On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 7:26 PM, Chris Wardell via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > I'm no authority on the subject, but I don't understand why there is a max > block-size, other than anti-spam measures. > > The only other reason I have heard for a max-block-size is to force people > into paying higher fees.
For the 73th time or so this month on this list: The maximum block size consensus rule limits mining centralization (which is currently pretty bad). But don't worry about not being an authority on the subject: Gavin (who has written extensively on the subject) doesn't seem to understand this either. He thinks it only limits full node centralization (by limiting how expensive it can be to run a full node). I thought the later would be quite obvious for everyone, but this month I've discovered that I've been extremely optimistic about people's understanding of the effects of the consensus rule they want to change. For the later reason (the one Gavin and I agree on) there's an old but very clear video explaining it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZp7UGgBR0I _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
