Why don't we just remove the limit altogether and let the miners decide the blocksize? They've been doing that anyway so instead of an arbitrary cap, just let the market decide?
Because this:
VII. The minersi decide.
No, they do not. The miners make some minor decisions in Bitcoin, but major decisions such as block forks are not at their disposition alone, and this for excellent reasons you'll readily understand if you stop and think about it.
From my understanding of how a hard fork works then the miners will decide. Why do you keep sucking on MP's cock?
Correct me if I am wrong.
If miners like the idea, they publish the new block version number in their headers. If they don't, they don't, and no fork happens.
If 75% of the blocks mined in the last 1000 have the new block version number, the miners are free to make a >1Mb block. But nobody has to.
A friendly reminder for everyone: iCEBREAKER is the one that shilled extremely hard pro HashFast a failed venture who scammed thousand of customers of their money promising unreal stuff! It would be a mistake to think that he is out for the good of everyone. Most of the people in Hardware forum have him on ignore because of his way of being.
Do you remember the aborted CoinValidation startup? (The one that basically wanted to make a business of destroying Bitcoin's fungibility by wanting to blacklist certain categories of coins on opaque criteria)
Do you think it is good that miners are only a handful of identified entities that governments can pressure to refuse to process transactions on criteria other than economic ones?
At first I thought having green or black lists was a bad thing. After more thinking I came to the conclusion that the future WILL have them. They will be needed just like we have black and green IP lists. This isn't wrong and it will have a minimal impact on the majority.