MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <201701022119.11115.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <CAGCNRJoN7u3yvzitH2KSmVty-p0tX9jxWLHPb8uO5CPZmxmoRg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGCNRJp71NCxQ3jk4hu-kXF94RiqfeD=AVnxR37TrJ7bDG310w@mail.gmail.com>
	<1944321.hguq3JoYe1@cherry> <201701022119.11115.luke@dashjr.org>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Hampus_Sj=C3=B6berg?= <hampus.sjoberg@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 12:21:44 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFMkqK_hKFZc0bnO17ONpM1v5D2nDgu5-u5MTByJF0xEYZ3tAQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>, 
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114a7f8a083207054867a767
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP - 'Block75' - New algorithm
Precedence: list

--001a114a7f8a083207054867a767
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

> It gives miners complete control over the limit. They can make blocks of
any size (within the current limit), thus triggering the conditions by
which your proposal would raise the limit further.

There might be a long term incentive to keep increasing the blocksize, to
further centralize the network (and kick smaller miners out), but it comes
with the cost of losing out on transaction fees.
Miners have always needed to plan for the short term, I see no rational
scenario where miners would spam their blocks with their own transactions
(or low fee transactions) to keep increasing the blocksize limit.

Hampus

--001a114a7f8a083207054867a767
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div>&gt; It gives miners complete control over =
the limit. They can make blocks of any size (within the current limit), thu=
s triggering the conditions by which your proposal would raise the limit fu=
rther.<br><br></div>There might be a long term incentive to keep increasing=
 the blocksize, to further centralize the network (and kick smaller miners =
out), but it comes with the cost of losing out on transaction fees.<br></di=
v>Miners have always needed to plan for the short term, I see no rational s=
cenario where miners would spam their blocks with their own transactions (o=
r low fee transactions) to keep increasing the blocksize limit.<br><br></di=
v>Hampus<br></div>

--001a114a7f8a083207054867a767--