Everyone in Core except a single member wants to raise the blocksize, but every expert including Andreas Antonopulos, has advised against raising the blocksize without activating segwit first, because doing so would lead to a ton of different attack vectors:

https://twitter.com/aantonop/status/733702311306887168

Therefore, you can thank the miners that don't signal for segwit for not getting a blocksize increase.

Its still soft fork (SegWit) vs hard fork(BU). Still no consensus if I'm not mistaken. Of course, increasing block size I believe will resolve the problem with backlog transaction but I the experts are still debating on how they are going to implement (soft or hard fork)

Been saying this for almost 2 years now


What's needed is MORE TRANSACTIONS not more blockspace. If the blocksize is a sensitive variable for the network, why ever talk about the blocksize at all, if there are other options? Probably the best I've heard of is to hard fork NOT to 2MB, but to a new encoding scheme that makes more efficient use of 1MB.

And yet (presumably) total morons are loudly and relentlessly arguing for multiplying the blocksize by ridiculous factors, WITHOUT solving the problem where verifying blocks doesn't scale linearly BEFOREHAND. It's crazy.

Well increasing the block sizes will lead to less decentralization, because a lot of people will have to stop running a node. The costs involved with

running a node, both in hard disk space and bandwidth will force people to shut down their nodes. The network will become more vulnerable to

spam attacks too... 

Hopefully  never! These people all think they are smarter than Satoshi, go start your own Coin then. It seems like more of an effort to Centralize and control Bitcoin than "fix" it. Why wouldn't you start a brand new coin with the "magical solution" and mine block 1, 2, 3 like Satoshi? Why would they sacrifice the "magical solution" on Bitcoin with Satoshi having 1 million BTC?

The fact is the "magical solution" is Bitcoin and they want it for themselves.

Litecoin is great for quick small transactions and Ethereum also. Both are accepted many places even Dogecoin.

So it's not like dust transactions aren't possible with Cryptos.

please research.
1. blockstream are holding back NODE consensus
2. blockstream node consensus avoidance is holding back onchain growth and also miner confidence.
3. blockstream tinkered with the fee war to remove 'reactive pricing' and implemented 'averaged pricing, which biasedly increases even with 'empty blocks'.
4. pools have not changed any major rules or enforced anything. it is the code blockstream devs handed out.
5. by blockstream avoiding node consensus even with segwig. it actually shot themselves in the foot. pools wont make a massive change to the way blocks are formed and relayed unless they see high majority node acceptance.. (to avoid orphans)

the reality is that pools are not greedy. they are smart. its blockstream that bent the rules (publicly admitting it by going soft) so that they can blame pools if nothing happens, but blockstream devs can take the glory if all goes right, (typical bait and switch)

the devs should have gone for a hard CONSENSUS not soft CONSENSUS (dont confuse consensus with splits, i know your probably itching to rebuttle as such)
all the difference between hard and soft is.. is who gets to vote..
hard=nodes then pools
soft=pools then nodes

which can cause just as many issues either way if not done right

may i know what these new attack vectors are that can be caused by increasing block size?
so far i have been seeing attackers spam the hell out of the network, increasing the mempool size to unbelievable size! what would be different if say block size were bigger (eg 2 MB)?

only when they activate the SegWit will we witness the increase of the block size. however, it is hnlikelyto happen in this decade since there are too many pool do not want to involve in the SegWit. i dont know why. if the litecoin can activate the Segwit, maybe bitcoin will follow its path

I hope that even if there is no increment in block size, another solution is found and soon implemented. Unfortunately miners have a great deal of power over Bitcoin. The network being congested and the increasing rates only benefit themselves.