Re:The senatorial governance of Bitcoin: making (de)centrali...
by lawn on Monday January 06, 2020 @11:57PM
(#21977005)
> Big blocks are probably easier to censor
Only if they get extremely big, and the clients cannot handle them.
> to use for people who only have low-spec equipment/networks.
These people should use light wallets or SPV wallets, which is what we already use on mobile phones.
> Vulnerability to censorship vs limited on-chain scaling -- pick your poison.
Only Siths deal with absolutes. This is a false choice.
Small blocks, and large fees, also have a centralizing effect on the network as small miners gets priced out as the transaction fees removes a larger fraction of their income.
And miner decentralization is the most important type of centralization there is, because that's what provides censorship resistance and network security.
Only if they get extremely big, and the clients cannot handle them.
> to use for people who only have low-spec equipment/networks.
These people should use light wallets or SPV wallets, which is what we already use on mobile phones.
> Vulnerability to censorship vs limited on-chain scaling -- pick your poison.
Only Siths deal with absolutes. This is a false choice.
Small blocks, and large fees, also have a centralizing effect on the network as small miners gets priced out as the transaction fees removes a larger fraction of their income.
And miner decentralization is the most important type of centralization there is, because that's what provides censorship resistance and network security.