Quote from: Uberse on July 26, 2017, 11:34:03 PM

Does anyone if BitcoinCash contains the malleability-problem fix that SegWit has? If it doesn't, it's dead. You couldn't use LN, right?

Wrong

Also:

- With segwit, block sizes that were 1Mb will become 2Mb average (up to 4Mb). So much for decentralisation and those node runners with low specs connectivity and hardware...

- LN itself is a transaction layer that would sit on top of bitcoin but also a number of other currencies (at least 4 others I've come across). LN is what people would transact with rendering the underlying currencies, in time, irrelevant (and removing bitcoin's value as a currency in the process)

- A big subject of contention is also as far as I understand, about fees. Bitcoin Core wants miners to give a 75% discount for transactions to and from LN (the LN service would of course require fees...). Assuming all transactions went through LN and existing fees cover the miners' economic costs of processing transactions it would require that native bitcoin fees go up by a factor of 4 to cover the deficit

- There is no solid logic I have come across that would require bitcoin block sizes to stay at or below 1Mb. The original design allowed for block size growth. The extent of the efforts put into stopping bitcoin from growing and scaling natively is not meaningfully and maturely explained. Segwit proves that keeping block size low is NOT an issue.

- Segwith, LN technologies are at least in part patended by one or more private companies including Blockstream, a company that employs people at the top of the bitcoin core development team. These people are, as far as I know, hiding the nature of their patents. How does that fit with bitcoin's decentralised, open source nature and philosophy? Since when are open source developers supposed to behave that way?

Something is very wrong with bitcoin's governance and that raises fundamental questions about it's future.

At least we know miners' motivations: they want to make as much money as possible from bitcoin and for that they need it to succeed.

The bitcoin core leadership and the companies they are associated with seem to focus mostly on developing other technologies and on making sure bitcoin won't scale natively. What is their motivation, what are their vested interests? Is it about development as they claim to some or is it about being in business for themselves?