I appreciate anyone coming up with new ideas for Bitcoin.  Hope to hear many new suggestions and ideas from Blockstream over the next 12 months.

I've got news for you.... you've gotten all you are going to get.  The Core Dev Team is a failed sham.  They've given you their solution.... Lightening Network/Liquid/Blockstream.  Period.  Under no circumstances will there be any meaningful discussion that includes raising the block size, making it intelligently scalable based on growth.  This way they protect what is important to them.... THEIR CONTROL OVER THEIR ECONOMIC BUSINESS MODEL.

Keyword above is "business".  They have a HUGE conflict of interest in that they are making decisions based on what is good for their business model. 

The biggest SCAM in the entire Bitcoin System is Blockstreams whole "Us vs the Fiat System" headfake.   Blockstream is positioning itself to be the "New Fiat Central Authority".   Seriously, if Bitcoin were to eventually grow to its potential and become the global currency - do you really want this group of special interest frauds to have total control?

I can't believe I am going to say this, It makes me want to VOMIT that I am getting ready to suggest that everyone read Mike Hearn's November letter on this subject.  As much as I hate the current XT release, and think Mike is totally untrustworthy as well, he has totally nailed it in this letter in regards to Blockstream and Core Dev.

https://medium.com/block-chain/on-block-sizes-e047bc9f830#.raipo96xw  <<READ!

Everybody that really doesn't know anything about this should read it.  Because it is the truth.  And this is NOT my support for current XT - but I will say it again, if the Core Dev can't eliminate the biased, conflicted interest comitters - then XT or a Fedcoin may very well surface to effectively kill the current Bitcoin Core.  Leadership is needed fast. 

Blockstream^TM is taking a conservative approach. SegWit soft fork, see how that goes. Then Lightning Network and some sidechains and we'll be good to go. Isn't it? I don't "code" or have any particular "insights". But I can appreciate that.

I mean, 2mb/4mb/8mb, what difference does it make; it will never be enough for the sloppy mob of Backpagers pounding at the doors. We have serious business to conduct. Amirite?

Well, first let me make it clear that I am not necessarily against Segregated Witness.  NOR am I anti-Blockstream (specificaly the technology concept of Lightning/Liquid/Sidechains etc).  I am all for Side Chain technology as an OPTION for anyone that wants to use it, and I think it adds to the overall ecosystem.  SegWit still is a bit murky to me - but overall I have no problem with the concept or rollout at some point, because it "appears" that it will help to strengthen the overall technology.

With that said, I will address in brief concept my response to your question.......

I think it is too little too late.  I think it is nothing more than another stall tactic on the part of the Blockstream Players.  It is just another thinly veiled attempt to deflect attention away from increasing block size - in order to buy more time to solidify Blockstream Side Chains.

I am against it because it is dishonest, manipulative, and involves a serious conflict of interest in which people that have direct monetary/fiduciary interests in NOT raising block size - and I am absolutely and utterly pissed off that they are allowed to continue to spin lying FUD without getting any pushback from the media.

SPECIFICALLY in regards to timing.... it will NOT be enough to handle what many forsee as what could be a year in which transaction volume EXPLODES.

There is an old adage in business, that one of the worst possible things that can happen to a young business.... is that they grow TOO FAST.  They aren't ready for it, they fail, lose cred, and in doing so often simply help drive public interest to the point that someone else then steps in and capitolizes from the initial businesses idea and subsequent failure.  That initial business often never recovers.

This is where we are in Bitcoin right now..... at the edge of a massive influx in "business" volume.  The Segwit Roadmap is a roadmap to not being ready to handle the explosion, and subsequent failure.  Ironically, it may lead to the implementation of XT or Fiatcoin.

Recognizing our self-serving biases is an important first-step toward cognitive humility. The fact is humans tend to be better at remembering and integrating information consistent with our beliefs. Conflict of interest is an extention of this that anyone involved in something as important as Bitcoin would certainly be mindful of; no self-respecting cypherpunk would seek to profit from their position at the expense of the project.

That's why the Blockstream^TM suite of products will all be open source. For the community.

That is my main concern. Is Blockstream the main force behind the indecision to increase the block size?

Nice FUD. Bitcoin will never scale to global levels without a layer like Lightning Network, only a clueless delusional person would argue otherwise at this point. So what have they done to scale Bitcoin? searched for solutions, and Lightning Network is way more useful than this post which contributes nothing new but crying for bigger blocks (as if that solves anything long term). Even BIP101 shows how it would take decades to reach the current VISA ts/ps volume in like 2030 which is is absolutely stupid since by then VISA would improve too. LN is the only way we can scale to massive levels, unless you can prove otherwise you are wasting everyone's time. The blocksize will be raised when needed, and soon we'll have it at like 2MB or something which is enough to give them more time to work on LN. The only truth here is you need to study more (assuming you don't have an agenda).

Speaking of clueless, delusional, lying FUD.... What are you talking about??

Nobody has said anything against a Lightning Network.  To the contrary, I have clearly stated support.  I have clearly stated that I have NO opposition to SegWit either.

This is just more manipulative misdirection.  The reason the bitcoin community is divided, and the door being opened wide for competitive Forks and Fiat coins being opened..... is because BLOCKSTREAM Players have decided what is good for everyone else, and has decided what technology paths are OK, and which are NOT.

Sort of a conflict of interest that it is only technology solutions that support Sidechain ONLY buildout that they allow to grow.  This type of suffocating control is just the same type of Crap that we have from the existing Fiat Banks.

Heil Blockstream!  They know what is best for ALL.

The only irony here is the fact that big bank corporations and the powers that be would love bigger blocks to bribe and keep under control the big datacenters that would be running said nodes due the resources needed to run them (its difficult for the average user to run a node now image if they keep getting bigger, and you are indeed delusional if you think technology will get increasingly better to support nodes for the average user to run specially worldwide).
The number of nodes is low NOW, we should be making it easier on the average user not the opposite (and by average I mean a decent computer and decent internet connection).


it is a free market, anyone is free to start their own company and offer a better layer/solution to scale up, my question is.. has anyone made as much progress as LN/elements project?