Quote from: Swimmer63 on July 14, 2017, 09:21:51 AM

Quote from: ComputerGenie on July 14, 2017, 09:07:01 AM

Quote from: Swimmer63 on July 14, 2017, 09:00:52 AM

It's this crap that makes all pro SegWit folks suspect in my mind...

I wouldn't say "all", but a good chunk. The fanboys and stakeholders are usually pretty easy to separate from the logical believers.

I lump all righteously pro SegWit posters together because I can't discern their true motives.
The movement has lost all credibility in my view because of their censorship, scare tactics and strategic media campaigning. All of their arguments conveniently leave out the part about how Blockstream will fail if it's not implemented.

Have you checked the code diffs (before & after SW) ? The design diffs to Satoshi's (drop the witness) ? The deployment diffs (SF vs HF) ? The miners acceptance (stalling) ?

Fishy, fishy, fishy, fishy .... phhhhhh

Quote from: allinvain on July 14, 2017, 10:20:29 AM

gmaxwell's reply to that article:

Quote

Gregory Maxwell

Blockstream does not have any patents, patent applications, provisional patent applications, or anything similar, related to segwit. As is the case for other major protocol features, the Bitcoin developers worked carefully to not create patent complications. Segwit was a large-scale collaboration across the community, which included people who work for Blockstream among its many contributors.

Moreover, because the public disclosure of segwit was more than a year ago, we could not apply for patents now.

In the prior thread where this absurdity was alleged on Reddit I debunked it forcefully. Considering that Rick directly repeated the tortured misinterpretation of our patent pledge from that thread (a pledge which took an approach that was lauded by multiple online groups), I find it hard to believe that he missed these corrections, doubly so in that he provides an incomplete response to them as though he were anticipating a reply, when really hed already seen the rebuttal and should have known that there was nothing to these claims.

As an executive of Blockstream and one of the contributors to segwit, my straightforward public responses 1) that we do not, have not, will not, and can not apply for patents on segwit, 2) that if had we done so we would have been ethically obligated to disclose it, and 3) that even if we had done so our pledge would have made it available to everyone not engaging in patent aggression (just as the plain language of our pledge states): If others depended upon these responses, it would create a reliance which would preclude enforcement by Blockstream or our successors in interest even if the statements were somehow all untrueor so the lawyers tell me.

In short, Rick Falkvinges allegations are entirely without merit and are supported by nothing more than pure speculation which had already been debunked.

as well is that ^

So why on earth is GMAX's brain bound to legal shit?

Should he not better be providing open source solutions for REAL BITCOINERS in a competitive open and fair / supporting way ?

When does this childish stuff finally ends? We need a way of choosing parts & modules of competing teams- not a full singleton solution provider that also needs to care about legal, economics , game theory ... ?