It is very rare these days that someone outside the core team is so helpful to them as in this post. Most outside core would be just as happy to see core fade away instead of being so very helpful as TB is being here, albeit TB was masterfully trolled by GM into doing GM's job for him, it is just as likely that GM's ego or outside incentives will prevent him from taking any of this helpful advice to heart.
Thanks for demonstrating your lack of either clue or integrity for the record-- some people might have been mistaking your endorsement of Wright as a moment of bamboozle rather than a deeper character flaw.
But just in case you missed the response to his claims there:
There was an incomplete
PR for that, it was something like a 5% performance difference for initial sync at the time; it would be somewhat more now due to other optimizations. Instead we spent more time eliminating redundant sha256 operations in the codebase, which got a lot more speed up then this final bit of optimization will. It's used in the fibre codebase without autodetection. Please feel free to finish up the autodetection for it. It's a perfect project for a new contributor. We also have a new AMD host so that x86_64 sha2 extensions can be tested on it.
So, dumping some output of a google search citing code that we already had-- isn't exactly "showing us the wound", would you say?
Not to mention your highlight of the use of sha256^2 which is part of the protocol definition from day one and not something we could change without invalidating every transaction and block. (Nor is it entirely pointless...) But I guess as Craig Wright's partner in crime you already know all about that because he's totally Satoshi. (lol)
Most interesting here is that TB has found where Core team have added the Big-O Quadratic Sighash bug which is their big issue of why then need SegWit and can't scale.
So, you're telling us that "TB" is Craig Wright? Because that
easily debunked claim is Wright's as far as I know.