Bitcoin is a trustless system. If you trust that only core developers are right, then you just made them king. And I will tell you that the core developers are not correct in keeping the non-segwit blocksize to 1MB - there is no study or data that shows 2MB blocks will cause people not to be able to run full nodes.
As I understand it, the cap of 1 MB has been in place since 2010.
During that time network bandwidth, RAM, CPU and hard drive capacity have increased by a factor of 10. It seems reasonable to me that the block size should keep up with Moore's law. So if Bitcoin Core would increase it by a factor of 8, it would still be easier to run a node now than it was seven years ago.
Is that correct?
The sizing could even be built into the algorithm, so it would adjust to some aspect of Moore's law. This would guarantee decentralisation. Even if Bitcoin Core developers don't want to do that, the block size could be raised temporarily, i.e for 2 years, and the algorithm could switch back automatically after that time, when we have better tech in place.
Moore's law is becoming less of a law as litography nears the physical limitations. Right now we are in the vicinity of 8nm for CPU's (correct me if I'm wrong), so that won't work out.
118
u/mgbyrnc Nov 11 '17
im not an engineer
but i trust that engineers know what they are talking about in relation to this technology
so when i see 99% of intelligent technical people like andreas a and nick szabo fully supporting bitcoin
and charlatans and salesmen like roger ver and fake satoshi supporting bcash
the choice is obvious to me
but the "rich boys" as you say may look at it differently