Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposed alternatives to the 20MB stepfunction

From: Gavin Andresen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 14:21:48 -0400

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Pieter Wuille <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> I personally think the block size should increase, by the way, but only if
> we can do it under a policy of doing it after technological growth has been
> shown to be sufficient to support it without increased risk.
>
> Can you be more specific about this? What risks are you worried about?

I've tried to cover all that I've heard about in my blog posts about why I
think the risks of 20MB blocks are outweighed by the benefits, am I missing
something?
  (blog posts are linked from
http://gavinandresen.ninja/time-to-roll-out-bigger-blocks )

There is the "a sudden jump to a 20MB max might have unforseen
consequences" risk that I don't address, but a dynamic increase would fix
that.

-- 
--
Gavin Andresen