Quote from: gmaxwell on June 25, 2016, 07:54:34 AM

Quote from: topiOleg on June 25, 2016, 12:55:35 AM

Blockstream was created by several of the most active Bitcoin core developers. It represents over 10 Bitcoin core developers who provide together most commits to Bitcoin core.

this is a load of bullshit, sure we do a lot-- but mostly in contrast to the general failure of most of the Bitcoin industry to support infrastructure development. I'm not aware of any way of counting that concludes anything close to "most". There are a good hundred contributors to core, and a great many very active ones which aren't at blockstream.

Anyone talking about blocking segwit for some hardfork is would be proving the big stinking lie of any claim that they were concerned with capacity. Core can't and isn't going to respond to threatening behavior. Fortunately, that isn't really the situation here-- except in the fevered minds of the /r/btc fudsters.

I'm not concerned about activation having any deployment issues. (And if is delayed by some miners, that an issue the community can take up with them. I don't consider the segwit deployment urgent.)

Quote from: topiOleg on June 24, 2016, 11:51:35 PM

The HK agreement between miners and blockstream (basically Core) represents consensus.

Blockstream has no such agreement, and it wouldn't matter if it did. (And, in fact, any effort to push such a thing would be an immediate actionable violation of my employment agreement.

Quote from: Quickseller on June 25, 2016, 04:06:23 AM

introducing additional features into Bitcoin that are increasingly complex

What do you think is increasingly complex? I think segwit makes Bitcoin simpler and safer. (though because the old things are still supported you can say there is some increase, but it seems pretty modest considering the simplicity it brings to people who are only using segwit and the number of problems it solves)

You heard it here first Jihan.

The HK agreement was a farce, and you were the mark.