Quote from: Viper1 on May 17, 2017, 07:58:21 PM

Quote from: The One on May 17, 2017, 07:47:49 PM

Compromise on security of the network

Nothing more than opinions one way or the other.

Quote from: The One on May 17, 2017, 07:47:49 PM

future mining fees to secure the network

You don't want bitcoin then since that was the plan from day 1. Or maybe you haven't read all the emails/posts etc from back then. Why would any miner support the network once the reward gets close to zero without fees to make up for that?

Quote from: The One on May 17, 2017, 07:47:49 PM

One either gets it right or not. If a mistake is made can it be reversed?

I don't know what world you live in, but everything we develop/code and every little change that's made is a risk and the outcome one "thinks" will happen is made up of a bunch of assumptions and as much testing and scientific proof one can do. Despite that, there is never any guarantee.

You misunderstood me. That's precisely what LN will do - take fees away from the miners thus reducing security in the future.

The real world. Grin

Segwit is not a "little change."
Raising the blocksize to 2mb now, then 4mb by the end of the year is what i call "little change" that can be observed, debated on and possibly reversed if it becomes a disaster. However it will be successfully sufficient to take the risk vs. the outcome of possible increase in spam. In the meantime, Capacity goes up, possible small increase in scaling. Higher scaling can be researched into until a "bright spark" comes up with a better idea.