Topic: R/BTC moderator steps down, announces he is leaving bitcoin for Ethereum - page 2. (Read 1474 times)

Am I missing something?

There is a huge difference between adopting an alternative currency and abandoning Bitcoin. I would like to see references for each of those points, especially Dell (first time I'm hearing about it).

do not ignore the signpost warnings.


https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/61rf15/updated_list_of_big_companies_abandoning_bitcoin/

You will be able to do all of that on secondary layer solutions. Sidechains, Tumblebit, Mimblewimble, LN, et. al.

Just ignore his posts. They are full of pseudo-science and false knowledge. He will never admit to being wrong, even if 99.99% scientists said otherwise.

You don't have to be a BU supporter to see that bitcoin is in real trouble and ETH is making gains every day. And since when did bitcoin supporters declare bitcoin to be worthless except as "digital gold"? That by itself is an absolutely horrid stance to take. (Insert random altcoin) can serve that role perfectly well. The promise of bitcoin was in its ability to transform finance in all kinds of niches. That's what I've been reading for years in crypto media! So saying it is just supposed to be a store of value unable to handle payments, as I take your comment to mean, is tantamount to a wholesale surrender and retreat from most of the financial battlefield.

And Franky, you are trying way too hard to deny the obvious: Segwit will provide significantly increased transaction capacity soon after it was deployed, if it could ever get the chance.

There is no such thing as the "Flippening". This is a made up doomsday scenario by the r/btc shills who are deeply invested in ETH. Bitcoin is supposed to be digital gold, not centralized paypal 2.0.

But I'm inclined to agree with singularity87 (the author/mod at the link) that even such throttling may be enough to "kill" bitcoin in the sense that Ethereum will surpass Bitcoin in network effect, leading to the "Flippening." (A period of rapid change as people realize bitcoin supremacy is a lost cause and flee to Ethereum in droves.) So the challenge for diehard bitcoin supporters is how to avoid this outcome.

do not ignore the signpost warnings.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/61rf15/updated_list_of_big_companies_abandoning_bitcoin/

I'd point out, though, that Segwit does alleviate the immediate TX pressure,

segwit promises: 2mb-4mb block promise when activated.
segwit reality:at activation.. nothing.. people using standard UTXO (native/legacy tx keypair) will have their data stuck in the base block limit of 1mb (no gain for them). only segwit utxo spenders(users who have funds on segwit tx keypair) will have part of the tx data outside the base block.
meaning it requires people to spend their native utxo and move the funds into segwit keys.. and then when they spend the segwit UTXO then they are helping with the ratio inside and outside the base block.*

segwit promises: malleability fix promise when activated.
segwit reality:at activation.. nothing.. people using standard UTXO (native/legacy tx keypair) will have their data stuck in the base block and can still do malleability. only segwit utxo (segwit tx keypair) will move part of the tx data outside the base block. meaning it requires people spend their native utxo and move the funds into segwit keys.. and then when they spend the segwit UTXO then they are helping with the not malleating because they are disarmed.*

segwit promises: quadratic sigop fix promise when activated.
segwit reality:at activation.. nothing.. people using standard UTXO (native/legacy tx keypair) will have their data stuck in the base block and can still do sigop spam. only segwit utxo (segwit tx keypair) will move part of the tx data outside the base block. meaning it requires people spend their native utxo and move the funds into segwit keys.. and then when they spend the segwit UTXO then they are helping with the not sigop spamming because they are disarmed.*

*the issues:
trying to move 46mill native UTXO.. is a laugh to think will be 100% accomplished, especially in any rational time or ability to achieve
thinking 100% of users will voluntarily use segwit keys and stick to segwit.
thinking that malicious spammers/attacker would voluntarily use segwit keys, voluntarily disarming and de-spamming themselves.. is the opposite of the motives of said malicious spammers.

infact segwit opens up new attack vectors for these spammers. which will make it even harder for people to move funds across. and all this having to move funds just to try disarming themselves will be ADDING to the mempool spam

dont expect to get anywhere near 2mb of 'capacity' just like we didnt get 7tx/s in bitcoin 2009-2017 even when maths estimations suggested it was possible

segwit promises: keeps node costs down
segwit reality: 2mb of data is still 2mb of data for a full node no matter if the signatures are in the middle of a tx or end of a tx.. yea you can claim enabling prunned or no witness mode.. but then your no longer the upstream tier of a full node. and just part of the downstream lower tier cesspools of not full data nodes, thus might aswell just be spv/litenodes. they are not counted/treated as "full nodes"

segwit promises: keeps node counts up
segwit reality: enabling prunned or no witness mode.. they are no longer the upstream tier of a full node network. and just part of the downstream lower tier cesspits of not full data nodes, thus might aswell just be spv/litenodes. they are not counted/treated as "full nodes"
moving non segwit nodes off the network. again drops the full node count.