Quote from: satoshi on October 03, 2010, 09:07:28 PM
We can phase in a change later if we get closer to needing it.
IMO it's a marketing thing. It's tough to get people to buy into a system, if the network is technically incapable of supporting high transaction rates.
THIS
That thread still says it all. Some of my other favourite parts are
kiba:
If we upgrade now, we don't have to convince as much people later if the bitcoin economy continues to grow.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1347.msg15590#msg15590appamatto:
Since a block restriction would allow generators to charge higher transaction fees, they might "vote" against an increase in the max size in the future.
It seems unlikely to be a real problem though.
(How wrong appamatto turned out to be, as it IS a real problem)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1347.msg17804#msg17804caveden:
I'm very uncomfortable with this block size limit rule. This is a "protocol-rule" (not a "client-rule"), what makes it almost impossible to change once you have enough different softwares running the protocol. Take SMTP as an example... it's unchangeable.
I think we should schedule a large increase in the block size limit right now while the protocol rules are easier to change.
Indeed, we should have.