On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 3:31 PM, James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com> wrote:

What's most likely to happen is miners will max out the blocks they
mine simply to try and get as many transaction fees as possible like
they are doing right now(there will be a backlog of transactions at
any block size). Having the block size double every year would likely
cause major problems and this proposal allows over a 7x increase it
seems.

Block75 is not exponential scaling. It's true the max theoretical increase in the first year would be 7x, but the next year would be a max of 2x, and the next could only increase by 50% and so on.

However, to reach the max in the first year: 1) ALL blocks would have to be 100% full and 2) transactions would have to increase at the same rate. We'd have to be doing 2.1 million transactions a day within a year to make that happen, and would therefore need blocks to be that big.

Realistically, max block size will grow (and shrink) at a much slower rate ... even more so with SegWit.

The main problem with this proposal I think is that users effectively

have no way to stop the miners from increasing block size
continuously.

Yes they could, simply by not sending transactions. Users don't care at all about block size. They just want their transactions to be fast and relatively cheap.

-t.k.