Quote from: siameze on January 12, 2016, 02:13:36 PM

This is the core of why I don't agree with a lot of the proposals out there. They seek to weaken Bitcoin's cryptography in some way or pass off complete signatures as not necessary. Without a fully verified node you may as well be using pebbles recorded in the rockchain,

While SegWit might not be a favored solution nor a simple one, it does not weaken the security model that Bitcoin uses. You can run your own tests on the testnet.

Quote from: valiz on January 12, 2016, 01:20:01 PM

Dear huge block shills, stop talking and FORK OFF!

That would be very nice wouldn't it?

Quote from: Kakmakr on January 12, 2016, 12:21:27 PM

Whoever thought that the idea to implement a competing BIP with dire consequences to the privacy of the Bitcoin users, must be stir crazy. I would rather kick the can down the road and not bend the knee to make sacrifices to my privacy. We need a scalable alternative without these funny add-on's.

Exactly. Why should we sacrifice anything just because some think that they should be paying for coffee with Bitcoin? Once the ecosystem is ready then we can increase the block size properly/implement other solutions. Increasing the block size limit is the same as adding more payload to a airplane; it can only take so much before it crashes. It would be wiser to first improve the plane itself.