Quote from: digaran on February 14, 2017, 11:00:11 AM

@Lauda, aren't you one of the GitHub contributors?

Not really.

Quote from: franky1 on February 14, 2017, 12:37:42 PM

thats a laugh Lauda doesnt even know C++

Here we go again.

Quote from: franky1 on February 14, 2017, 12:37:42 PM

he cant even read more than 6 paragraphs so obviously has not reviewed the code. nor reviewed the LONG explanations of risks.

Hint: The garbage that you post is usually not worth reading.

Quote from: franky1 on February 14, 2017, 12:37:42 PM

lauda is not interested in bitcoin or protecting bitcoin. he exists to protect blockstream

I have no business affiliation with Blockstream.

Quote from: jbreher on February 14, 2017, 04:41:11 PM

The quadratic hashing issue is a non-problem. Any miner that creates a block that takes inordinate time to validate will find himself bankrupted by other miners who continue hashing on the same parent to find a peer solved block. Such a peer solved block will validate well before the aberrant block, leading to the aberrant block being orphaned. 'Problem' solved. With the incentives as they exist today. Unchanged.

Nonsense. I'm not going to hope for some optimal-case scenarios with open attack vectors out there.

Quote from: jbreher on February 14, 2017, 04:41:11 PM

Emergent consensus is -- once you strip away all the trappings of centralized planning -- the exact security model Bitcoin has enjoyed since day one.

A simple: No.

Quote from: jbreher on February 14, 2017, 04:41:11 PM

You're slipping Lauda - your statements are usually at least semi-defensible from at least one narrow angle. This one is downright ludicrous no matter what viewpoint you come at it.

Just because you don't properly understand it, that doesn't mean it's ludicrous. Read again.

Quote from: DooMAD on February 14, 2017, 05:27:43 PM

If he's not a troll, then how do you justify his actions here? He entered a completely unrelated thread to start accusing me with his paranoid delusions, despite the fact that I'd quite like to see SegWit activated to see how effective it is in the real world. But Carlton simply can't cope with anyone having a different opinion and will lash out with insults, weasel out of justifying his position, throw more insults and then play the victim when someone calls him out on it. And that's when he's not screaming at people to fork off. There may have been a time where he was capable of having a reasonable discussion, but now he's undeniably a troll. I find him to be a pernicious and loathsome creature.

I think the frustration is getting to the head of many people nowadays. You know, if you read through this one more time [e.g. a few posts by franky (most have been debunked long ago) and kiklo] you will see where it is coming from. This is the same crap that had to be dealt with for months with just a different mixture of threads and usernames.

Quote from: DooMAD on February 14, 2017, 05:27:43 PM

Given the choice between some variant of BIP106 and BU, I'd go for BIP106 every time. But I don't have that option,

You should be able to find someone/convince someone to implement it somewhere.

Quote from: DooMAD on February 14, 2017, 05:27:43 PM

Conversely, I can also see how some people have legitimate concerns over SegWit and Lightning, but people in this thread are almost certainly taking it to extremes.

I think that in plenty of cases, the word 'extremes' is very conservative. Undecided