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

From: Gavin Andresen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 14:23:59 -0400

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 1:34 PM, Mike Hearn <[email-masked]> wrote:

> As noted, many miners just accept the defaults. With your proposed change
>> their target would effectively *drop* from 1mb to 800kb today, which
>> seems crazy. That's the exact opposite of what is needed right now.
>>
>
> I am very skeptical about this idea.
>

By the time a hard fork can happen, I expect average block size will be
above 500K.

Would you support a rule that was "larger of 1MB or 2x average size" ? That
is strictly better than the situation we're in today.

-- 
--
Gavin Andresen