Quote from: franky1 on June 07, 2016, 09:54:11 AM

Quote from: Lauda on June 07, 2016, 09:00:56 AM

If the Segwit soft fork does not get activated then there can be no adoption.

everyone can remember the promise that hard fork (everyone upgrading) was not needed because softforks dont need consensus, that segwit can be "compatible" with old nodes. and everything was honky-dory with fluffy clouds and unicorns flying to the moon.. and everyone gets to still be a full node and a free chocolate cookie

but here is a blockstreamer admitting that a softfork is not as soft as they first said.. if it was soft it could get activated with out any adoption.. which was the whole point of why people first loved segwit instead of hardforks
but now its actually admitted to require adoption just to activate, making it actually a harder-than soft fork.

now people are wising up that it need consensus and a high percentage of adoption to activate.... just like a hard fork

so here is a radical thought... you may need to sit down and take a few minutes to think about it..
wait for it..
here it comes..

include the block limit increase with segwit....

but before you cry your wet dream admiration's for blockstream.. remember this.. read it, sit back have a coffee and think outside of the box about what im actually about to say.. take a few minutes to let the thought settle in your mind before you shout out your blockstream admirations about why not to do it.

just because the blocklimit will be 2mb.. there is nothing in the rational world of reality that suddenly causes a block to bloat to 2mb in size instantly after activation just because the new limit exists....
the block limit is not a rule to say 'this is the the amount of data needed before we do anything'.. instead its about allowing anything from 0-2mb.
again for emphasis.. its not a rule that says only accept 2mb blocks.. but anything under 2mb(meaning 0-1mb can still be accepted)

EG in 2013 when blocks were finally allowed to surpass the 500k buglimit(related to databases) to then fully embrace the 1mb blocklimit.. blocks were not instantly 1mb in size.. miners were not ejaculating happiness that they can now bloat blocks instantly with 1mb of data..
instead it allowed a couple years to naturally grow at a natural pace..

so while we are now seeing that segwit actually requires people to upgrade, not just out of personal choice, but as a vote/consensus just to activate it.. (finally blockstreamers are starting to admit it) you might aswell increase the potential blocklimit tooo...thus allow for potential growth without needing the constant oliver twist tactics every couple years of "please sir can i have some more".

as for the proposal of just 1.05mb or 1.25mb.. that is also a short term thing that wont deter the oliver twist scenario for as long

but i can already predict 4 responses.
1. gmaxwell admitting all his code and features are meant for sidechains and he doesnt see the need to expand bitcoin or include features he is coding for bitcoin, things like CT wont even be in bitcoin... thus pretend bitcoin issues are not even in his remit to be involved in,
even if he has previously highlighted his features in context of bitcoin by mentioning the words bitcoin more often then his sidechains coin names while talking about his features.*
*https://people.xiph.org/~greg/confidential_values.txt - mentions(bitcoin:20 zerocoin:1 elements: 4)
2. luke pretending he is not part of the core-devs and his agreement to code the hardfork was not meant to be part of core, but he did enjoy the free vacation in asia.
3. lauda replies with some insult and not actually address the issue.
4. other blockstream fanboys, if not insulting, will atleast try to suggest that hard forks should only be about "classic" debate and not even consider core including a hard fork, followed by those same blockstream fanboys using buzzwords like bigblockers, gavinistas, and maybe even use some latin rhetoric they learned from each other without even checking the context of when or how it should be used.. before ofcourse running back to go play with their monero

Long reading - one meaning: WE NEED BOTH (and more for sure in new Releases)

Still 2MB HF would just do fine - but it's toooo easy and nobody gets the cheers & credits for implementing.

So than do BOTH and mess up the code a bit and get the merrits.