Block size limit controversy: Difference between revisions

From Bitcoin Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Phantomcircuit (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Lapp0 (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
== Argument in opposition of increasing the blocksize ==
== Argument in opposition of increasing the blocksize ==
* Risk of catastrophic consensus failure
* Risk of catastrophic consensus failure
* Damage to decentalization
=== Damage to decentalization ===
* Bitcoin is only useful if it is decentralized because centralization requires trust. Bitcoins value proposition is trustlessness.
 
* The larger the hash-rate a single miner controls, the more centralized Bitcoin becomes and the more trust using Bitcoin requires.
 
* Running your own full node while mining rather than giving another entity the right to your hash-power decreases the hash-rate of large miners. Those who control hash-power are able to control their own hash power if and only if they run a full node.
 
* Less individuals who control hash-power will run full nodes if running one becomes more expensive.
 
* Larger blocks leads to more expensive full nodes.
 
* Therefore, larger blocks lead to less hashers running full nodes, which leads to centralized entities having more power, which makes Bitcoin require more trust, which weakens Bitcoins value proposition.


{| class="wikitable sortable"
{| class="wikitable sortable"

Revision as of 01:19, 1 June 2015

Argument in favor of increasing the blocksize

  • Bigger blocks (more transactions per second)

Argument in opposition of increasing the blocksize

  • Risk of catastrophic consensus failure

Damage to decentalization

  • Bitcoin is only useful if it is decentralized because centralization requires trust. Bitcoins value proposition is trustlessness.
  • The larger the hash-rate a single miner controls, the more centralized Bitcoin becomes and the more trust using Bitcoin requires.
  • Running your own full node while mining rather than giving another entity the right to your hash-power decreases the hash-rate of large miners. Those who control hash-power are able to control their own hash power if and only if they run a full node.
  • Less individuals who control hash-power will run full nodes if running one becomes more expensive.
  • Larger blocks leads to more expensive full nodes.
  • Therefore, larger blocks lead to less hashers running full nodes, which leads to centralized entities having more power, which makes Bitcoin require more trust, which weakens Bitcoins value proposition.
Entity Supports Larger Blocks Supports Hard Fork
CoinBase Yes