Charts
DataOn-chain
VIP
Market Cap
API
Rankings
CoinOSNew
CoinClaw🦞
Language
  • 简体中文
  • 繁体中文
  • English
Leader in global market data applications, committed to providing valuable information more efficiently.

Features

  • Real-time Data
  • Special Features
  • AI Grid

Services

  • News
  • Open Data(API)
  • Institutional Services

Downloads

  • Desktop
  • Android
  • iOS

Contact Us

  • Chat Room
  • Business Email
  • Official Email
  • Official Verification

Join Community

  • Telegram
  • Twitter
  • Discord

© Copyright 2013-2026. All rights reserved.

简体繁體English
|Legacy
BTCBTC
💲67963.61
+
0.74%
ETHETH
💲2070.18
-
0.06%
SOLSOL
💲80.19
-
1.01%
USDCUSDC
💲1.00
-
0%
WLDWLD
💲0.2429
-
7.43%
XRPXRP
💲1.31
-
0.76%

BitMEX Research
BitMEX Research|10月 19, 2025 09:34
> Increasing Blocksize increases centralization, again, diminishing its role as a more perfect form of money. (Read, “Blocksize Wars”) Yes, one should read "The Blocksize War". The OP_RETURN size limit has been 1MB for well over a decade. A recent version of Bitcoin Core has increased the OP_RETURN relay policy filter limit, not the actual size limit. This recent change is not a blocksize limit increase. In Chapter 2 of "The Blocksize War" it explains one of the key reasons why we need a blocksize limit, because otherwise the chain will be full of loads of spam or as the book puts it "music collection or encrypted documents". The small blockers won the war. We have a reasonable blocksize limit in place. This protects us from the spam. Filters are not effective at stopping transactions people want to make. Only a tiny minority of nodes need to ignore the filters and then the filters wont work at all. We should not fight an unwinnable war. And to the extent the filters do work at reducing the propagation of transactions people want to make, that causes centralization pressure, pretty much the same kind of centralization pressure the small blockers fought to stop in the blocksize war. Filters are not a robust long term solution to fighting against mining incentives or fighting against spam. Bitcon should not rely on ineffective measures like filters. The blocksize limit is that robust long term solution. Chapter 2 Extract > Small blockers also believed full blocks were inevitable anyway. After all, if blockspace was available, why not use it up? Anyone could store anything they liked in the blockchain, for instance their music collection or encrypted documents. Demand for cheap, highly-replicated storage was essentially unbounded, they argued. Asking for the limit to increase above expected demand was therefore nonsense. Indeed, one person could easily fill all the space up themselves. The retort to this point from the larger blockers circled back to the mining incentive argument; miners would not do this, they claimed, miners would not let this amount of data in the blocks.(BitMEX Research)
+6
Mentioned
|
APP
Windows
Mac
Share To

X

Telegram

Facebook

Reddit

CopyLink

|
APP
Windows
Mac
Share To

X

Telegram

Facebook

Reddit

CopyLink

Timeline

11月 10, 21:39Cash App launches a new Bitcoin map
11月 05, 18:34Latest developments in Bitcoin and Ethereum protocol development
11月 04, 17:42Rootstock protocol technology stack expansion
11月 04, 17:05Bring zero-knowledge proof to the trondao network
11月 04, 15:08Core has a complete end-to-end BTCfi system
11月 02, 15:51Showcasing SoFi's brand-new real-time ultra-low-cost international payment experience
11月 01, 18:00Lightning-fast Bitcoin, no waiting required
10月 31, 22:25Bitcoin Whitepaper Halloween Theme
10月 31, 14:30Bitcoin's white paper is only 9 pages long.
10月 31, 04:01Satoshi Nakamoto released the Bitcoin white paper

HotFlash

|
APP
Windows
Mac
Share To

X

Telegram

Facebook

Reddit

CopyLink

APP
Windows
Mac

X

Telegram

Facebook

Reddit

CopyLink

Hot Reads