Re: Estranged Core Developer Gavin Andresen Finally Makes Sensible 2MB BIP Proposal!
My answer is that whatever transactions the miners choose to include in the blocks have sufficient utility to be included.
This should follow real supply and demand for block space, not an arbitrary blocksize limit. The blocksize limit should be continued to be used as an anti spam measure which should exist significantly above the current average transaction volume.
So if I decide that my posts should be included on the blockchain, and a miner decides that a few Satoshi will reward hie enough to include them in a number of blocks, then that will be of benefit to Bitcoin. Even though every node will have to store them forever.This should follow real supply and demand for block space, not an arbitrary blocksize limit. The blocksize limit should be continued to be used as an anti spam measure which should exist significantly above the current average transaction volume.
If everyone adopted Bitcoin tomorrow, and we increase the blocksize moderately, according to real technological limits and the price to transact would still be high, I would still accept that outcome, that is fine, but that is different to restricting Bitcoin unnecessarily so early in its development. The block subsidy is meant to bootstrap Bitcoin adoption during its early life, we still have decades before the fees are meant to overtake the block reward.