He is right. We've Lightning now and 300kb blocks is something more than logical!
Please tell me you are joking; it's so hard to detect sarcasm
In the interest of maintaining civility, and playing your scenario out, do you foresee 150kb/150kb == 300kb or 300kb/300kb == 600kb Blocks, accounting for SegWit data ?
No, I'm not joking! Chinese mining cartel is selling every bitcoin they mine to defend bcash price. Lowering blocksize is the ultimate argument of showing them what they do is futile. Plus, it will be a big incentive for Lightning adoption!
I support 300kb blocksize too. Segwit increased the effective blocksize and it's best if that is undone. It won't happen though, and in a way I'm happy that it's so hard to make large changes (even though this one would be positive).
Never sacrifice security for something pitiful like "low fees".
Huh? Segwit is not going to be undone.
You have to get consensus to undo segwit, and recall segwit passed by nearly unanimous consent.
I doubt that sentiment has changed very much, in terms of undoing segwit.
It seems that there remains a vast majority of support for segwit that you would have to overcome if you want to undo it... a simple majority would be inadequate.. bitcoin no work like dat...
Lol not undo segwit. But with segwit came an implicit blocksize increase as segwit transactions are discounted. By reducing thel blocksize to 300 kb that effective increase is undone and the previous situation restored.
