Quote from: countryfree on November 27, 2016, 12:46:29 AM

Well, I have missed that part. Last time I read about it, it was 1.7 to 1.8 MB, which is still substantial, but still modest considering that some 18 months ago, there was a proposal from leading BTC developers to raise the block size to 8 MB.

Well, you can't call something that is 2-2.1x marginal though, regardless of what was proposed. If I created a proposal with 100 MB blocks, I could just call BU modest then? Besides, there is no way that 8 MB blocks would be accepted today in terms of safety and resource usage.

Quote from: countryfree on November 27, 2016, 12:46:29 AM

So this crisis is over, but I have no doubt there will another one not far from now.

A lot of people don't seem to understand that it's not possible to largely scale Bitcoin (in its current form) on-chain while preserving decentralization. Regardless of what block size limit you put on there, those are just patches to a gun wound.

Quote from: Xester on November 27, 2016, 04:21:17 AM

The moment the price of of bitcoin inflates the miners cannot cope up with the transactions traffic.

Those events are not related at all. "Miners can't cope" is also misleading. The consensus rules dictate the maximum amount of data/transactions that can be transferred, not the miners.