3 ms·

> Segwit activation in August was a blocksize increase, and a much more elegant solution than just doubling the blocks Segwit is a technical failure as it was

by lawn 9y ago

> Segwit activation in August was a blocksize increase, and a much more elegant solution than just doubling the blocks Segwit is a technical failure as it was implemented in a soft fork as a hack. It's scaling is inefficient. Did you see the capacity increase when it got activated? It was abysmal. https://medium.com/the-publius-letters/segregated-witness-a-fork-too-far-87d6e57a4179 https://medium.com/the-publius-letters/segregated-witness-a-... It also decreases the security of the network: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoFb3mcxluY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoFb3mcxluY > Had this been a success it would have signaled the transfer of control of Bitcoin from the many developers and contributors to corporate banking and wall street interests. it would have been the end of decentralized crypto network open to many and the start of a corporate controlled network open to only a few. Now who's pushing conspiracy theories?

wol_ 9y ago
so countless bitcoin developers acting in their own self interest is somehow a sign of a Blockstream takeover, but handful of people that got together to decide on the fate of a fork with idiot one developer is business as usual. you'd have to be a moron to believe that. an article from Dec 2016 in no way disproves the reality of today. a huge amount of value has entered the network, fees are low and the number of transaction per block have increased, segwit adoption is increasing and the community is strongly in favor. I don't know this jaqen dufus, and and Rizun is an incompetent fool. The 'chief scientist' has no clout and his BU software was complete failure and joke in a long line of takeover attempts and subversions including classic and others. segwit is the most thoroughly reviewed code that's ever been written, a vulnerability in SSL was revealed and patched as a result of this work but if you don't like segwit please use BCH instead, lol.
makomk 9y ago
The reason the capacity benefits from Segwit haven't fully appeared yet is because people haven't switched to using it yet. The 2X fork required everyone to switch to it at once via software that wasn't exactly well tested or thoroughly reviewed. That's why it failed.

by lawn 9y ago

wol_ 9y ago

so countless bitcoin developers acting in their own self interest is somehow a sign of a Blockstream takeover, but handful of people that got together to decide on the fate of a fork with idiot one developer is business as usual. you'd have to be a moron to believe that. an article from Dec 2016 in no way disproves the reality of today. a huge amount of value has entered the network, fees are low and the number of transaction per block have increased, segwit adoption is increasing and the community is strongly in favor. I don't know this jaqen dufus, and and Rizun is an incompetent fool. The 'chief scientist' has no clout and his BU software was complete failure and joke in a long line of takeover attempts and subversions including classic and others. segwit is the most thoroughly reviewed code that's ever been written, a vulnerability in SSL was revealed and patched as a result of this work but if you don't like segwit please use BCH instead, lol.

makomk 9y ago

The reason the capacity benefits from Segwit haven't fully appeared yet is because people haven't switched to using it yet. The 2X fork required everyone to switch to it at once via software that wasn't exactly well tested or thoroughly reviewed. That's why it failed.