cryptocoinsnews.com / JUSTIN OCONNELL / 20/08/2015
As this debate on BitcoinTalk demonstrates, the current rhubarb regarding increasing the block size limit in Bitcoin has been ongoing since at least 2013 in a public manner… as well as a heated one. The discussion between the Bitcoin core developers goes on for 26 pages. The most recent post is April 2013. It starts with Peter Todd, who still to this day opposes increasing the block size limit in the manner being proposed via Bitcoin-XT.
I fear very few people understand the perverse incentives miners have with regard to blocks large enough that not all of the network can process them, in particular the way these incentives inevitably lead towards centralization. I wrote the below in terms of block size, but the idea applies equally to ideas like Gavin’s maximum block validation time concept. Either way miners, especially the largest miners, make the most profit when the blocks they produce are large enough that less than 100%, but more than 50%, of the network can process them – Peter Todd
Gavin Andresen is quick to respond:
I strongly feel that we shouldn’t aim for Bitcoin topping out as a “high power money” system that can process only 7 transactions per second.
I agree with Stephen Pair– THAT would be a highly centralized system.
Oh, sure, mining might be decentralized. But who cares if you either have to be a gazillionaire to participate directly on the network as an ordinary transaction-creating customer, or have to have your transactions processed via some centralized, trusted, off-the-chain transaction processing service?