1. segwit only activated due to a hard fork.
the august 2017 was a controversial hard fork. you can call a hat a cap. you can call a shovel a spade. but reality is what it is
and it was core that instigated the august 2017 event

2. its a washy washy not true blocksize increase. infact with new scripts and bloated tx formats. the byte per tx average shows that we are not getting any better tx count than before.. EG 2010 even satoshi calculated a potential of 4200tx a block (7tx/s)
show me one day where we got even close to 600k tx a day.
(if 4mb was true increase we would have potential of 2.4m tx a day.. but no segwit cant even aid in surpassing the 600k limit)


3. linear sighash of legacy format is of no issue. the funny part is that core deem it ok that a block can actually contain just 5 tx's of thousands of sigops... but here is the thing. reduce the block sigop limit. reduce the tx sigop limit... linear sigops doomsday is fixed. there is no need at all to give anyone 20% fill of a block. there is no need at all to give anyone thousands of script bloat allowance.

4. segwit has not addressed the problem. the legacy limits and risks are still the same now as 2015. segwit has not fixed legacy issues. it has just told people to stop using legacy transactions. its like war on guns. no on has taken guns away they just made a new neighbourhood that is antigun and telling people to move house.

5. new segwit opcodes have the ability to reintroduce malleation in segwit tx formats, so to pre-empt a reply about that, sorry but malleation is not fixed. plus malleation has not been fixed nor never was fixed for legacy

6. the only purpose of segwit, is a tx format thats compatible with LN's needs. it has nothing to do with all the half baked promises of fixing bitcoin issues. segwit is a gateway tx format to move people to a different network, away from bitcoins blockchain

no one realistically is actually or has ever actually proposed formally and sensibly 'massive block sizes'
the whole "gigabytes by midnight" rhetoric is social drama propaganda over on reddit. which has been circling and used as a lame excuse to even avoid a compromised agreement of 2mb legacy increase in 2015.. or a 8mb weight 2015-2019

the real funny part is that core devs said 4mb was super bad network crashing... right up until the point that they realised that they would want 4mb themselves for their special LN gateway tx format called segwit.

yet the rest of the network is still stuck due to devs wishy washy code where the 3mb extra is not for true tx space, but just the scripts(witness) and all tx's are still stifled by the 1mb legacy limit.. even though the node count services show that the august 2017 controversial hard fork event could have simply just been a flip to 4mb legacy. allowing both legacy and segwit full utility. without causing any extra drama

compliance AKA regulation is not what people think.
regulation is more about allowing businesses to wear a shiny sherrifs badge and police its own customers under the ruse of protection.

but people using businesses as custodians(banks2.0) is the complete opposite solution to the whole point of blockchains.
yea i get it some people want gateways in and out of fiat-crypto. but using businesses as long term custodians and relying on businesses for long term 'security' is just not logical for the point of blockchains purpose.

most people think using custodians protects/insures them. but what they dont realise is the insurance is not a instant handout. some people can be waiting years for reimbursment and even then only get pennies on the dollar.

here is a foolish example of what cipertrace services could lead to
the foolish thing is, when an exchange claims 'we been hacked' the ceo can be the 'hacker' taking the coins himself for retirement.
he then spends them. the coins circulate to other exchanges with a new recipient. then things like ciphertrace want to freeze the account of the recipient(unwitting victim to be handed coins) loses his value. and guess what. the CEO that retired gets given back coins that he said were hacked(takn by him in first place)

meanwhile the recipient that had his accounts frozen then has to pay out legal expenses to defend himself and explain where/how he got the funds and try to fight to ven get a chance of being seen as innocent, let alone losing out twice via frozen accounts and then legal expense.

where as. if people just learn the point of blockchains 'your private key, your private property' then compliance, custodians and regulation are not required.

too many people want regulation. not fir personal security(as thats a laugh) but purely for the HOPE that it draws in new adopters for a pump and dump.
however, these new adopters wont be investing in coins on exchanges. but on private investment markets. markets where coins are locked up and dont move and the price is just a bet/gamble up or down. and not an actual coin swap/trade.
(ETF are locked batches of coins that then are given a share price. and its the share price people gamble on not a real coin price)

again with the over use of technical analysts!!!
seriously. if these analysts are just looking at charts and seeing triangles they are not technical. nor analysts.. they are trend anals.

anyone can draw a triangle
the anals are the ones deciding if the angle is based on 1dayy, on week, one month, 3 month.. basically they are drawing their own triangles based on decisions they make.

anyone can do the same. make a triangles angles look steeper or smoother just by changing the parametrs they choose.

a true technical analysts seeks out technical stuff away from the charts. such as the invention of asics that cause the october 2013 price rise
the mtgox fiasco that caused the slump...

future contract purchases that caused the 2017-18 movements.
next gen asic and old asic sell off that caused the late 2018 slump (along with some futures sell offs too)

anyone that just does trend anals based on drawing stupid lines on charts and calling it a pattern are foolish people that have no clue

in short.
if the cloud miner could make a profit from his equipment. he would not need to rent it out to other people to get income.
but what others said is true also
the repeated "i" shows its some basement dweller and not some large mining farm business
the special bot/accelerator.. well thats just empty words not related to how bitcoin mining even works

oh and here is the biggest hint that its a scam
'you have to know someone who knows someone to be on the network' AKA PYRAMID ponzi

still early. they may change their model.
the coding for the coin doesnt need to change, but just the method of purchase and the value/price.

EG facebook got away for years without needing loads of fiat handling licences by having their credits at xx:1 per $ instead of 1:1

so they can still do a fixed value thing. but just not fixed at 1:1.

anyway.. next step i see is a WVWII  winklevi war 2, where zuckers starts a crypto ETF before the winkles

if libra is just an altcoin with swinging value. then us government cant do much.
but if libra is going to be fixed value / a stable coin of fiat value then the government will treat it as a CVC (convertable virtual currency) much like any other database balance measuring $

which facebook has tried to avoid having all the money service business licences by having its 'facebook credits' purchase be unlinked to fiat value.

facebook could see alot of licence filing state to state country to country if they try the 'fiat stablecoin' approach

starting a new crypto is how the 8000 altcoins are made.
bug fixing and upgrading bitcoin to actually do things the community want does not create an altcoin.
forks can happen but in a good community positive consensus the fork evaporates in hours if it occurs at all.
however if bitcoin was changed controversially (no big community will/desire) then the fork would continue

so having bitcoin getting a bug fix and an upgrade to something the community will actually applaud, wont end in controversy
but starting a new altcoin from scratch is just that creating an altcoin from scratch

people are too afraid to admit that bitcoin has lost its footing since 2015 in regards to its features and ethos
people are too afraid to admit that core devs went down the wrong roadmap thats just a signpost route to an alternate network of managed accounts requiring agreements
people are too afraid to tell devs to just be devs and stop pretending to be the whole community stop pretending to be economists

an actual fee formulae
EG
if the spending UTXO is 1 confirm old then the fee is 144x more than a UTXO thats a day old. also people can then use locktimes to not let a UTXO get added to a block. thus become in full control of priority

EG
if tx is 1confirm aged. add a lock of 6blocks. meaning your happy to wait an hour. thus you only pay 138x instead of 144x

this then:
reduces spammers on the blockchain.
if people still want fast spamming but without the huge fee they can use alternate networks of pegged tokens like LN
the fee formulae give individual control of fee's rather than a wild west auctionhouse of everyon fighting each other for top bids and everyone still end up paying the same and getting disapointed as they didnt get priority even after paying reccomendation

fee war doesnt work

my shitcoin propaganda?.... dang seems you too cant contemplate independent thought

i dont care about the drama of the altcoins after the august 2017 event.(emphasis upon emphasis 'bilateral' is gmax's buzzword)
you seem to be stuck in a team X or team Y mindset that you cant even envision independent thought of not belonging to any team... i know shock right. someone thats not fanboying any team.. OMG your thinking it must be impossible.

core devs admit to a bilateral split as do those on the altcoin side.
the only propaganda is those trying to fight over ownership of a brand NO_ONE should own
if you keep thinking core deserves bitcoin brand then you have failed decentralisation class lesson one
EMPHASIS NO ONE should own the brand.
EMPHASIS NO ONE should own the brand.

take 2 steps back, open your mind. sit on the fence and ask yourself
"who owns 'dollar'?"
some patriotic hillbillies will scream blue murder its 'murica
but really think about the real world
canadian DOLLAR
australian DOLLAR
zimbabwe DOLLAR

then think
is the world at crisis with the confusion CAD vs USD... no

libra is just applepay on steroids

its all just based on a dataset of values where the unit of measure is the equivalent peg to fiat. all that changes is that it takes visa out the middle

facebook has a billion users outreach so expect it to cotton on as fast as applepay did in mainstream

that said. its not bitcoin. its just DLT (distributed ledger tech(centralised blockchain))

no gavin was invited to a conference to explain to government agencies what bitcoin was all about.

whats next.. andrea's antanopolus is a canadian government leader because he went to speak to canadian leaders

that must make Luke JR god because he is a bible preacher.

bilateral split was GMAX's buzzword
RESEARCH IS HEALTHY. try it

luke JR loved his mandatory code to cause the split. he has been celebrating its success ever since.
RESEARCH IS HEALTHY. try it

what i find funny reading about libra

says "protects users’ privacy by never mingling your Libra payments with your Facebook data"

but then says "You’ll pseudonymously buy or cash out your Libra online...  ...and spend it using interoperable third-party wallet apps or Facebook’s own Calibra wallet that will be built into WhatsApp, Messenger and its own app."

but then shows


oh look someones facebook profile in same app as the payment

people will laugh when they get facebook notifications/messages that a friend paid them X. and questions start arising 'but how does facebook notifications know'

the way i look at it. libra wont 'mingle' facebook data.. to avoid blockchain bloat.
but facebook will include libra data because how else will messenger inform you been paid

by gateway i dont mean clearing house. i mean learning experience. buzzwords, definitions. .. they will use bitcoin as a gateway to learning not a gateway payment

bitcoin wont be a clearing house for altcoins. people will just altcoin to fiat direct without btc as middleman.
do you really think people will use bitcoin as a 'clearing house' if it costs $20 a tx... when they could just fiat to altcoin for pennies without involving bitcoin.

this is where the bitcoin core devs should have stuck to coding a fee formula,rather that pretending they re expert economists and taking out fee mechanisms to introduce a fee war

think about it. if you have a bunch of nickles and dimes in a bag and you want to swap it for a bank note. would you bother swapping the small denomination coins for gold and then swap again to bank notes.

angola's minimum wage $60 a month (/4/40=$0.375 an hour)
kenya minimum wage $130 a month (/4/40=$0.81 an hour)
nigeria  minimum wage $80 a month (/4/40=$0.50 an hour)
mozambique  minimum wage $50 a month (/4/40=$0.31 an hour)

bitcoins tx fee just to move funds costs ~20minutes to 1 hours minimum wage.
many africans learn about bitcoin. find out it isnt suitable and just use it as a gateway into altcoins which are cheaper and more suitable to transact with.

windfury. try reading some actual information. stop crying
i am not team bch. i just detest the core ass kissers that want centralisation. and that includes those advertising other networks that require middlemen authorisation just to make payments.

i find it soo funny that is someone isnt kissing core centric ass they must be on another team. thats the foolish mindset of people that cant understand the word independent.

learn what bitcoins ethos was 2009-2015 before all the rekt campaigns
learn what code was used, who used it and the results it caused
you can social drama your rhetoric all you like but the blockchain data can prove you wrong.
so try to learn whats real via code, stats and data. not by social drama
oh.. its called research by the way. i know you hate the word, but try it

although your transaction is lean(small) using only 190 real hard drive bytes.
the wishy washy code of segwits scale factor falsely makes it appear that your only paying 4byts/sat. thus not as much of a priority as other transactions that would have paid more

paying $0.28 cents and not getting in after 3 hours is not the 'promise' of 2015 which said segwits wishy washy code meant to sort out.

having actually gone abroad and visited these places. here is my view

2012-2014 bitcoin was a good thing for those countries.(i say 2012-> as thats when i first got into btc)
but now, tx fee's (at ~$0.25) are like 5hours labour just to make a tx. and to own 1 whole BTC is like having to work
180000 labour hours.. so not practical

unlike america
($15 min wage) tx fee = 1 minute.. 1 BTC=600 hours labour
($7.50 min wage) tx fee = 2 minute.. 1 BTC=1200 hours labour

..
bitcoin for the under developed/3rd world countries is just a entry buzzword where people hear it, learn about it see its not practical no more and then look into the world of altcoins.
underdeveloped/3rd world countries dominate the altcoin scene

bitcoin did not fall from $20k to $3k
the $20k was a small fluke event. not a normal sustained price/value.

you word it like a seagul up high dived down into the water and never came back up.
reality is a whale leaped up out of the water and then splashed back to its natural level
.......
as for bitcoin vs blockchain
blockchain is the new revolutionary database model that needs no central storage. and bitcoin is just one type/form of data held on such a database model.