My view is that high-frequency stress tests will only serve to drill-down to determine what block size is best to split the mining network into 50/50, i.e. a "network-split attack". Click to expand...

Having them every 6 months makes sense as we should expect some overall improvement in that timescale. Click to expand...

That is correct! I think it's better to know than it is to not know. I doubt miners will use this information to be malicious. Even if they do, they could have gotten the number by doing the testing on a private network anyways.Doing the test infrequently give the advantage of having enough time to fix problems that arise. If the tests happen weekly, then you only have one week to fix a problem, if the next test is in 6 months, you have 6 months to fix the problem, etc.The downside is it will take longer to see trends if the tests are only making 2 stress blocks per year. The core developers think "centralization" will occur when blocks get too big. It'll take years to see that trend develop if only one stress block happens every 6 months...It seems people that have since commented on this proposal prefer less frequently than weekly. I have yet to see someone suggest daily or hourly or anything like that. I think the time of the stress test should be easy to remember. "every Monday" is easy to remember, as is "the first Friday of each month". Its harder to remember "January 1st and July 1st" or "January 1st, May1st, and Sept 1st"There is also the difficulty adjustment that happens every 2 weeks. Maybe the stress test can be defined as 10 blocks before the each difficulty adjustment. Or maybe it can be derived from the halving block... I think it's probably better to have it defined based on a calendar date and time, rather than a block number, because human coordination is the goal and that will be easier with "human" dates and times.