I don't care how it gets fixed, as long as it does gets fixed.
How did we still not get consensus on this?
An open source protocol should be much faster at adopting to change.
This is not a good sign
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Right now Bitcoin still constitutes a potentially usable foundation for autonomous value storage free of counter-party risk (much like precious metals.) It is simple and proven and has stood the test of time and of attack better than I had guessed it would when I initially took a position.
I and others see the appropriate track to be to build on the foundation that Bitcoin provides. The most obvious failure mode would be for Bitcoin to grow itself into a situation where it was no longer reliable or workable as an autonomous system supportable by low capital actors. I have little doubt that the real force behind the movement to bloat Bitcoin is coming from people who see things the exact same way. The main difference is that Bitcoin failing is, to me, a bad thing.
It works now, however with increased adoption and therefore increased transaction volume it will not work as it does now, transactions would become unreliable and the fee would also increase, this would conversely hamper adoption and worsen the public perception of Bitcoin.
I think that increasing the blocksize will maximize decentralization and financial freedom compared to the alternatives over the long run. That is my position and that is my intend, I want Bitcoin to "succeed" regardless of what other people say to the contrary.
