Quote from: Killerpotleaf on March 26, 2017, 01:15:48 AM

Quote from: misterbigg on March 26, 2017, 12:18:32 AM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 25, 2017, 04:48:38 PM

Greg has openly called for full blocks and a fee market (which we have right now).

If blocks are empty, then when the reward drops to zero how will miners get paid?

miners will allow limitless space at no cost if they are left in charge of blockspace.

miners are not given that power or limitless control
EG.
2009
upper limit 32mb.. lower limit was 250kb
2013
upper limit 1mb(consensus.h).. lower limit was 500kb(policy.h)
2015
upper limit 1mb(consensus.h).. lower limit was 750kb(policy.h)
2016
upper limit 1mb(consensus.h).. lower limit was 999kb(policy.h)

dynamics is for instance (dont knit pick the numbers just see the concept)
2017
upper limit 4mb(consensus.h).. lower limit was 1.25mb(policy.h)
2018
upper limit 4mb(consensus.h).. lower limit was 1.5mb(policy.h)
2018
upper limit 4mb(consensus.h).. lower limit was 1.75mb(policy.h)
then a rethink about the network speed capability
2019
upper limit 8mb(consensus.h).. lower limit was 2mb(policy.h)

policy becomes more fluid and adjustable based on MAJORITY nodes useragent display of their LOWER limit. but consensus.h stays static, pools see where a MAJORITY of nodes prefer their policy limit. and the MINORITY get a message that their policy.h needs changing or will be surpassed due to the minority having too low a policy.

but pools will not surpass the real main consensus.h limit

a few dynamic implementations are actually looking into having speedtests in the node to actually know what the node is actually capable of. to make nodes more self reliant on setting their limits without devs in a different county having to guess whats 'safe'