If the limit is 20 then the miners will go to 20. If the limit is infinity then the miners will go to infinity. The issue isn't "what is the best arbitrary number." The issue is that the cost to maintain a full node should not be determined by the miners who have an economic incentive to include as much spam into the blockchain as is willing to pay a pittance. It's a matter of privatized gains and socialized costs; they get the profit from including the spam, and the rest of us pay the cost.
wow... this is the first time i read something reasonable from you!
i dont argue that this is not an issue. i say
it's a fact that the miners decide.
thats why i say we need monetary incentives for them to act in a good way (e.g. making smaller blocks).
ps: i'd really appreciate if you would stop quoting this stupid billionaire and use your own arguments.
This is not the first time DP has written reasonably in this thread, it's just the first time he got through your defensiveness and succeeded in making a point in a way you could understand. Which is still laudable accomplishment, and it was very well stated.
MP is many things but certainly not stupid. Your resentment of his wealth and puckish personality in no way diminish his many well considered, logically consistent arguments. MP is eminently quotable, as few people on this planet can match his combination of topical expertise and exacting articulation.
my defensiveness? well... not really sure what i should answer to that. i didnt change my mind in the slightest? i still think the miners decide and told why? so i dont really understand your point.
but well ok: he is not stupid and he can certainly articulate very well.
that doesnt change the fact that he makes death threats to people who dont share his opinion.
so i retreat: sorry MP; you are not stupid.