3 ms·
Big blocks are probably easier to censor and harder to use for people who only have low-spec equipment/networks. Vulnerability to censorship vs limited on-chai
by ArchD 7y ago
Big blocks are probably easier to censor and harder to use for people who only have low-spec equipment/networks.
Vulnerability to censorship vs limited on-chain scaling -- pick your poison. Censorship-resistance and on-chain scaling are both good things, but one picks a priority.
You or someone else can always go BCH if you like big blocks and the BTC devs are not going to stop you.
- lawn 7y ago> Big blocks are probably easier to censor Only if they get extremely big, and the clients cannot handle them. > to use for people who only have low-spec equipment/networks. These people should use light wallets or SPV wallets, which is what we already use on mobile phones. > Vulnerability to censorship vs limited on-chain scaling -- pick your poison. Only Siths deal with absolutes. This is a false choice. Small blocks, and large fees, also have a centralizing effect on the network as small miners gets priced out as the transaction fees removes a larger fraction of their income. And miner decentralization is the most important type of centralization there is, because that's what provides censorship resistance and network security.