4 ms·
> with a simple increase in block size. "Simple" changes to the bitcoin protocol aren't simple because it's a coordination problem. As long as more than 50%
by Majromax 6y ago
> with a simple increase in block size.
"Simple" changes to the bitcoin protocol aren't simple because it's a coordination problem. As long as more than 50% of mining power is behind the older protocol, the longest block history will remain under that protocol. Nodes which can switch will have incentives against doing so, because mining an embiggened block that does not become part of the official history orphans the mining reward.
From another perspective: any breaking change to the bitcoin protocol involves politely asking miners to execute a 51% attack on themselves.
- aeternum 6y agoThis is true, but breaking changes, aka hard forks have occurred in the past and blocksize has already been successfully increased from 1MB to 2MB. It will all come down to whether miners think they can make more from having fewer higher fee txns vs. more lower fee txns in a block. My prediction is that more lower fee txns will win since competition from other cryptocurrencies will cap the txn fee that people are willing to pay.
- 1996 6y ago> My prediction is that more lower fee txns will win since competition from other cryptocurrencies will cap the txn fee that people are willing to pay Exactly my analysis too.