pull down to refresh

70 sats \ 5 replies \ @Scoresby 22 Jun \ parent \ on: Why BIP-110 Matters More Than Ever bitcoin

It seems then that full smaller blocks would probably be better than partially full current size blocks. (unless this is just a temporary anomoly)

write
compose
103 sats \ 4 replies \ @optimism 22 Jun

I think that once upon a more peaceful time, Luke was arguing 200kB soft-blocklimit (like it used to be 750kB) which was a meaningful thing to propose (though I wouldn't have gone for it personally)

reply
241 sats \ 3 replies \ @Filiprogrammer 22 Jun

It was 300kB.

If we had 300 kilobyte blocks starting today, it's 1x the peak sync time in 2019, and we get back to the 2013 sync time in 2035.

https://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/magicalcryptoconference/2019/why-block-sizes-should-not-be-too-big/

reply
1 sat \ 2 replies \ @optimism 22 Jun

Thanks!

reply
214 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 16h

I see you found someone else correcting you haha

it's easier to correct people than to put yourself out there yourself

reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @optimism 16h

It's a free-for-all!

reply