Quote from: brg444 on January 16, 2016, 05:51:55 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on January 16, 2016, 04:58:52 PM

Quote from: brg444 on January 16, 2016, 03:17:03 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on January 16, 2016, 02:13:26 PM

SW, at it's theoretical maximum, will force you to transmit 4MB worth of data for only a 1.75MB maximum gain in tx's and associated fees. how does that help you vs a simple blocksize increase to 4MB worth of pure tx's and fees?

This is a complete lie and misfabrication.

macbook-air please, if you are wang chun, do consult with the Core devs.

Segwit is the most responsible way to end this dead lock for now and will provide for ample time and headroom to optimize the propagation problems so that a 2MB hard fork may go through with absolute network consensus down the road.

There is still clear dissent amongst users about a contentious hard fork and while miners may agree it would create a bad precedent for you to force this on the community.

please point out the technical error.

First not one miner is forced to mine anything whatsoever. They will pick whatever transactions they wish and will be incentivized to pick Seg Witness tx since they will come with more fees per bytes.

As for the 4MB you present it in a disingenuous way that propose the maximum gains necessarily translates to a 4MB block.

Here's how it actually works:

Quote

That would be 1.6MB and 2MB of total actual data if you hit the limits with real transactions, so it's more like a 1.8x increase for real transactions afaics, even with substantial use of multisig addresses.

The 4MB consensus limit could only be hit by having a single trivial transaction using as little base data as possible, then a single huge 4MB witness. So people trying to abuse the system have 4x the blocksize for 1 block's worth of fees, while people using it as intended only get 1.6x or 2x the blocksize... That seems kinda backwards.

why is that link unclickable?