The problem statement is not so simple; one one hand there is incentive for the miner to keep the block small so that it propagates the network faster but that is looking at immediate profit, however, on the other hand, Peter Todd has shown[1] in the bitcoin-dev mailinglist that actually &quot;increasing&quot; the blocksize and even withholding it for some time significantly increases profit in the near long term.<p>Now, even ignoring this, if we assume the problem statement just as what the author describes, there are problems with his approach. Firstly, big pools have said that they operate at a loss and their aim is not to earn profit from mining but by providing value-added services like &#x27;guaranteed tx confirmation&#x27;, which big pools can. Secondly, and technically, this only works if data set is low so as to keep collision low [2]. Beyond a certain point there are many false positives and worst case all transactions might be needed to sent anyways.<p>So although this is not worse than the current status, but certainly could end up not even being useful.<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.mail-archive.com&#x2F;bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net&#x2F;msg03200.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.mail-archive.com&#x2F;bitcoin-development@lists.source...</a>
[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Bloom_filter#Interesting_properties" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Bloom_filter#Interesting_prope...</a>