Or, we could remove the pointless, artificial 1MB bottleneck and everything carries on exactly like it does now. The blockchain doesn't instantly double or treble in size. It doesn't lead to mass-centralisation (or if it does, it will happen much more slowly than it would if we start forcing users off-chain). None of the other idiotic horror stories your side of the debate has raised will come true.
You might try to carry out Mircea-Next-Tuesday's little threat and launch your 1MB-only nodes if you fancy fighting the inevitable, but I'm still pretty sure you're full of hot air on that one since you know it would be financial suicide. When the fork goes ahead, you're going to tag along and play nice because you don't have any other choice.
You might try to carry out Mircea-Next-Tuesday's little threat and launch your 1MB-only nodes if you fancy fighting the inevitable, but I'm still pretty sure you're full of hot air on that one since you know it would be financial suicide. When the fork goes ahead, you're going to tag along and play nice because you don't have any other choice.
If the fork were to succeed somehow, I would be done with bitcoin.
That's the best reason to support the fork yet.
You can try to refute what I'm saying by yet again quoting MP's ramblings, but it doesn't change the fact that people's natural tendency is to want what benefits them. A 1MB limit will not benefit the majority, so the majority won't want it. Why would anyone support a system that guarantees security for the few and forces risk and uncertainty on the many? Unless they're one of the few, that is.