You are right, I was here, but it did return on scene with different discussion on 2013.
The real problem is that if someone has a business plan that it depends by not solving a problem, it's easy that it will take a loooong time.
Do you have concrete proof of what you are inferring?
He seems to be referring to Blockstream. To this I would say that the problem they seem to be focused on is keeping Bitcoin 'free' (using the term in a systems and political sense) and secure while at the same time making it's strengths filter down to everyone. It's a tricky operation. Much more involved than the brain-dead 'bigger blocks yesterday already' strategy, but they seem to be making progress at a comfortable clip and easily fast enough to beat the race against any significant block size constraints which currently exist.
Back in 2011 a lot of people were all indignant about the idea that Satoshi made a lot of money off his work on Bitcoin. I never understood this. Even if he did, fantastic. He deserved to for Christ's sake! If Blockstream makes a ton of money off their work on LN and sidechains and whatever, that would seem fair enough to me. Some of the crypto they are working on is cutting edge and the problems they are attacking are difficult and new-ish to network and to monetary science. I honestly don't see how they are going to become ultra-wealthy tycoons off it though, and nobody making this accusation seems to be able to put their finger on it either.
You must be kidding right? Satoshi didn't forced anybody to use bitcoin while Blockstream is trying to force everybody down their path. They won't succeed though.