I think many of us overestimated its development status when -almost half a year ago- thought it be the final push into mainstream readiness for Bitcoin.
We tried to tell you... and were soundly excoriated for it.
At the same time, maybe also underestimated the rate of new users/investors that were to come in the following months.
We tried to...
Ok, you sure have a point there. But you guys are wrong in that *just* a blocksize increase is an scalable solution. It isn't.
You are going to have to do better than a simple assertion.
The only serious investigation into the matter has proven that your average 'home' computer today can handle a simple block size increase that will net us about 100 tx/s. And with a fix to core's crappy multithreading design, can handle block size increase up to about 500 tx/s. And that is without looking for other sw architecture improvements.
How many years' worth of simple blocksize scaling do you think that will net us? Even if only one (as if), that would immediately eliminate the blockapocalypse. We don't know whether or not that would be sufficient for Moore's Theory to carry us the rest of the way to ubiquity. But it would at least provide time for LN to mature, and solve today's (and tomorrow's) pressing issues.
Core is either completely deluded in terms of economics and game theory, or they have a different goal than has publicly divulged. In the end, it matters not which of these two postulates is the correct one. Either way, you've all been led asunder.
And that's from a tech side... from a "marketing" perspective... Do you really think trying to destroy confidence in the main cryptocurrency as a store of value would do any good in the long run trust over *ANY* cryptocurrencies?
(stuff about a clearly inapplicable analogy deleted)
How much confidence destroying is going on with the current situation? If we would have had a block increase, we would not be in backpedaling apology mode. Especially in so public a manner. Rip the bandage off already.