You are making a debate just to make a debate. You can still use Bitcoin onchain without problems if you want to. But you should not criticize developers if they want to make tools that people might use.
No one is forcing you, and how would it give them misery? Lightning will also make transactions cheaper onchain if they do not want to use Lightning.
Quote
Quote
People are not forced to do all their transactions off-chain, they are just encouraged to take their micro transactions off-chain, because it is faster and cheaper to do that on a second layer that are focussed on that.
It is just the same as forcing people to do something, making their life a misery and giving them just one option to exit, your favorite one.No one is forcing you, and how would it give them misery? Lightning will also make transactions cheaper onchain if they do not want to use Lightning.
A gentleman asked me to express my ideas and i did so, what's wrong here?
No because you are biased against the Core developers. It is one thing to question or criticize, but you are imposing your own ideas as "right", and the people against you as "wrong".
Quote
Secondly, you have heard about incentives and how people follow them. Right? How don't you understand my argument here?
When you offer scalability off-chain and do nothing about it on-chain, you are forcing people to use the only economic option you have left them with.
When you offer scalability off-chain and do nothing about it on-chain, you are forcing people to use the only economic option you have left them with.
Forcing? You can choose to use onchain transactions anytime you want. Plus offchain transactions really help free some space for your onchain transactions.
Quote
I have explicitly specified that it is a right for any developer or company to use bitcoin api for developing second layer protocols or services of any kind, but it is not Core's right to be biased toward them or project the problems like scalability to them.
The Core developers are free to choose which solutions are the best for the long term feasibility of the network.
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Everyone knows "Block size" increases is one of the most ineffective ways to scale a network, so that is not even considered as a possible solution.
Wrong! Block size debate is not over, It will be over. Let us observe Ethereum and make that our case study. Give it 10 years. Bitcoin Cash will also follow the same path. If it can increase its transactions per block more than Dogecoin. Hahaha.
Ok. See you 2028.
See you.
