Topic: SATOSHI - BTC 32 MB Blockchain Size (Read 977 times)

Not sure if you know or you didn't even research, but this is the forum Satoshi (not Satochi btw) used.
You can even find his username here using the member search. He is also the only one with a rank of "Founder"
You should check his posts, it's good read anyway. Go into the mind of satoshi.

What was the original forum that Satochi used, still exists?

Some folks from Bitcoin Core ran some tests

But you should understand that this disadvantage is hard to quantify since it is a wildly fluctuating value that would depend on ever changing conditions (like current network load). Nevertheless, you can be pretty sure that bigger blocks take longer times to propagate, and it is in fact a matter of seconds, not minutes, but this is enough to put some miners at disadvantage. The relationship is not linear, i.e. you can't say that 10Mb blocks will propagate 10 times longer. In some cases, such a block may take a lot longer than that to reach remote miners due to various network issues

While I see it being a disadvantage, is it possible to put a number to it? 10 minutes should be enough to propagate the network using today's wire (maybe not 2008 wire though)

There was a good reason behind going (back) to 1Mb block size

And it is essentially the same reason why Bitcoin Core is so negative toward increasing the block size toady, while miners, on the contrary, are so hell-bent on pushing larger blocks. Bigger blocks take longer times to propagate over the network, and miners who are located in, say, Europe or the US find themselves at a disadvantage against Chines miners who mine most coins and are located close to each other. In other words, smaller blocks are faster and thus contribute to a more level mining playground

this is an interesting info

Our Dev is very concerned about Segwit.
BTW- I asked him to integrate Segwit into KORE and he refused.
Here is our conversation:



[12:36 AM] MikeMike: Geeez if I only understood this earlier regarding segwit!
[12:36 AM] KOREWDev: Hahaha
[12:36 AM] MikeMike: All they had to do was increase the block size a tiny bit
[12:37 AM] KOREWDev: It's incredibly dangerous and notice how when engineers have pointed out these flaws they are completely hand waved
[12:37 AM] MikeMike: Is there any special things segwit could do?
[12:37 AM] MikeMike: seems to me adding segwit is deviating from Satoshi
[12:38 AM] KOREWDev: The very nature of segwit is bankster oriented
[12:38 AM] MikeMike: how so?
[12:38 AM] KOREWDev: They could potentially start creating unlimited coins offchain and selling them for real bitcoin!
[12:39 AM] MikeMike: Why has this information not been made public?(edited)
[12:40 AM] KOREWDev: The cryptography behind all this should have started as a coin in and of itself then if it was that "good" it would naturally surpass bitcoin .
But instead they are forcing it down our throats
[12:40 AM] KOREWDev: It is public information
[12:40 AM] KOREWDev: But remember that post of mine you saw on bitcointalk?
[12:40 AM] KOREWDev: Remember how the shills tried to drown out my questions?
[12:41 AM] KOREWDev: That's how they are doing it
[12:41 AM] MikeMike: I know a hacker who went to work on the core dev team.
[12:41 AM] MikeMike:__________ is last name
[12:42 AM] MikeMike: I wonder if he is behind this at all and what his opinions are on it.
[12:42 AM] KOREWDev: In every forum , in every discussion, people are being paid to hype segwit yet they do not know how dangerous it really is.
[12:43 AM] MikeMike: What do you recommend?
[12:43 AM] KOREWDev: Think on it , me and you see bitcoin, we spend 100 million to buy people and influence, 5 years later we control a multi billion dollar industry, not a bad return right ?
[12:44 AM] KOREWDev: I have recommended simply reverting to the original block size Satoshi intended
[12:44 AM] MikeMike: Which was?
[12:44 AM] KOREWDev: 32 MBg!
[12:45 AM] MikeMike: so why not go to 4?
[12:45 AM] MikeMike: What happened to people in the core dev team for bitcoin?
[12:45 AM] MikeMike: How could they put something like this together?
[12:46 AM] KOREWDev: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/satoshi-btc-32-mb-blockchain-size-1835653
[12:46 AM] KOREWDev: They are being influenced by big money and huge egos
[12:48 AM] KOREWDev: IMO reverting to 32 MB would ensure that no further argument would arise
[12:48 AM] MikeMike: So once segwit is activated a future release cannot take it out?
[12:48 AM] KOREWDev: we would simply be using blocks in their natural intended form
[12:48 AM] KOREWDev: It would be impossible
[12:49 AM] MikeMike: So  32 mb is scaling then. Only uses what it needs. spam attacks could increase.
[12:49 AM] KOREWDev: those transactions made and processed while it was there would require segwit to always be a part of the code
[12:49 AM] KOREWDev: LOL
[12:49 AM] KOREWDev: considering the cost of spamming 32MB
[12:50 AM] KOREWDev: they would actually die down
[12:50 AM] KOREWDev: it's easy to fill a 1 MB block and cheap too
[12:50 AM] MikeMike: banksers have unlimited funds
[12:50 AM] KOREWDev: try paying the TX fee for just one day of spamming blocks
[12:50 AM] KOREWDev: NOPE
[12:50 AM] KOREWDev: even they would feel the sting
[12:50 AM] KOREWDev: remember ,, the fee is not paid in USD
[12:50 AM] KOREWDev: it's paid in BTC(edited)
[12:51 AM] KOREWDev: :smiley:
[12:51 AM] MikeMike: Would you mind if I made a post in that thread and c/p our conversation?
[12:52 AM] KOREWDev: No, i do not mind
[12:52 AM] KOREWDev: though trust me, no one will really listen
[12:52 AM] KOREWDev: we've been at this for years
[12:55 AM] KOREWDev: 32 MB every ten minutes in negligible
[12:55 AM] KOREWDev: and would take a very long time to saturate
[12:56 AM] KOREWDev: By then the price of Bitcoin will be such that people buy their coffee with alts and store their savings as BTC


MikeMike

Satoshi programmed bitcoin to be mined at 1 mb during its launch and it will increase as bitcoin is developing over the years. It means that the more users bitcoin has the blocksize will increase. But the problem is that satoshi left bitcoin behind leaving it to other developers who does not have the same views as him. Thus today the intended blocksize did not happen but instead it remained the same. Other reasons is that 1 mb blocksize is still good even today and the only problem is not on the blocksize but the spam attacks on blockchain.

Someone predicted it in the past Satoshi said the community will establish consensus and increase the size.
Did not predict the drama
----------------------------------------
Quote from satoshi:
It can be phased in, like:

if (blocknumber > 115000)
    maxblocksize = largerlimit

It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.  When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.

~ Satoshi Nakamoto, on bitcointalk.org, October 04, 2010, 07:48:40 PM

WOW I did not know about this size thing. I am interested in it a lot now. The size is really important for transaction I guess as it it gives indirect confirmations from block solving. So is it like bigger the block size more is the time it takes? From your statement I am thinking it is related to bandwidth stuff more rather than transactions. Its great to know that bitcoin creator thinking about personal computer easiness as well as consumer grade internet connections. 

So there was something with 32 MB i have good memory

You can look at the Bitcoin Wiki to get some background.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability_FAQ


Bitcoin Core was initially released without an explicit block size limit. However, the code did limit network messages to a maximum of 32 MiB, setting an effective upper bound on block size.[2]
Around 15 July 2010, Satoshi Nakamoto changed Bitcoin Core’s mining code so that it wouldn’t create any blocks larger than 990,000 bytes.[3]
Two months later on 7 September 2010, Nakamoto changed Bitcoin Core’s consensus rules to reject blocks larger than 1,000,000 bytes (1 megabyte) if their block height was higher than 79,400.[4] (Block 79,400 was later produced on 12 September 2010.[5])

... Statements by Nakamoto in the summer of 2010 indicate he believed Bitcoin could scale to block sizes far larger than 1 megabyte. For example, on 5 August 2010, he wrote that "[W]hatever size micropayments you need will eventually be practical. I think in 5 or 10 years, the bandwidth and storage will seem trivial" and "[microtransactions on the blockchain] can become more practical ... if I implement client-only mode and the number of network nodes consolidates into a smaller number of professional server farms" [7].

These statements suggest that the intended purpose of the 1 megabyte limit was not to keep bandwidth and storage requirements for running a Bitcoin node low enough to be practical for personal computers and consumer-grade internet connections, and that the limit was intended to be lifted to accommodate greater demand for transactional capacity.

i have always heard that there were no limit for block size. so i am very interested to know where you brought your 32 MB from. can you provide a reference for what you said?

but i know that Satoshi set the limit of 1 MB because there were fear of spam attack that can fill the blocks up fast and with useless transactions and waste space. so the limit is there to prevent flood!

p.s. why did you post this question in Economics board?!

satoshi nakatomo the first create bitcoin not use block size 32 MB, early launch until now only 1 Mb
and now discussion about block size bitcoin unlimited and segwit

Hello professionals,

I am amatour but I know that Satoshi created Bitcoin with Blockchain size like 32 MB.

1. Who and why changed it to 1 MB ?
2. Why can`t we back to 32 MB ?