pull down to refresh
reply
Is this close to your view, too?
I imagine you've given this question some thought.
reply
Pretty much. I was just writing up a long-winded reply that can be summarized as "Yes."
I particularly appreciate your emphasis on the difference between problems that may emerge later and problems we actually are dealing with today.
But mostly I enjoyed the OP's point that we should keep the rough in rough consensus.
reply
More than fair. In recent times, block size isn't really a problem at all. The growth in Bitcoin-to-goods exchange rate + block reward has been enough to keep miners profitable and fees are at rock bottom right now.
reply
I'm in the "Be damn well sure you know why the fence is there, before you take it down." camp.
I also don't like the idea of solutions in search of problems. What we have right now are concerns about problems that may emerge later, not real problems in the present.
I do wish block size had been designed to be endogenous from the outset, so I get why people want to go that route. It's clearly an arbitrary parameter in the system. I just don't think that's a good enough reason to start mucking about in the fundamentals of something that is so successful.