-Snip-
Relax, franky1, no one is crying.
Increasing the block size will require more resources from each validating node, it will force some nodes to drop out, and also cause the network to centralize.
This is an incorrect statement. To be blunt, you are lying.
Not every block increase results in a loss of decentralization.
Maybe not, but in general, bigger blocks = require more resources = centralizing the network. It's simply physics, ser.
Plus since you accuse me of "lying", why not come out and use your real account. Who are you? It's just a friendly debate, there's no such for sock puppetry.
Quote
I'm talking about is REAL network scaling. To increase the functionality of the network.
It seems to me that you are not quite accurate in using the word "real".
If we had increased the block size by 2-4 times in 2017, then perhaps we would now have 2-4 times increase in the number of transactions. And that would definitely be real scaling.
Instead, you are suggesting that we all hope for some other imaginary "real scaling". Which in practice can be just an unsuccessful experiment.
I settled more comfortably on the couch. I want to hear from you a cheerful report on how much progress you have achieved in your "real scaling" over the 5 years since 2017.
OK, do you believe that BCash's maximum block size is not centralizing for its network, if the demand for its block space goes as high as the demand for Bitcoin's block space?