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.
you could find reassuring that chypherdoc number are supported even by the official "Capacity Increase Faq", see:
https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-core/capacity-increases-faq#segwit-sizefor the sake of clarity:
According to some calculations performed by Anthony Towns, a block filled with standard single-signature P2PKH transactions would be about 1.6MB and a block filled with 2-of-2 multisignature transactions would be about 2.0MB.
to that add that you could ave 4MB virtual block size only if a block is completely filled by 3-of-3 txs.
Based on such actual data and the avg block txs compositions SegWit will give s scaling factor of ~1.75x once the soft-fork will be adopted by 100% of the network.
This is a possible scenario:
- SegWit deployed on april/may 2016
- Soft-Fork triggers in Jun/July 2016
- 50% of adoption after one year
if all the above are valid that means that you will have 1.35MB vitual max block size by june/july 2017.