Adjustable Block Size is a Terrible Idea

Interested in access more free crypto analysis, resources and information like this? Check out these platforms:

Telegram —

Twitter —

Having adaptable block size in light of the fact that there’s no tail emission (infinite reward produced from blocks), means there’s no incentive for an attack vector not to cripple the network in the future.

jstolfi from r/btc and other brilliant community members who have advocated for $BCH have actually noted this in the past. But instead of listening, their community has chosen to write it all off as “FUD” or “Blockstream propaganda”.

Why Is This Relevant?

Bitcoin Cash said that they were eventually going to scale to handle over 10 million TX/day. So, here’s what that means on a fundamental level:

There’s 86,400 seconds per day. So, 10 million/86,400 = 115.

PayPal currently handles 193/second at the very least. So not quite there yet.

Still interested in what upgrade allows this for $BCH.

Here are the plans as initiated by Bitcoin Cash…

Okay, let’s unpack this a bit.

The first proposed upgrade here on the network is an increase in the “default” block-size limit, which is said to be a lead up toward the “adaptive block size limit” < — I’ve been against this from the very beginning.

The first important concept to get here is that of “tail emission”, that refers to a continuous reward on the blockchain. This is the structure that Monero currently has on its protocol. So, there will never be a “cap” on the amount of Monero.

They didn’t want to take away the incentive for mining on the Monero coin — see here:

This is some super technical shit, but it gets the point across.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Yes No