[bitcoin-dev] Block size following technological growth

Gary Mulder flyingkiwiguy at gmail.com
Thu Jul 30 16:56:23 UTC 2015

On 30 July 2015 at 16:12, Jorge Timón <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> wrote:

> 1) Unlike previous blocksize hardfork proposals, this uses median time
> instead of block.nTime for activation. I like that more but my
> preference is still using height for everything. But that discussion
> is not specific to this proposal, so it's better if we discuss that
> for all of them here:
> http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-July/009731.html

Note that a "median" is a special case of a 50% percentile. If you desire
to apply a more stringent criteria you can use the 75th or even 90th


Perhaps if a statistician (i.e. not me) could be found to offer her
services, she could become a resource for helping selecting the most
appropriate statistical algorithms on request (and implemented Integer math
as per Gavin, from memory), considering the consequences of learning
post-fork that a "bad statistical model" was chosen.

e.g. an exponentially weighted moving average is usually much less volatile
and harder to manipulate than a simple moving average, but still can
"respond" to short term drivers.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150730/b6d539f7/attachment.html>

More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list