Quote from: franky1 on November 27, 2022, 11:27:21 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on November 27, 2022, 10:51:09 AM

Maybe not, but in general, bigger blocks = require more resources = centralizing the network. It's simply physics, ser.
..
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?

-Snip-

I'll ask again, does ANYONE 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?

Quote from: ETFbitcoin on November 27, 2022, 12:34:45 PM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on November 27, 2022, 10:51:09 AM

Quote from: oldkoin on November 26, 2022, 01:58:25 PM

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.

You also need to consider cost of the resource (such as storage in $/TB or internet speed in $/GB) usually going down over time. Although waiting time for IBD (initial block download) probably only become worse, especially if block size limit is increased and block remain mostly full.

The trolls are speaking with situational premises, and OK, but I can also speak about other situational premises too, like not every user has the same access to cheap hardware, cheap bandwidth, and increasing these requirments would be centralizing for the network. Let's avoid that. Let's talk about how things generally are. Would it be wrong to say that an increase in block size = require more resources = centralizing?