CHIP 2023-01 Ensuring safe permissionless block growth


We propose a process and coordination method that can be used to continue the growth of Bitcoin Cash in a decentralized and permissionless manner.

The growth of the blocksize can be an open market property with a small amount of coordination and communication. The goal is to avoid any central control or choke-points in Bitcoin Cash.


This proposal does not require deployment.


Probably the best feature of Bitcoin, as Satoshi saw it, is the elegant balance of power between the different groups. From software developers to holders to merchants and miners, each has its role to play and none is the boss over any other.

The Bitcoin Core (BTC) system has famously been captured with one specific property that had been moved from the bigger ecosystem to now be under the control of the software developers. The block size has been set to not be allowed to become larger without software developers permission. The entire system there has since become rather toxic and their failure is a really the core motivation for this CHIP. To avoid similar misalignment of priorities and subsequent capture on our chain.

The author of this CHIP means for this proposal to also show the world Bitcoin Cash already moved the blocksize limit out of control of the software developers. It makes sense to explain in practical terms how Bitcoin Cash can keep growing safely in a decentralized and permissionless way according to market needs based on market capacity.

The rest is available here:

There is a healthy amount of confusion about the way that this would work out in practice, with people thinking that miners are the ones making the decision about the outer limits, which is exactly the opposite of what this proposal is suggesting.

As such a simple made up scenario to see how the moving parts actually could interact. It is my hope that a simple scenario would be helpful for people to follow the concepts a bit better.


We have today a maximum blocksize which the miners manually set. This property is only used by miners or mining pools. This property is set by them to indicate the maximum size of the blocks they will produce.

We have today a blocksize-accept-limit . This is a technical property, meant to indicate the technical abilities of anyone parsing blocks in the Bitcoin Cash space.

The accept-limit does not need coordination to be changed, if 20% of the full nodes changes to 40MB tomorrow nothing bad will happen.

So in our scenario we go over a couple of years of changes in the wider ecosystem and what each stage looks like.

Year now+1. Our ecosystem has grown, new software releases have happened. A lot more full nodes are deployed. We might have a bunch of 32MB-accepting ones, some 40MB ones, some services even accept 64MB! Lots of differences because those people running that software will have been tested for different limits.

Year now+3 The actual block size being mined is 10MB. The majority of services have software that by default supports 40MB. The miners want to protect themselves and even while the full node mining software by default does more, they configured themselves to keep their accept-limits at 32MB.

Year now+4. Blocksizes are 20MB regularly. Some miners are mining 30MB blocks when the mempool gets really full. We still make sure that the transactions get included in the next block. Practically all of the ecosystem (exchanges, merchants, full nodes, fulcrum like indexers) are running with software marked to support 64MB blocks. The miners are still broadcasting they are accepting only 32MB.

Miners may coordinate between themselves to remove the 32MB accept-limit. They are 100 full nodes in an ecosystem of 40000 full nodes. Price has risen to a level where mining a block for the lolz is not happening anymore. Any attacker is going to lose $100K per block trying to disrupt the network. The big risk is over.

The miners decide its safe, they remove their custom-set accept limits, going back to the default set by their full node team. They KNOW its safe because the rest of the ecosystem is saying they will accept bigger blocks in well-known places or simply their connect string you can find on the future like sites.

Year now+5. Blocksizes often touch 32MB. Never going over. In the mean time practically all miners have been replaced by new ones and for sure the software being run by miners is just a year, max 2 old.

A random miner ends up mining a 33MB block. Everyone accepts it because the limits have been raised a year or more ago. By everyone in the ecosystem, over time. As new hardware and software became available.

Miners don’t have to take a risk

The entire problem we have had in the past revolves around miners taking a risk in a cut-throat business. This is solved with the proposal given here. There is no risk when you KNOW that the entire ecosystem will accept it, and you know because the proposal makes clear how everyone should tell the miners what is accepted by the exchanges, services and full nodes.

This proposal removes the risks and avoid complicated systems that may have a negative influence on the open market balances.

I will respond to your CHIP and point out the logical errors in it when I have more time.

There you go. First error.

The problem here is that Miners will not coordinate. Miners will just do what the developers of leading Node software tells them (distributes to them).

They always did so and there is absolutely no reason to think or presume that this will change without some significant event (usually a heavy crisis) happening first. This is based on pure history. This has been the way the miners behaved so far, despite claiming otherwise.

I have already explained this in multiple different topics on Reddit, here and other media. I hope I don’t have to go all over all the historical events that have driven me toward this conclusion again.

It’s pretty obvious. Miners are not active players. The just install the [DEFAULT_SOFTWARE] and mine the shit out of it like there is no tomorrow.

This is how it is. And how it’s going to be, unless some nuclear scenario happens.

Again. Logical error.

Miners don’t decide. They follow, see above.

Kind of correct. Miners definitely avoid risk. This is why they follow and install a singular node software that the community+developers decided is “safe” and represents the cryptocurrency they mine.

This has been the thing that is happening forever, since 2015.

Unfortunately, because of the critical logical erroneous assumption that you have taken, this proposal solves absolutely nothing.

You assume that miners will “coordinate” to “decide” something. This is not happening.

Miners already KNOW that the entire ecosystem will accept their blocks.

How do they know it you ask? Because they only run the “default” software (which in case of Bitcoin Cash is BCHN) and they almost never run non-default software like your Bitcoin Classic or Bitcoin Unlimited [going back in history to BTC times/2016 here].

Miners are already doing what you claim this proposal will do, but unfortunately they don’t do it and will not do it the way your proposal states.


Human following, herd innertia, listening to authorities instead of reason, looking what the other members of the herd are doing instead of thinking for oneself. This sort of stuff.