[Q²C]

Bitcoin Block Size Debate and Forks – The Block Wars

The term “Block Wars” in the context of Bitcoin refers to a significant period of debate, disagreement, and eventual division within the Bitcoin community regarding the scalability and size of Bitcoin blocks. Here’s a detailed explanation of the events:

Background
Bitcoin Block Size: At the inception of Bitcoin, blocks were limited to 1 MB in size. This size was chosen by Satoshi Nakamoto, Bitcoin’s creator, to prevent spam transactions and to keep the blockchain manageable. However, as Bitcoin’s adoption grew, this size limit became a bottleneck, leading to transaction backlog and increased fees during peak times.

Scalability: The central issue was how to scale Bitcoin to handle more transactions per second without compromising its decentralized nature, security, or the ethos of being a peer-to-peer electronic cash system.
The Debate
Big Blockers: Advocates for increasing the block size argued that without a larger block size, Bitcoin could not scale sufficiently to serve a global population. They proposed solutions like:

Bitcoin XT (2015): Proposed by Mike Hearn and Gavin Andresen, which would increase the block size to 8 MB and then double every two years.

Bitcoin Classic (2016): Similar to XT but more community-driven, aiming for an increase to 2 MB.

Bitcoin Unlimited (2016): Allowed miners to choose their own block size limit.
Small Blockers: On the other side, those who argued against increasing the block size emphasized:

Decentralization: Larger blocks would require more storage, bandwidth, and processing power, potentially leading to centralization as fewer nodes could participate.

Segregated Witness (SegWit): Introduced in 2017, which was seen as a way to scale by moving signature data outside of the block, thus effectively increasing capacity without changing the block size limit.
Key Events
The SegWit2x Proposal (2017): A compromise suggesting to activate SegWit and then increase the block size to 2 MB. However, this proposal was contentious and eventually led to:

The Bitcoin Cash Fork: In August 2017, a group of miners and developers forked Bitcoin into Bitcoin Cash, which had an 8 MB block size limit, escalating the block wars.
Failure of SegWit2x: The planned hard fork for increasing block size to 2 MB was called off in November 2017, as major supporters backed out, leading to significant community division but no change in Bitcoin’s block size.
Aftermath
Bitcoin Scalability: After the contentious hard fork, Bitcoin continued with SegWit, and the community began to look more into layer-two scaling solutions like the Lightning Network, which could handle transactions off-chain to reduce the load on the main blockchain.

Community Split: The block wars left a divided community, with Bitcoin Cash and later Bitcoin SV emerging as separate entities with their own ecosystems, focusing on different aspects of what they believed Bitcoin should be.

Ongoing Discussions: Even after the most intense period of the block wars, discussions about Bitcoin’s scalability continue, with debates over block size limits, transaction fees, and network capacity still occurring but with less existential threat to Bitcoin’s unity.
The Block Wars were not just about technical scaling solutions but also about the philosophy, governance, and future vision of Bitcoin, illustrating the challenges of managing a decentralized, open-source project with global stakeholders.

As of the current data available, Bitcoin transaction fees can vary based on factors such as network congestion, transaction size, and the speed at which you want the transaction to be confirmed. Here is a broad overview based on recent information:

Recent Posts on X: Posts found on X indicate that as of early February 2025, the fastest Bitcoin transaction fees were around 3-4 satoshis per virtual byte (sat/vB). This would equate to approximately $0.73 to $1.00 for a simple transaction, considering the Bitcoin price at that time was around $96,716 to $99,619.
Web Information: According to various websites:
- Tangem Blog (updated information) suggests that medium-priority transactions were priced at $8.48, and high-priority transactions at $9.32 after the recent halving.
- Bitcoinfees.net and similar fee estimators provide real-time data, but as of the latest check, they suggest fees are calculated based on the current state of the network, with recommendations for different confirmation times. For instance, to ensure a transaction is confirmed in the next block, you might need to pay around 3-4 sat/vB or more, depending on network conditions.

Given this information, the current fee for a Bitcoin transaction can be estimated but is subject to change:

For a fast confirmation: Around 3-4 sat/vB, which could translate to approximately $0.73 to $1.00 per simple transaction based on current Bitcoin prices and network conditions.
For medium to high priority: Fees could range from $8.48 to $9.32 for transactions needing quicker confirmation.

Remember, these fees are not static and can fluctuate with network demand. It’s always advisable to check with a current Bitcoin fee estimator or your wallet’s fee suggestion for the most accurate fee at the time of transaction.

Simple Hash Puzzle

by Toshinaka

Here’s an example of a simple hash puzzle:

Puzzle:

I have hashed a short, common English word using the SHA-256 algorithm. Here’s the hash:

e3b0c44298fc1c149afbf4c8996fb92427ae41e4649b934ca495991b7852b855

Can you guess the word?

Solution:

The hash provided in this puzzle actually corresponds to an empty string or no input at all, which might be a bit of a trick. Here’s how you would typically solve a real hash puzzle:

Step 1: You would try common words or phrases, especially if given hints about the length or nature of the word.
Step 2: If no hints are provided, you might use a brute-force method or a dictionary attack, where you systematically hash each word in a dictionary until you find a match.

For instance, if the actual puzzle was:

559aead08264d5795d3909718cdd05abd49572e84fe55590eef31a88a08fdffd

This hash corresponds to the word “test” in SHA-256:

echo -n “test” | sha256sum

Would produce the hash above, showing that “test” is the word being sought if you were to solve this puzzle.

Remember, in real scenarios with stronger security, hash puzzles might involve more complex hashing with salts or multiple rounds, making them much harder to crack without the exact input.

AI, Crypto & Blockchain

Bitcoin Block Size Debate and Forks – The Block Wars

Simple Hash Puzzle

pointer

digest

Donate Monero

[Q²C]