Quote from: inBitweTrust on February 20, 2015, 03:19:25 AM

Quote from: onemorebtc on February 20, 2015, 03:09:13 AM

i still dont see why this lowers security as you claimed (you said this would raise node count - i think this too, and this would actually increase security a little). it adds complexity but there is always a tradeoff to make.

I am not claiming security will decrease with the fork. I am merely suggesting the ones against this hardfork have fears that aren't completely illusory, and we might see more centralization as they fear due to the costs (mainly bandwidth) being too high to support full unpruned nodes.

I am just suggesting that we can take steps or possibly incorporate other changes to address these fears and add more decentralization at the same time we increase block size conservatively. We need to be more specific however of what degree of decentralization and security is appropriate. I haven't heard many details as of yet of what we should be aiming before besides mostly vague fears and opposition to change.

IMHO: more decentralization is not possible with bigger blocksizes except you would accept that not every node keeps everything.

i guess i misunderstood you then.