OK I think I see whats going on here.
If you look at this block, mined by BTC.COM here: https://btc.com/0000000000000000001bc14d31cd78cba9af69b4ef9af8fac9f3aabb260658de
You can see the size is over a Meg but the stripped size is under.
Same for the raw data for the last KanoPool block here: https://btc.com/0000000000000000001e04433a329abe9308ce304f64da81e8ec1c9d3522308b
If you look at this block, mined by BTC.COM here: https://btc.com/0000000000000000001bc14d31cd78cba9af69b4ef9af8fac9f3aabb260658de
You can see the size is over a Meg but the stripped size is under.
Same for the raw data for the last KanoPool block here: https://btc.com/0000000000000000001e04433a329abe9308ce304f64da81e8ec1c9d3522308b
I thought the >1MB blocks would need the hard fork which is yet to come?
I was thinking the same thing. Anything that looks > 1 MB right now is "virtual", using the last upgrade's technology, but technically is still within the 1 MB limit.
M
Yep, makes sense. That was my original question. Just odd that on BTC.com most other blocks are over 1M, at least appear that way. When you look at the details, they show stripped size and size. Did not notice that till now. Thanks for all the responses
