Quote from: sickpig on May 28, 2015, 05:46:17 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on May 28, 2015, 04:19:25 PM

Quote from: Adrian-x on May 28, 2015, 04:06:23 PM

Quote from: sickpig on May 28, 2015, 02:17:05 PM

Quote from: rpietila on May 28, 2015, 01:56:26 PM

Sorry to pose a stupid question: what are the reasons why the limit cannot be raised?

main reasons that opponents to the increase state are:

- centralization

- fees discovery price distortion

- UTXOs size will increase significantly

- Tor could not be used anymore

- other things we don't know yet caused by rising block max size.

All valid reason to keep developing and not accept the 20MB block proposal as a final solution. To attempt solving those problems buy limiting block size is an expression of a lack of creativity

the one i keep hearing getting complained about more so now is the one Ice brought up earlier; UTXO.

i don't get that one. the UTXO is stored on disk and has a 100MB cache stored in RAM that limits filling it up. yes, the UTXO set is increasing apparently according to Statoshi, but if it only takes up 100MB, what's the big deal?

http://gavinandresen.ninja/utxo-uhoh

good re-read. and i'm pretty sure he changed that write-up. initially, he claimed the entire UTXO was held in RAM but down in the Reddit comments for the thread several ppl pointed out that it was held on disk with a 100MB high speed cache. so, bottom line, it doesn't necessarily appear that this is a problem except for maybe miners. given that tx growth won't immediately go to 20MB/block, i think it's safe to say this space problem should be worked out in time.