Bitcoin Block Size Debate
In 2015-2017, the Bitcoin community was divided over the block size debate. Small blockers wanted to keep block sizes small to maintain decentralization and accessibility. Big blockers argued for larger blocks to reduce transaction fees and increase Bitcoin’s utility as a digital currency.
Small Blockers’ Perspective
- Concerned about centralization if block sizes were increased.
- Preferred infrequent, consensus-driven changes to avoid manipulation.
- Opposed the New York Agreement, which sought to compromise on block size.
Big Blockers’ Perspective
- Saw Bitcoin as “digital cash” and wanted to increase its utility.
- Argued that larger blocks were needed to keep fees low.
- Criticized layer 2 solutions like the Lightning Network.
Ethereum Founder’s Stance
Vitalik Buterin initially supported big blockers but later became frustrated with both sides’ extremes. He advocated for a balanced approach with “medium predictability” in transaction costs and node requirements.
Lessons for Ethereum
Buterin emphasized the importance of:
- Inclusive governance
- Technological innovation
- Avoiding “one-sided competence traps” where diverse perspectives are lacking.
Technological Advancements
Buterin lamented the omission of ZK-SNARKs in the block size debate. He believes these technologies could resolve scalability and privacy challenges without divisive compromises.
