On the other hand, "minor" changes in the BU code even before their hard fork activation have already led to invalid block generation.
Remember: BU and Segwit are not the only two choices in the world... 2MB hard fork is VERY easy from the software side. The network must consent, but it has been done successfully in the past, in one day. No politics in that statement.
At this point, lines are drawn, and people are unlikely to accept Segwit, regardless of whether a blocksize increase is included or not.
JayGuanGee, [facepalm], I can't even engage with you, please look at this chart and tell me there is no problem again:
https://blockchain.info/charts/mempool-size?daysAverageString=7×pan=all (7-day average mempool size).
You cannot engage because you are continuing to exaggerate and to make things up. Yes, blocks are still full, but transactions are going through and
fees remain relatively low. and we are still achieving secure immutable decentralized value storage and transfer of value. This bitcoin thingie is world changing, and even if there is no solution (such as seg wit or larger blocks), bitcoin brings a lot of value, even in its current state. So don't be trying to suggest that bitcoin needs to compete with Visa or with some payment system, when it achieves a whole other level of added value, even in it's current state and even if some variation of its current state were to continue for the next 20 years.
I feel sorry for you. You've also been fallen into the BS fee trap. Do the math: Fees are just not needed for the next years...