Blockstream co-founder proposes reduction of Bitcoin network’s block size to 330Kb
Blockstream co-founder Luke DashJr. has proposed that the block size of Bitcoin should be temporarily reduced to 300kb from the current size of 1 Mb, according to a report by TrustNodes. But already the proposal has caused a stir in the crypto community with many experts arguing that it would have a negative impact on the already slow network and the move would mean a smaller number of transactions on the network. Many critics like Roger Ver and other members of the BCH and BSV community are of the view that the 1Mb cap is unnecessary and it a big stumbling block in the scalability of the network.
As per the report, the idea proposed by Luke DashJr. is a bit impractical and might make the already slow system slower. As per the report, the fact remains that to run a full node one needs to go all the way back to the genesis and download all the transactions since then, which adds up to nearly 238.32 GB.
The report further adds:
“Any given public node probably ‘talks’ to 200 others at any given time. You can limit the number, but all this ‘talking’ requires bandwidth. The more data in a block, the more bandwidth required. Putting aside considerations of how this would affect the usability of the network, a decrease of the block size by 3x would only slow down the growth by 3x.”
The scalability issue has been a major stumbling block for Bitcoin from the start and it was the main reason behind the fork that gave birth to Bitcoin Cash [BCH]. While the Bitcoin Cash[BCH] camp believes that increasing the number of blocks is the answer to the scalability issue, BTC believes that rather than increasing the number of blocks, the focus should be on developing technologies that would help to optimize transactions. Lightning Network is the leading example of such an approach.
If we consider the response, Luke’s proposal to reduce Bitcoin block size has met with a cold response from the critics and experts. Considering Luke’s stature the proposal has not been able to generate much enthusiasm among the community members and there hasn’t been much activity on the social media. The point remains that to have something in theory and to implement it in practical terms is a totally different and the ever-evolving field of blockchains might need something more than just a cosmetic change to make the impact that everyone expects it to make.
Image via Shutterstock
Join our Telegram group