SegWit data is far from arbitrary; it is foundational to the Lightning Network’s ability to facilitate fast, low-cost, off-chain transactions. And the 1MB block limit was to prevent spam attacks early on in the network development. It wasn’t a hard cap like the supply. That makes no sense to sacrifice the mechanism which allows it to be a medium of exchange for no reason at all. Segwitt bits don’t cause the chain bloat and aren’t arbitrary. Unless you think sending zaps, or making payments on lighting is arbitrary lol

Replies (1)

The pricing is arbitrary. Why not 1/10? 1/1000? 1/2? Why 1/4? Why not 1/1 when the physical bits cost the same to store? The only moral answer in regards to the economics of energy is 1=1. But hey, now we can stuff spam in witness data for 1/4 of the cost and grow the chain memory up to 4x faster. Why are you afraid/reluctant for lightning tx bits to pay 1:1 the real physical cost they induce? Lightning won’t work if we don’t tax the nodes to pay via increased storage requirements? Why won’t a 1MB block size prevent spam now? Why won’t increasing the cost 4x to write spam prevent it now? Returning the blocksize to its original limit and reducing the SegWit discount does not sacrifice the mechanism of lightning, it accurately prices reality such that economic actors can make knowledgeable decisions from real price. I hope you realize you are trying to defend arbitrary price controls of a specific good/service within Bitcoin.