Quote from: Quantus on January 12, 2016, 12:52:23 AM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 12, 2016, 12:36:34 AM

Quote from: johnyj on January 12, 2016, 12:33:57 AM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on January 12, 2016, 12:20:35 AM

Mining nodes are all already in data centres. We are already far past this point, so I would not consider that to be a good reason not to increase the blocksize. Miners can not "raise the fee" they simply just choose what transactions to include and not to include, collectively this creates a free market for fees. With an arbitrarily small block size limit it has more in common with a centrally planned economy.

This is back to Peter Todd's famous question: If it is already centralized then why make it worse

The relay network that miners are using right now are a perfect example of now we are relying on private company to provide the bitcoin network necessary service. Following this route, in future all the mining nodes will operate on a private company's network, so that a couple of phone call can shut them down right away

Small block size does not preventing you from inventing fee-free transaction services off-chain. In fact, limited at 1MB or limited at 8MB is the same effect
because bitcoin is never going to scale indefinitely. So, if you sooner or later have to limit the block size, then why not do it now when bitcoin core software is still relatively light weight. It is the direction that matters, not parameters

This is the engineers nirvana fallacy, just because Bitcoin does not scale efficiently it does not mean we should not scale Bitcoin at all. I think this is wrong and even small increases to the blocksize will bring massive practical benefits to both people and the protocol as a whole.

Even if one megabyte is the practical limit of the network today, which I do not think is the case, in the future this limit should still be increased in order to reflect the true technological capabilities of the time.

I can agree with the principle that we should not increase the blocksize limit more then our technology will allow, even if one megabyte currently represent this limit which I find hard to believe that this is the case. It does stand that this limit should be increased in the future if we want to see Bitcoin bring about as much utility and benefit as possible. This whole one megabyte forever idea really does not make any sense, I also doubt that Satoshi somehow magically choose this number which would reflect this technological limit now and for all time. Satoshi was actually quite clear on this subject, he thought that the blocksize should be increased when the need to do so arose.

Quote from: Konrad S Graf

The protocol block size limit was added as a temporary anti-spam measure, not a technocratic market-manipulation measure.

1MB is just a slogan we don't really want to lock to max block size forever. Satoshi is human just like the rest of us. We have had over 9 years now to think and discuss these issues at great length. We go around and around on looking for insight. Are not better prepared then Satoshi was over 10 years ago to predict the outcome of the Bitcoin network?

I think that his underlying vision still holds true. Glad to hear you are not in the one megabyte forever camp, such a position is indeed a bit nuts in my opinion. Wink