The Blocksize War of 2017: How Bitcoin Survived Its Biggest Internal Crisis
As Bitcoin grew in popularity, the network became congested. The protocol had a hardcoded limit: each block could only hold 1 megabyte (1MB) of transaction data. This meant the network could only process about 3 to 7 transactions per second.
Quick Answer
In 2017, the Bitcoin network faced an existential threat not from governments, but from within. A civil war erupted over a fundamental technical parameter: the size of a block. The resolution of this conflict proved definitively that Bitcoin is controlled by its users, not corporate interests.
💡 Key Takeaways
- The Blocksize War was a debate over whether to increase Bitcoin's 1MB block limit to allow for more transactions.
- Corporate miners and large exchanges pushed for larger blocks (big blockers).
- Individual node runners and developers fought to keep blocks small to preserve decentralization (small blockers).
- The small blockers won via a User Activated Soft Fork (UASF), proving users control the network.
On this page
The Great Divide
Two factions emerged. The "Big Blockers," led by large mining corporations and prominent CEOs, argued that the block size must be increased to allow for cheap, fast payments. They viewed Bitcoin primarily as a payment network.
The "Small Blockers," consisting mostly of core developers and everyday users running full nodes, argued that increasing the block size would make the blockchain too large for average people to store on their home computers. If only massive data centers could run nodes, Bitcoin would become centralized. They viewed Bitcoin primarily as digital gold.
The New York Agreement and the UASF
In May 2017, a group of powerful CEOs and miners met behind closed doors and signed the "New York Agreement," deciding to force a block size increase. They assumed their combined hash power gave them total control.
They were wrong. Everyday users rebelled by initiating a User Activated Soft Fork (UASF). Thousands of individual nodes signaled that they would reject any blocks from miners who followed the corporate agreement.
Start Trading Bitcoin on Coinbase
Join millions of people who trust Coinbase to buy, sell, and manage their Bitcoin. Sign up today and get started in minutes.
Sign Up for Free
Conclusion: The Users Reign Supreme
Faced with the reality that users would simply ignore their blocks, the corporate coalition backed down. The network activated the SegWit upgrade instead, paving the way for the Lightning Network. The Blocksize War proved that in Bitcoin, the economic majority (the users running nodes) holds the ultimate power, ensuring the protocol remains immune to corporate takeover.
Start Trading Bitcoin on Coinbase
Join millions of people who trust Coinbase to buy, sell, and manage their Bitcoin. Sign up today and get started in minutes.
Sign Up for FreeFrequently Asked Questions
What was the Blocksize War?
A multi-year debate within the Bitcoin community over whether to increase the block size limit to scale the network. It culminated in 2017 with the community rejecting corporate efforts to change the protocol rules.
Why is a small block size important for Bitcoin?
Keeping blocks small ensures that the total size of the blockchain remains manageable. This allows ordinary users to run full nodes on cheap hardware, which maintains the network's decentralization and security.
Enjoyed this story?
Share it with your network and help others discover the history and utility of Bitcoin.
