pull down to refresh
Full blocks is the natural state of the Bitcoin system, because demand for cheap highly-replicated perpetual storage is unbounded. When monetary transactions don’t fill the blocks, the underdemanded blockspace will be filled with more frivolous things.
I could see how your observations might support an argument for a temporary blocksize reduction, or to reduce the witness discount, but I can’t figure out how you get from your observations to supporting the introduction of seven consensus rules that disrupt development of more sophisticated monetary rails and only impact ~3% of the data insertion transactions observed on the network at this time.
reply
Appreciate the constructive comment, thanks for the historical context and data.
The 75-90% figure was specifically about per-block size, not yearly blockchain growth. Your own calculation confirms this: You note 2.2 is about 1.83x of 1.2, which is an 83% increase in bytes per block. The 2.29 MB peak I cited from March 2024 (from mempool.space 7-day average data) puts it at ~91%. So the per-block claim holds within the stated range.
You're right that a reader could infer I meant yearly growth increased by 75-90%. That's a fair criticism of my phrasing, and I should have been more precise. Your figure of less than 50% for total yearly growth is accurate.
Where I'd push back is on "blocks have been smaller than expected." The 2015 Capacity Increases FAQ projected 1.6 MB for blocks full of standard single-signature P2PKH transactions. Before February 2023, blocks averaged ~1.1-1.2 MB, well below that projection. What brought blocks up into the 1.6-2.2 MB range was primarily non-monetary data exploiting the witness discount, not a surge in monetary transaction demand. When blocks sit at 1.57 MB in 2025, a meaningful portion of that capacity is still non-monetary. Saying blocks are "smaller than expected" is technically accurate against the 2.0 MB multisig projection, but it frames the situation as though demand for monetary transactions filled those blocks to expectations. The composition tells a different story.
The decline from 2.29 MB (2024 peak) to 1.57 MB (2025) reflects cyclical inscription demand, not the problem resolving itself. The witness discount that makes data embedding economically attractive is unchanged.