Re: How a floating blocksize limit inevitably leads towards centralization
Isn't it possible to have a better happy medium though? Where transactions are say........ a dollar at most? Or maybe a few? Just how big would they get? Maybe that's why all the devs are saying wait and see. :T
But yeah it would still be an achievement to actually need a greater block size
But yeah it would still be an achievement to actually need a greater block size
* "the devs" do not even agree amongst themselves
* There is no immediate need to change the block size (as you point out), only a perceived, debatable future need.
* Until that point happens, it is impossible to know what is a happy medium. And how will we know that happy medium? The free market and user choice will decide, not some cabal of miners or devs.
It is entirely within the realm of possibility that the userbase would refuse to change the block size. It is inevitable that some users will indeed refuse to upgrade, thereby rejecting all (in their opinion) oversized blocks, thereby creating that most undesirable of outcomes, the long-lived chain fork.
Will a majority endorse the block size change, or refuse? An unanswerable engineering question, for the moment. And given the present lack of need for a hard forking change, there is not much point in speculation.
+1 agree with you jgarzik