Quote:
Originally Posted by theskillzdatklls
Segwit from what I know is a very complicated code structure and could have stuff lying around as well. also its scaling ability is pretty piss poor. 1.7x is good for what, the next month, if not already over saturated with the current market?
that said, ive said before i think both scaling functions can be deployed, ive never understood why these are all so mutually exclusive. increase blocksize, let that multiple through with sw. but core has had infinite resistance to this idea.
Segwit is a foundational change that allows further scaling improvements to be built on top of it.
You can read about them on Core's roadmap:
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pi...er/011865.html
Obviously this is way beyond my technical expertise- maybe TC can comment on the impact of these proposals
"- offchain: LN like protocols to increase throughput by a scale of x1000 to x10000 in a decentralized manner.
- onchain: Schnorr, Signature Aggregation, TreeSigs, MAST, Tx cut-through, ... overall we get from that an additionnal +50% to +100% with significant improvements on the fungibility/privacy side (that we so desperately need) ." - quoted from reddit
To say that there is no plan after Segwit is simply false.
Now the question is, do we give Core, a brilliant group of developers with an excellent track record, who promote peer-review and rigorous testing before deployment, a legitimate chance to scale Bitcoin? Or do we trust Bitcoin Unlimited, the opposite of everything I just mentioned, who have two major ****ups in the past month alone.
Edit: As for why "we can't have both."
https://youtu.be/JarEszFY1WY?t=6198
Last edited by Zenzor; 03-16-2017 at 11:39 PM.