pull down to refresh

11 sats \ 2 replies \ @moel 25 Jul 2022 \ on: Peter Todd on the bitcoin inflation bitcoin
Eventually, the block rewards will be too low to support the energy costs and price of buying new mining equipment.
Most/all profits from mining will have to come from transaction fees.
This plays nicely into another hot topic: We should make blocks smaller to keep miner fees up!
The base layer should not be too cheap (to prevent spamming) and not be too expensive, lest no-one will use it at all and only do Lightning/Liquid/federations.
In a couple of years, we should have a block size scaling (to smaller blocks) that is flexible, like the difficulty is scaling right now.
Let's say that the current ±1,7 MiB block size limit that we currently have, is the maximum, but we want to aim for blocks having a total "mining reward" of 1 BTC.
  1. Every time the average mining reward of the last 2016 blocks falls below 1 BTC, we make blocks a corresponding % smaller.
  1. Every time the average mining reward of the last 2016 blocks rises to 1 BTC, we make blocks a corresponding % bigger (till we hit the current 1.8MB size).
write
preview
110 sats \ 0 replies \ @m4 OP 25 Jul 2022
The main reason to keep block small is decentralization. Decentralization is the first measure of bitcoin security.
reply
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @based 25 Jul 2022
2.0 MB blocks are not too uncommon during congestion thanks to increasing segwit usage.
https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/98810/whats-the-blocksize-limit-after-segwit-and-how-do-legacy-nodes-deal-with-segwit
reply