Segwit deployed as a soft fork is actually safer than a hard fork. A soft fork means that backwards compatibility is maintained. Old versions of Bitcoin software will be able to function with no ill effect when a soft fork is deployed. In contrast, a hard fork requires that every single Bitcoin user upgrade their software to support the new consensus rules. This has the effect of being not backwards compatible and thus forcing users to upgrade to the latest version or risk being kicked off of the Bitcoin network.
change to
Segwit deployed as a soft fork is sometimes safer than a hard fork. A soft fork means that backwards compatibility can still function even if they no longer know what they are processing. Old versions of Bitcoin software will be able to function but without fully checking new features when a soft fork is deployed.
In contrast, a hard fork and softfork both require that every single Bitcoin user upgrade their software to support the new consensus rules, but softforks can still function by just confusing the old clients into not bothering to check what they are processing, making the old node no longer full nodes. but 'compatible nodes'
the danger is that the majority do not upgrade because they have been lied to saying that there is not a problem, and basically passing a blind parcel of data around the network that they dont check.
hard forks with a small priority grace period to kick peoples ass into action can be safer. because by upgrading you regain full node status, and by making it a short priority grace period you wont run into the issues of lazy people avoiding the upgrade because they stupidly think there is no reason to do it straight away.
The other difference is whether to include the witness data in the block size count, and to maintain backwards compatibility while also having the capacity increase, it was decided to not do so.
change to
The other difference is whether to include the witness data in the block size count, and to maintain backwards compatibility while also having the capacity increase, it was decided to not do so. meaning the point of the maxblocksize variable becomes useless because physical data will no longer be 1mb, but more
PS.
if you think the above is Fud. then i dare you to stick with 0.8 for the rest of your life and try to claim that you are still a full node. and pretend that for the next year every real data hitting your hard drive will continue to be less than 1mb.
please try not to play down the risks like a biased fanboy, pretending the world is made of candy floss clouds and everything is perfect.