Re: [ANN] Bitcoin Cash - Fork 1:1 of Bitcoin - Pro on-chain scaling

Quote from: MartinGandhiKennedy on October 12, 2017, 01:48:58 AM

Quote from: tekmobile on October 12, 2017, 01:09:56 AM

Honest question what do you have against segwit ?

Segwit weakens Bitcoin's security model
https://bitcrust.org/blog-incentive-shift-segwit

Risk of SegWit
https://nchain.com/en/blog/risks-of-segregated-witness-mining-cartels/

Dr. Peter Rizun - SegWit Coins are not Bitcoins - Arnhem 2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoFb3mcxluY

Didn't SegWit increase the block capacity?
https://www.bitcoincash.org/
Even if used in 100% of transactions, the increase would equate to 1.7MB blocks. Thus, it is a small capacity increase at best. It will not handle exponential growth or worldwide usage. Second, the soft fork implementation results in discardable signatures, which weakens Bitcoin's security model. Third, it makes future capacity increases more difficult due to bandwidth inefficiency and quadratic hashing attacks which SegWit doesn't solve since an attacker isn't forced to use it.

For those (and other) reasons, Bitcoin Cash was necessary as a pre-SegWit fork. Segwit will not be adopted.

8 times Core told people Segwit is a Blocksize Increase
http://archive.is/6DkOY

Small Blocks Destroy Miner Revenue
https://keepingstock.net/an-open-letter-to-bitcoin-miners-c260467e1f0

Is that the best you can come up with some BS articles I could come up with a list of articles that list technical reasons on why increasing the blocksize is bad does that make it a valid reason.

on another note looks like the miners have finally thrown in the towel and gave up last block 3 and a half hours ago now just wait for the EDA exploit to fix the profitability for them they only need to trigger a single reduction to keep parity any more and it will be more profitable and back to hyper blocks