxing ring right now.

But I have numb legs today from the knee down and a mild gut pain. But other than that, I am strong enough today. This is a significant improvement over March, where I couldn't even think or keep my body up out of bed most of the time.

Good luck, I hope you get better, or at least get worse really really slowly.

Oh, and publish your bitcoin fix before you go.    

Ty. I want to implement, not publish. Waiting for $10,000 - $20,000 in seed capital to fund me so I can work full-time.

I didn't say I would put my name on an altcoin. I said I want to go implement. My name on it is irrelevant.

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

Bitcoin is part of the grand plan for Global Technocracy and total top-down digital control.

How do you reckon this can't be prevented just by switching up the protocol or switching to an altcoin? They can spend trillions taking over all the infrastructure if they want, but a little change to a different mining algorithm for example undoes all those ASICs, for starters. I'm not seeing it.

[shmadz]

Bitcoin is part of the grand plan for Global Technocracy and total top-down digital control.

How do you reckon this can't be prevented just by switching up the protocol or switching to an altcoin? They can spend trillions taking over all the infrastructure if they want, but a little change to a different mining algorithm for example undoes all those ASICs, for starters. I'm not seeing it.

That's kinda how I've always seen it as well. The genie is out of the bottle. You can just take the current state of the Blockchain (or whatever state it was in before the "takeover") and port to a new chain based on some other algorithm.

Bitcoin is simply the template for a free, honest system of settling transactions. It can't solve the political problems, but at least it offers an alternative system. A fighting chance.

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

I am stressed right now, so exploding is something I probably needed to let it out.

It's good you discovered vitamin D₃ and are probably getting plenty of sun. How about magnesium, such as Zechstein minerals applied topically? Zinc? Bone broth? Fermented foods? Proteolytic enzymes? B12? Cutting out all grains and maybe dairy? Probiotics like Primal Defense? Those are the things that come to mind when I think of an auto-immune nerve disease like MS.

Anyway, although it was off-topic I read your story with interest, and I think if you are that stressed out right now you might take some time out to meditate. With the fighter personality you have, you might be quite prone to "indicator suppression," where you ignore signs your body is giving you, including more subtle ones like what foods to eat and when to stop an extreme diet. You mentioned your tolerance to pain.

In my honest opinion, I have always thought you were very intelligent, but the way you post simply overwhelms - it leaves no time for people to chew on and respond to the large jumps you propose before you post more and more and it all gets lost in the shuffle. Less is more. The goal is getting people to understand you and appreciate your points, or maybe even help you refine them, isn't it? Thunderballing in and assuming the worst intentions about everyone who reacts poorly on autopilot just makes that harder. If you have a hard concept you need to get across, you need the audience at their mentally clearest, not feeling defensive.

By the way, I for one would be quite interested in hearing more about your improvement idea. Maybe a little later, though, eh

[TPTB_need_war]

Good luck, I hope you get better, or at least get worse really really slowly.

To be more precise, self-diagnosis of my EDSS before recent treatment was in the range of 3.5 - 5. I could walk (even run) more than 500 meters, but I couldn't stay up 12 hours a day. I did have the blurred vision, slurred speech, such extreme difficulty swallowing that I felt afraid to sleep thinking I might suffocate (probably not rational), urination every 30 minutes, emotional and depression issues, etc..

My EDSS now appears to be 3.0 or lower. This is after only 5 - 6 weeks of treatment and it was claimed it takes 2 months for the high dose vitamin D3 to return normalcy.

Also be aware the vitamin D3 is metabolized in the liver to a hormone, and I have been fighting this daily pain and fatigue with every last ounce of my willpower for 3 years, thus my aggressive behavior (or being easily triggered by those who so callously disrespect a handicapped person and who debate disingenuously). I am all for a gentleman's debate on the merits. I can match civility with those who are. Apparently my emotional and hormonal state at the moment is that I can also match fire with fire.

There is a saying, "don't kick a dog in the corner, or wake a sleeping dog". I am cornered by numerous circumstances. To my antagonists please don't kick me, I might bite your leg off. If you want to have a civil debate, then fine.

Anyway, although it was off-topic I read your story with interest, and I think if you are that stressed out right now you might take some time out to meditate. With the fighter personality you have, you might be quite prone to "indicator suppression," where you ignore signs your body is giving you, including more subtle ones like what foods to eat and when to stop an extreme diet. You mentioned your tolerance to pain.

I definitely need but I have obligations I can't meet. I am extremely stressed. And I got so tired of not being able to perform, that I took the risk of permanent renal damage. Because my back is against the wall. I am literally in fight or perish mode.

Hopefully I will make it through this intense patch and be able to achieve some peace and calm that I haven't had for 2 years nonstop.

For past month or so at least, I've been sleeping about 3 - 4 hours a day (on average, some days 5 - 7 hours and some days I skipped sleep) and working nonstop other than a few hours in the bed next to my desk and the food downstairs.

Add: as of march I had acute chronic insomnia so intensely that I had lost the ability to sleep. I was getting very desperate about my health. So now I feel it is improvement the sleep I have now, even though it is less than ideal for a healthy person.

[Shrikez]

Yeah, well, I'm not big on drama, but I kinda wish I woulda said "pics or it didn't happen" cuz that was a hell of a lot of pics.  

I am stressed right now, so exploding is something I probably needed to let it out.

Surely the vitamin D3 is working because of the intense volcano energy I feel right now if one of those detractors would join me in the boxing ring right now.

But I have numb legs today from the knee down and a mild gut pain. But other than that, I am strong enough today. This is a significant improvement over March, where I couldn't even think or keep my body up out of bed most of the time.

Good luck, I hope you get better, or at least get worse really really slowly.

Oh, and publish your bitcoin fix before you go.    

Ty. I want to implement, not publish. Waiting for $10,000 - $20,000 in seed capital to fund me so I can work full-time.

I didn't say I would put my name on an altcoin. I said I want to go implement. My name on it is irrelevant.

For what it's worth I'd fund you for a year if I had the means.

Keep fighting

[TPTB_need_war]

Bitcoin is part of the grand plan for Global Technocracy and total top-down digital control.

How do you reckon this can't be prevented just by switching up the protocol or switching to an altcoin? They can spend trillions taking over all the infrastructure if they want, but a little change to a different mining algorithm for example undoes all those ASICs, for starters. I'm not seeing it.

That's kinda how I've always seen it as well. The genie is out of the bottle. You can just take the current state of the Blockchain (or whatever state it was in before the "takeover") and port to a new chain based on some other algorithm.

Bitcoin is simply the template for a free, honest system of settling transactions. It can't solve the political problems, but at least it offers an alternative system. A fighting chance.

I made a similar entropy point recently in the Economics thread, yet in the more general context of the internet. I will try to locate it and edit this post to add a link.

I agree. I am in support of Bitcoin. I think it is possibly its own trojan horse. And I think the masses are going to adopt Bitcoin no matter what we do. I posit our only hope is to establish an alternative (often anonymous) economy with sufficient usage that it will remain viable and useful. I have no delusions about entirely disrupting fiat nor Bitcoin, because the masses don't want to end their socialism (they depend on Big Brother for food, housing, education, healthcare, anti-terrorism shadows, etc).

However, my point against altcoins (and note I have not intensively evaluated for example Nxt's ecosystem, so there might be exceptions I am unaware of) is they have limited network effects because afaics network effects are mostly driven by the use as a medium-of-exchange. And it appears to me to be a chicken-or-egg dilemma in that without network effects then it can't be a viable investment because medium-of-exchange requires reasonable ubiquity (currency must be convenient and increase efficiency of trade). In short, there is no value in just buying digits that we trade as an investment. There has to be some use value to impart value to the digits.

Thus I posit there does come a point where we may not be able to get the economy-of-scale to offer a viable option to Bitcoin any more. The inertia could become too great to overcome and we might even already be there or approach that point on the next runup in price with Circle, Coinbase, and Paypal all ready to vest the masses in Bitcoin. I assert that the masses are complacent and they simply won't switch, no matter if all our ideological reasons for supporting Bitcoin disappear. We could try to leave into our own coin, but we will find that not enough of us can leave en masse at once in order to use the coin for anything. Thus most of us will thus throw in the towel and realize it is futile and we waited too long.

So I argue we can't just take it as a given and must be proactive and expedient on any altcoin experiments we want to do.

(emphasize the word "experiments", I am cognizant that all altcoin attempts are experiments, not a given)

Can anyone point out a flaw in that reasoning?

Note I assume Bitcoin can't or won't make the type of radical changes I have in mind. I would need to delve into finer details to determine what would be the hindrances to Bitcoin adopting the changes, if they prove to be correct and superior.

Ditto Monero. I am not in principle against embracing Monero (and their existing inertia), but it really depends on the details (technical and personality synergies involved). It is difficult to see how I or my prospective investor(s) could be rewarded though since the coin is already mined out and hashrate is very high already. This is a dilemma for a coin that has no premine, then how do they pay for ongoing development. I suppose you could take a portion of the ongoing minting and tx fees. Maybe Monero is already doing that, I haven't paid attention.

For what it's worth I'd fund you for a year if I had the means.

Keep fighting

Ty. Much appreciated. It is crazy if someone doesn't fund me. I think someone will. I am not asking for huge amount. I'd self fund but I am really in risky territory now with my remaining depleted savings. Imagine I had 18,000 oz of silver in 2008. The M.S. disrupted my preparations and thought processes to the degree that I got into holes and circumstances where I took rash actions on investments or for example due to practicalities and fatigue left my silver with a dealer (carting and storing 10,000oz of silver in the Philippines is highly implausible for a foreigner, I mean to say there will be excessive taxes such as 5% if do it the declared legal way, carting that to Mindanao! no way!).

I was wealthier than rpietila in 2008. He had a superior financial outcome with his illness, I think because (of his location in a first world country, i.e. Finland and) his vocation as a speculator is a daily discipline that can return daily gains, i.e. it is easier to maintain discipline and correct for drift because there is a daily feedback on financial gains. My career as a programming entrepreneur requires long periods of no income and risking it all on a new project development. Thus the M.S. put me too far out of sync with the patterns required for periodic success in my vocation.

[TPTB_need_war]

I think we should also re-summarize whether pool control can be defeated by the new pool RPC (was it "getblockdata"?) that allows the miner to add or remove transactions. I must admit it has been a while since I looked at that and I might not have completely digested it (in a rush or whatever).

Perhaps someone can chime in so I don't have to go google it.

https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-guide#getblocktemplate-rpc

So that is one argument that can be made against the pool's having control. Note it doesn't impact my other upthread (and very on topic) point that larger blocks favor centralization because higher orphan rates do.

However does it really give control the miner? I don't think so. The users still need to forward transactions into the network and eventually the volume of transactions will be too great for miners to listen to and compare with what the pool is sending them. They will at some point be forced to delegate transaction compilation to the pools.

So I argue both of my orthogonal points remain valid.

The author of the OP can still maintain the pools are not concentrated because he can look at a piechart of pool names and see that not one of the names has a significant market share. I can maintain that I have many names too.  

Add: and the key point of distinction is that in Bitcoin in order to get a transaction to have a confirmation then it must be put into a block. In my novel new design, transactions don't have to be put in blocks in order to be confirmed. That is a very strong head scratching hint for you!

[TPTB_need_war]

Time we fucking wakeup sheeople!

http://armstrongeconomics.com/archives/30365

Hillary Clinton is already bought and paid for, She netted $400,000 for giving two speeches for a few minutes at Goldman Sachs.

Even the top five contributors to Hillary’s bid for the Senate back in 1999 were:

Citigroup Inc ….. $782,327
Goldman Sachs ….. $711,490
DLA Piper ….. $628,030
JPMorgan Chase & Co ….. $620,919
EMILY’s List ….. $605,174

Gary Gensler (born October 18, 1957) worked at Goldman Sachs for 18 years and at 30 became the youngest partner. He then, like most people from that firm, strangely seem to suddenly care about how government functions and then crosses over into public life after filling their pockets at Goldman,

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102634242

Goldman, IDG invest $50 million in bitcoin company Circle

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10456534

The story starts once Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg had launched, after the dorm room drama that's led to the current court case.

Facebook's first round of venture capital funding ($US500,000) came from former Paypal CEO Peter Thiel. Author of anti-multicultural tome 'The Diversity Myth', he is also on the board of radical conservative group VanguardPAC.

The second round of funding into Facebook ($US12.7 million) came from venture capital firm Accel Partners. Its manager James Breyer was formerly chairman of the National Venture Capital Association, and served on the board with Gilman Louie, CEO of In-Q-Tel, a venture capital firm established by the Central Intelligence Agency in 1999. One of the company's key areas of expertise are in "data mining technologies".

Breyer also served on the board of R&D firm BBN Technologies, which was one of those companies responsible for the rise of the internet.

Dr Anita Jones joined the firm, which included Gilman Louie. She had also served on the In-Q-Tel's board, and had been director of Defence Research and Engineering for the US Department of Defence.

She was also an adviser to the Secretary of Defence and overseeing the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which is responsible for high-tech, high-end development.

It was when a journalist lifted the lid on the DARPA's
Information Awareness Office that the public began to show concern at its information mining projects.

Wikipedia's IAO page says: "the IAO has the stated mission to gather as much information as possible about everyone, in a centralised location, for easy perusal by the United States government, including (though not limited to) internet activity, credit card purchase histories, airline ticket purchases, car rentals, medical records, educational transcripts, driver's licenses, utility bills, tax returns, and any other available data.".

Not surprisingly, the backlash from civil libertarians led to a Congressional investigation into DARPA's activity, the Information Awareness Office lost its funding.

Now the internet conspiracy theorists are citing Facebook as the IAO's new mask.

Parts of the IAO's technology round-up included 'human network analysis and behaviour model building engines', which Facebook's massive volume of neatly-targeted data gathering allows for.

Facebook's own Terms of use state: "by posting Member Content to any part of the Web site, you automatically grant, and you represent and warrant that you have the right to grant, to facebook an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license to use, copy, perform, display, reformat, translate, excerpt and distribute such information and content and to prepare derivative works of, or incorpoate into other works, such information and content, and to grant and authorise sublicenses of the foregoing.

And in its equally interesting privacy policy: "Facebook may also collect information about you from other sources, such as newspapers, blogs, instant messaging services, and other users of the Facebook service through the operation of the service (eg. photo tags) in order to provide you with more useful information and a more personalised experience. By using Facebook, you are consenting to have your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States."

http://www.coindesk.com/peter-thiel-founders-fund-lead-2m-funding-round-in-bitpay/

Peter Thiel & Founders Fund lead $2 Million funding round in BitPay

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b6f63e4c-a0af-11e4-9aee-00144feab7de.html

Coinbase lands $75m investment from NYSE and BBVA

Others in the round include Vikram Pandit, former chief executive of Citigroup

Ripple Labs, whose technology can be used to transfer Bitcoin and other currencies, announced on Tuesday that former White House economic adviser Gene Sperling would be joining its board.

[cypherdoc]

Time we fucking wakeup sheeople!

Nom, nom, nom!

[fallinglantern]

Surely the vitamin D3 is working because of the intense volcano energy I feel right now if one of those detractors would join me in the boxing ring right now.

But I have numb legs today from the knee down and a mild gut pain. But other than that, I am strong enough today. This is a significant improvement over March, where I couldn't even think or keep my body up out of bed most of the time.

Totally OT at this point, but upping your Vitamin D3 intake means you also need to keep your electrolytes in balance. If you start feeling sore muscles or inexplicable fatigue, that's your cue to load up on minerals. After I upped my D3 intake to 5000 IU per day, I also started supplementing 250mg magnesium oxide, 1000mg potassium chloride, and 2000mg sodium chloride.

[cypherdoc]

I think we should also re-summarize whether pool control can be defeated by the new pool RPC (was it "getblockdata"?) that allows the miner to add or remove transactions. I must admit it has been a while since I looked at that and I might not have completely digested it (in a rush or whatever).

Perhaps someone can chime in so I don't have to go google it.

https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-guide#getblocktemplate-rpc

it's getblocktemplate and i've already pointed out that it gives miners the flexibility to construct their owns blocks.  as a former miner, moving to a new pool is one click away and all of us were watching carefully for any pool operators acting suspicious

So that is one argument that can be made against the pool's having control. Note it doesn't impact my other upthread (and very on topic) point that larger blocks favor centralization because higher orphan rates do.

larger bloat blocks have a higher chance of being orphaned

However does it really give control the miner? I don't think so. The users still need to forward transactions into the network and eventually the volume of transactions will be too great for miners to listen to and compare with what the pool is sending them. They will at some point be forced to delegate transaction compilation to the pools.

you'll need to give a citation on this.  i'm not aware of any problems with loading the size of the unconfirmed tx's data set into RAM at all on startup.  in fact, the set is fairly uniform across all nodes b/c of the speed of the network which allows proposals like IBLT from Gavin a chance to be implemented.  i've never heard about any concerns going forward on this.

So I argue both of my orthogonal points remain valid.

The author of the OP can still maintain the pools are not concentrated because he can look at a piechart of pool names and see that not one of the names has a significant market share. I can maintain that I have many names too.  

Add: and the key point of distinction is that in Bitcoin in order to get a transaction to have a confirmation then it must be put into a block. In my novel new design, transactions don't have to be put in blocks in order to be confirmed. That is a very strong head scratching hint for you!

well that'll be a trick b/c the blockchain is Satoshi's fundamental contribution to tx security that was missing for all these decades of digital money formation.  each block cements the tx's into the chain via POW. 

you need to elaborate on your purported innovation to have any meaningful discussion.

[cypherdoc]

I understand the probability equations, but am trying to understand the logic in how they are being used and how an attacker with less than 50% could have an almost 100% chance of forcing a new longer chain. I would expect that no matter what the probability of being successful would be less than 50%.

The reason is the attacker just keeps going with his attack until (with a tiny bit of luck) his chain is longer. At that point everyone else will join his chain and his need to "attack" is over, he just mines his chain along with everyone else.

Intuitively, realize that the success probability is 100% at >50%, because he can always be assured of outrunning the other fork. It doesn't just jump right from near-zero to 100% as soon as you get 50%, it rises gradually with significant shares <50%.

but for every "bit of luck" the 49% attacker gets (by that i'm assuming you mean a "spurt" of luck with several blocks in a row) the 51% honest chain has the same chances of that "bit of luck" of a block spurt.  not only does the 51% honest chain have the advantage of slowly pulling further ahead via percentages alone while the 49% attacker is withholding blocks, he has the advantage of the same block spurt of luck.  both of these factors as the 51% chain pulls further and further ahead will eventually force the 49% attacker to abandon his attack, start over, while suffering losses from the blocks he could have claimed by publishing them instead of holding them back.  in effect, you can neutralize the spurt of blocks from the analysis and just say that the 51% chain will always outrun the 49% chain on average.

The math says otherwise. The 51% chain doesn't need to do anything at all. The 49% chain just needs to get lucky to pull ahead briefly, and it eventually will, usually. That 2% lead isn't much. Occasionally the 51% chain will pull too far ahead and you will need to abandon your attack, that's what accounts for the 4% (or whatever number) chance of failure. But usually this doesn't happen.

If Satoshi's brief explanation or Peter R's use of the math isn't clear enough for you, there is more of a step-by-step explanation here, along with some pictures (Figure 3 in particular): https://bitcoil.co.il/Doublespend.pdf

that's interesting.  not that it matters.

did you know Meni Rosenfeld was a huge proponent of POS for several years?  smart guy but he was way off on that one.

[cypherdoc]

I agree. I am in support of Bitcoin. I think it is possibly its own trojan horse. And I think the masses are going to adopt Bitcoin no matter what we do. I posit our only hope is to establish an alternative (often anonymous) economy with sufficient usage that it will remain viable and useful. I have no delusions about entirely disrupting fiat nor Bitcoin, because the masses don't want to end their socialism (they depend on Big Brother for food, housing, education, healthcare, anti-terrorism shadows, etc).

However, my point against altcoins (and note I have not intensively evaluated for example Nxt's ecosystem, so there might be exceptions I am unaware of) is they have limited network effects because afaics network effects are mostly driven by the use as a medium-of-exchange. And it appears to me to be a chicken-or-egg dilemma in that without network effects then it can't be a viable investment because medium-of-exchange requires reasonable ubiquity (currency must be convenient and increase efficiency of trade). In short, there is no value in just buying digits that we trade as an investment. There has to be some use value to impart value to the digits.

Thus I posit there does come a point where we may not be able to get the economy-of-scale to offer a viable option to Bitcoin any more. The inertia could become too great to overcome and we might even already be there or approach that point on the next runup in price with Circle, Coinbase, and Paypal all ready to vest the masses in Bitcoin. I assert that the masses are complacent and they simply won't switch, no matter if all our ideological reasons for supporting Bitcoin disappear. We could try to leave into our own coin, but we will find that not enough of us can leave en masse at once in order to use the coin for anything. Thus most of us will thus throw in the towel and realize it is futile and we waited too long.

So I argue we can't just take it as a given and must be proactive and expedient on any altcoin experiments we want to do.

while digging thru all your other bullshit, i stumbled upon this.  i can't disagree much with anything you say here and am glad to see you say supporting things about Bitcoin.

Bitcoin does have the network effect and that is why i say don't waste time on altcoins.  we should spend more time strengthening Bitcoin to make it stronger and more resilient to attack.  specifically to your Sybil attack theory, there is the parallel meshnetworks that ppl are trying to bootstrap for Bitcoin.  that seems like a worthwhile project while at the same time continuing to build on Bitcoin. 

it's my strong sense that the general opinion out there is that Bitcoin is it of all the cryptocurrencies.  you can see it in the charts.  all the altcoins, incl Monero, have been more decimated by this latest bear market.  you can say it's just more volatile swings and to be expected but my reading of the news states that most investors are turning to the safest of all coin options, that being Bitcoin.

how about this?  let's say you're right about TPTB trying to get the entire world onto Bitcoin.  well, that's going to take several years and significant price pumping to do so, so why not ride the wave?  make lotsa money on the way up; profit.

[cypherdoc]

^ Here's a chart that shows the historical blocksize growth along with the limits, the "block fullness," and some commentary on how the limits have changed in the past and may change in the future.

Credit to Solex for the 1MBCON Advisory System Status and DeathAndTaxes for digging up the GitHub commits that introduced the blocksize limits.

Peter, can you extend the chart out to the right so we can see what year the 20MB size would be hit?