I may be naive, but isn't this sort of reckless all for an extra 1MB?
you do know segwit is opting for 4mb bloat right..(1mb txdata 3mb witness area)
yet they claim 2mb is bad..
think about that.. its called hypocrisy, its just a shame the blockstream fanboys dont actually read code to know how much bloat segwit will be, and how little capacity increase it offers in return for that bloat
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/395521854efd5804433d57aaf69f46676e4b6efc+/** The maximum allowed size for a serialized block, in bytes (only for buffer size limits) */
+static const unsigned int MAX_BLOCK_SERIALIZED_SIZE = 4000000;
+/** The maximum allowed cost for a block, see BIP 141 (network rule) */
+static const unsigned int MAX_BLOCK_COST = 4000000;
+/** The maximum allowed size for a block excluding witness data, in bytes (network rule) */
+static const unsigned int MAX_BLOCK_BASE_SIZE = 1000000;
4000000bytes=4mb
serialised = total combined data
1000000byte base size = old blocksize limit now renamed and utilised for the non-witness data
so if you want a hard fork.. like many of us do to allow more Traditional transactions through, we need to convince core to increase their new buzzword
MAX_BLOCK_BASE_SIZE to 2000000
which classic, BU and other non core implementations who are sticking to the maxblocklimit word can increase their number to 2000000 aswell and everyone can play happily together with no contention