$8 worth of security for each and every transaction is too much security for now. Maybe at some point in the future, we'll need that, but we'll never get to that point without the growth than can only come from cheap transactions.
This "field of dreams" business model of smallblockers is baffling. You don't run a small bank like that, getting a huge vault and then opening for deposits. You get a small vault and you upgrade when you have too many deposits to hold in the small one.
People are not going to pay for security they don't need, particularly when it is provided by Chinese security guards nervously wondering if they are going to get a phone call from the Commies suggesting they take the day off.
The difficult thing about this conversation is that we are repeatedly being misrepresented or misunderstood. Core has already agreed to compromise and kick the can by increasing capacity(they are slowly increasing the "bank" vault just like classic).... which means that you really aren't interested in 2MB, but something much bigger... which at this point in time(remember we want bigger blocks too) would be disastrous for bitcoin. Even by Gavin's own calculations Classic could cause a 40% node drop off (worse case scenario) , this is absolutely unacceptable and we need to start reversing this trend immediately.
It really isn't a choice between on the chain decentralized network with large blocks and a decentralized network of payment channels using the main chain as a settlement network. The first option is impossible to accomplish at Visa levels of tx's , It will never happen, not because of any choices we make , but because the technology is just incapable and any future projected technology is incapable of doing this in a decentralized manner. *
* I am open to the idea of unforeseen radical breakthroughs that completely change technology or black swan events... but lets modify bitcoin if these happen and not expect for them to occur.
That's not true. I am interested in bigger increases IF we can do it safely and securely. The issue is that i don't trust core to follow through on their planned increases at all. If they were selfishly interested in throttling the network so that they can make money on their LN side chain regardless of who it hurt, how would they be acting any differently than they are now?
Let's say your girlfriend wants to get married and you have no intention of ever doing it. What do you do? If you're a douchebag, you know that the honest answer will mean you won't get laid, so the solution is to stall so you can keep having sex with her as long as possible. At some point, the girlfriend has to stop fucking until you buy a ring. That's where we're at now. The problem is we keep buying bitcoin (putting out), so douchebag Core keeps on stalling.
SegWit is just ring shopping in the cheapest jewelry store in town. It's not exactly overwhelming evidence of commitment.
