B++ Logo
Feedback

The Blocksize Wars

The Blocksize Wars (2015-2017) were a period of intense debate and conflict within the Bitcoin community over whether to increase Bitcoin's block size limit. This controversy ultimately led to the hard fork that created Bitcoin Cash and fundamentally shaped Bitcoin's development philosophy.

The Core Issue

The Problem

Bitcoin's block size was limited to 1 MB (set by Satoshi Nakamoto in 2010). As Bitcoin adoption grew, this limit became a bottleneck:

  • Transaction Backlog: Transactions waiting hours or days for confirmation
  • Rising Fees: Fees increased as users competed for limited block space
  • Scalability Concerns: Could Bitcoin handle global adoption with 1 MB blocks?

The Question

Should Bitcoin increase its block size limit?

This seemingly simple question divided the community into two camps with fundamentally different visions for Bitcoin's future.

The Two Sides

Big Blockers

Core Belief:

  • Bitcoin should scale on-chain
  • Increase block size to handle more transactions
  • Keep all transactions on the main chain
  • Lower fees through increased capacity

Proposed Solutions:

  • Increase to 2 MB, 8 MB, or even 32 MB blocks
  • Remove block size limit entirely
  • Let the market decide optimal block size

Key Advocates:

  • Bitcoin XT (2 MB proposal)
  • Bitcoin Classic (2 MB proposal)
  • Bitcoin Unlimited (removable limit)
  • Bitcoin Cash (8 MB, later increased)

Small Blockers

Core Belief:

  • Bitcoin should scale off-chain
  • Keep blocks small to preserve decentralization
  • Use Layer 2 solutions (Lightning Network)
  • Maintain low node operation costs

Proposed Solutions:

Key Advocates:

  • Bitcoin Core developers
  • Most node operators
  • Decentralization-focused community

Timeline of Events

2010: The 1 MB Limit

  • Satoshi Nakamoto sets 1 MB block size limit
  • Initially a spam protection measure
  • Blocks were mostly empty at the time
  • Limit was meant to be temporary

2015: Early Proposals

Bitcoin XT (August 2015)

  • Proposed increasing to 2 MB, then 8 MB
  • Required 75% miner support
  • Controversial hard fork proposal
  • Rejected by community

Bitcoin Classic (January 2016)

  • Proposed 2 MB block size increase
  • Simpler proposal than XT
  • Gained some miner support
  • Eventually abandoned

2016: Bitcoin Unlimited

Bitcoin Unlimited (March 2016)

  • Proposed removing block size limit entirely
  • Let miners vote on block size
  • "Emergent consensus" mechanism
  • Gained significant miner support (~30-40%)

2017: The Resolution

SegWit Activation (August 2017)

Bitcoin Cash Hard Fork (August 1, 2017)

  • Big blockers created Bitcoin Cash (BCH)
  • 8 MB block size limit
  • Separate blockchain from Bitcoin
  • Permanent chain split

Key Arguments

Arguments for Bigger Blocks

  1. On-Chain Scaling

    • More transactions per block = lower fees
    • Simpler solution (no complex Layer 2)
    • Users want on-chain transactions

  2. User Experience

    • Faster confirmations
    • Lower fees
    • Better for everyday payments

  3. Technical Feasibility

    • Storage is cheap
    • Bandwidth has improved
    • Modern hardware can handle larger blocks

  4. Satoshi's Vision

    • Satoshi mentioned increasing block size
    • Was meant to be temporary limit
    • Should adapt to demand

Arguments for Small Blocks

  1. Decentralization

    • Larger blocks = higher node operation costs
    • Fewer people can run full nodes
    • Centralization risk

  2. Network Security

    • Slower block propagation with larger blocks
    • More orphan blocks
    • Weaker network security

  3. Off-Chain Scaling

    • Lightning Network can handle millions of transactions
    • On-chain for settlement, off-chain for payments
    • Better long-term solution

  4. Economic Security

    • Higher fees = better security
    • Miners need fees after halvings
    • Fee market is important

Technical Details

Block Size Limits

Bitcoin (BTC):

  • Base block size: 1 MB
  • With SegWit: ~2-4 MB effective capacity
  • Weight limit: 4,000,000 weight units

Bitcoin Cash (BCH):

  • Started: 8 MB
  • Current: 32 MB
  • Plans for even larger blocks

SegWit Solution

Segregated Witness (SegWit) was the compromise solution:

  • Soft Fork: Backward compatible
  • Witness Data: Moved outside base block
  • Effective Capacity: ~2 MB (up to 4 MB with witness)
  • Transaction Malleability: Fixed
  • Lightning Network: Enabled

Network Metrics

Bitcoin (BTC) - 2024:

  • Average block size: ~1.5-2 MB (with SegWit)
  • Transactions per block: ~2,000-3,000
  • Average fee: Variable ($1-50+)
  • Full node count: ~15,000-20,000

Bitcoin Cash (BCH) - 2024:

  • Average block size: ~100-500 KB
  • Transactions per block: ~500-2,000
  • Average fee: Very low (<$0.01)
  • Full node count: ~1,000-2,000

The Outcome

Bitcoin (BTC) Won

Results:

  • Maintained 1 MB base block size
  • Implemented SegWit for scaling
  • Lightning Network developed
  • Focus on decentralization preserved

Current Status:

  • ~80% of transactions use SegWit
  • Lightning Network growing
  • Fees remain variable but manageable
  • Strong decentralization

Bitcoin Cash (BCH) Split

Results:

  • Created separate blockchain
  • 8 MB blocks (later increased to 32 MB)
  • Lower fees but less decentralization
  • Smaller network and ecosystem

Current Status:

  • Separate cryptocurrency
  • Lower market cap than Bitcoin
  • Different development path
  • Still active but smaller community

Lessons Learned

1. Hard Forks Are Risky

  • Created permanent chain split
  • Divided community and resources
  • Both chains continue separately

2. Soft Forks Preferred

  • SegWit was a soft fork (backward compatible)
  • No chain split
  • Gradual adoption

3. Decentralization Matters

  • Small block supporters prioritized decentralization
  • This has proven important for Bitcoin's security
  • Node count remains high

4. Scaling Solutions Evolve

  • Lightning Network emerged as solution
  • Multiple approaches can coexist
  • Innovation continues

Impact on Bitcoin

Positive Outcomes

  1. Clarified Vision: Bitcoin's focus on decentralization was reinforced
  2. SegWit Activation: Enabled Lightning Network and other innovations
  3. Community Cohesion: Core developers and community aligned
  4. Innovation: Led to development of Layer 2 solutions

Negative Outcomes

  1. Community Division: Deep split that still exists
  2. Resources Split: Development resources divided
  3. Confusion: Users confused about different Bitcoin versions
  4. Delayed Scaling: Took years to resolve

Current Status

Bitcoin (BTC)

  • Block Size: 1 MB base, ~2-4 MB with SegWit
  • Scaling: Lightning Network + SegWit
  • Philosophy: Decentralization first
  • Status: Dominant Bitcoin implementation

Bitcoin Cash (BCH)

  • Block Size: 32 MB
  • Scaling: On-chain only
  • Philosophy: Big blocks, low fees
  • Status: Separate cryptocurrency