I see - so you are another paid shill.
How surprising.
... Thanks for making it clearer who is actually paying you to post.
This is why we can't have nice things
I do not report posts as a matter of principle; please don't force me to reconsider.
... @CIYAM: If you have nothing but your paranoiac musings & baseless accusations to contribute, kindly stop shitting up this thread. ty.
... I haven't even opened my Core wallet in weeks because I don't want to have to wait for it to synchronize....I'm just an average user so where is my motivation to maintain a full node to support the network? I mean why? Is that a valid question? The less of an incentive it becomes to maintain a full node, the more control the miners consolidate. I don't believe that was an intended outcome of the project....so things have changed from the original vision....the math needs to be re-thought in order to put the project back on track with the original vision....that's all.
The blockchain grows every day, it currently grows by (at most) 1MB every (roughly) 10 minutes. Changing the 1MB max_block_size to 2MB will make it grow by (at most) 2MB every (roughly) 10 minutes. The important bit is "at most." Just like every block isn't 1MB right now, blocks won't suddenly be 2MB, or bigger at all. Though they could be, when the capacity is needed. And if someone decided to "spam" the blockchain.
There are conceptual problems with scaling Bitcoin, and your running a full node is of clear benefit only to yourself, and only if you're handling large sums. That's a tangent tho, & and by thinking that I'm likely in the minority.
