anyway back to the topic now the distraction of other networks is handled.

why need 100% adoption
why need everyone using segwit keys.

for full nodes (proper bitcoin data validators and archivers) segwit does not offer a byte per tx advantage

i get it. if you wanna lock funds up in another network then yea use a segwit key and go play

but for day to day onchain utility where real full data is fully validatd and fully stored. why need 100% segwit adoption.
just remove the 4x legacy wishy washy herpa derp and declare the 4mb block as open single box 4mb space for legacy and segwit to coexist in full. and have practical amount of more transaction capacity without the herpa derp

i know we are all frustrated. we all thought we found the red pill to the banking matrix. to then be told there is a wonderland for alice but it just leads back to how banks work. i understand the frustrations.

i understand the path of frustrations
banks have broke use bitcoin
bitcoins broke use LN
LN's broke but bitcoin is broke and expensive use an alt (thats next stage: dont get ur gold out fortknox. have some nickel coins instead)

yes i know the devs are pushing people in circles and into new rabbit holes that promise wonderlands leading to more rabbit holes

maybe first its best you use LN. and not for the one time utopian scenario of everyone needing to be online is online for that 1 time blissful experience of seeing them say yes in milliseconds. but seeing the flaws.

LN is not a sole feature for only bitcoin.
imagine it this way.
your a stunt driver. you have a bitcoin car. but you want to drive a lightning car and test it out. it has all the bitcoin and litecoin and other altcoin sponsorship stickers on the lightning car and has been promoted as the fastest car there is
but to drive it. you need to put your bitcoin car up as collatoral for insurance purposes and lock it up in a factory.

and now you can drive the lightning car... but remember its not your car. your driving a different car and have a navigator sat beside you.
your car is locked away in a factory of lightning.. it too is not on the lightning track or able to move on the bitcoin network.

the car your driving is not on the bitcoin road network. its on its own separate track.
you no longer have the only set of keys to your bitcoin car.

actually play it out in real world scenario of a month.
preplanning spending habits to know whats best to deposit.
spreading it across channels
knowing others will spend your funds because your on their route
people not always being online
people not always being well funded

the LN dev admit there are flaws. its about time the community admit it to and stop promoting it the wonderland to alice.

remember its just a vehicle. and other people will use that vehicle. people from litecoin town will use the vehicle.

as for those that think bitcoin is broke the whole emotion that bitcoin needs a different network is a massive facepalm.
if you want to concede and think bitcoin is broke and needs another network. the go play with another network.

meanwhile those that actually care about the bitcoin network will concentrate on the bitcoin network. not trying to make other networks better, but call out where bitcoin devs are causing issues

so before hitting the reply in frustration at me. take a step back. have some coffee. and relax.
actually think about these questions.

a. do you want to concede that bitcoin is broke and needs people to move away from bitcoin and use other networks like LN rootstock and bakkt
b. would you rather have all the devs return and only innovate the bitcoin blockchain for pure bitcoin mainnet utility. or promote other networks and let bitcoin stagnate to make these other networks look good

take a deeper step back and really ask
is the whole bloat up a new tx format to peal off a few bytes and hide them elsewhere.. and then 4* legacy tx's to make the pealable tx format look better and all the other convoluted code any less 'herpa durpa' then just allowing segwit AND legacy to fully use the 4mb area the devs now say is ok...

get rid of the 4x wishy washy tweaking and just treat the bytes of a legacy as a bytes. and the bytes of a full segwit as bytes and just let the network have extra capacity. upto a lean 15k+ instead of 6k+ and then grow the capacity over time.
(unless your going to cry that livestreaming and playing HD online gaming running around, firing at targets while also on teamspeak is broke because millions of people cant.. blah blah blah false arguments about internet limitations and computer limitations of pretending we are in the 1990's floppydisk era)

P.S
you can buy coffee without needing multiple co-sign channels and without multiple tx's onchain.. its called buy a starbucks giftcard as then your just in a simple partnership with stabucks spendin what you need without the headache of others raiding your funds on your route or needing to watch raw tx data incase the partner makes you sign something by mistake

but hey if you want to keep thinking bitcoin is dead and the only option is other networks. you go play that game.

1&2 coinbase is not bitcoin but a service built ontop of bitcoin. they also use other altcoins.
LN and coinbase can survive without bitcoin. they simply just trade litecoins instead if something happened to bitcoin.
it is not dependant on bitcoin.

litcoin traders will use it and never touch bitcoin and it functions. OMG shock horror, right. litecoin using LN and not need bitcoin..

bitcoin nodes could if LN became too malicious not use LN..
i get what your saying, they want it to be tagged as the solution/child of bitcoin (lots of fame and promo oppertunities by doing so.). but thats like a bank saying its gold... and we all know all banks do these days is play with paper.

as for the belief that you have 100% control you dont. you say that you can cash out.. well your co-signer can too..
and guess what. they can send your previous transaction out. because they needed to sign a previous one of yours.. and then they can because you gave them the revocation. they can then send out a current one with the revocation and spend the funds that you think you own(but never did).. and lets jsut call it what it is.. "chargeback".

you are in a mutually assured distruction multisig where you are both tied to each other.. with which devs are still trying to patch up.. lots of buggy opportunities to rip each other off with due to the mutual relationship of LN

and LN devs know of the issues its why they warn you to only use low amounts as there is risks you can lose what you put in
if you had 100% you cant lose.. obviously

i find it funny people think you retain 100% control.
if you ever did then the other person wont know if your spending funds secretly elsewhere..
it needs to be co-signed to prevent you spending elsewhere.

but anyway. research watchtowers and factories and you will see the % control decrease even further.

2016: >$300
2017: >$900
2018: >$5800
thats a bull run

the movements in between are just cubs and calves playing (small bears and small bulls)

1. LN is not bitcoin.. OTHER COINS WILL USE IT. thats the true reason for it. its a multicoin network.
they are just screaming the bitcoin brand to garner support and financial backing to pay the devs to get it. its like saying a phone case is Apple yet its design fits samsung and other brand too.. they just want to tag themselves to bitcoin.
i guess yo missed the chatter about litecoin and other coins using it..

2 it is its own network a separate network the word network is literally spelled out in its name to emphasize it.
it has no blockchain. and its not a service purely for bitcoin. its purpos is not to give you 100% control it uses multisigs. multisigs is multiple parties co-managing funds and ending each others permission(signature)

2. new opcodes being added to LN actually re introduce malleability
and before you deny that. the LN devs are fully aware of it and admit it themselves. they even want to rename the opcode to make it obvious thats its risky to use

i am getting so astonished that so many talk about something but have yet to actually research it beyond some reddit glossy leaflet style promotional script

market cap dominance is meaningless. there are no ban accounts of billions of dollars. its just math of coins * price of one trade
(meaningless)
anyone can make an alt of a trillion coins and for $5 snap the market cap into pieces of firewood

they do need to pre-buy their opening offer to prove they have the reserves
its why the winkles are sat on 200k of coins. as their opener

nothing said above in this topic is TECHNICAL analysis

this topics OP is pure TREND anals

anyway some technicals for you
grab the UTXO set. look at the funds moving for the last 10 months.
65% of funds moved while the prices were above $5,800
that low has been tested many times and no one has bit hard enough

bitcoin mining costs. also have a $5,800 of 43terrahash network
currentyly mining above that too. meaning even miners are not foolish to sell below.

now take that knowledge and then use that when the bottomline surpasses another threshold for a medium amount of time. and then recheck to see if atleast 50% of coins moved hands in that tim and if mining costs also are above that amount in that time so you can see how tough the support line will keep the prices up

P.S october-november will see a new batch of ASICS that are more efficient/lower cost. so rejig your mining costs for then and calculate how many coins are being made by pools who's hashrate jump in that period. to then calculate the impact they could cause if they sold off on the market..

have a nice day

LN is not bitcoin
LN is not even blockchain
LN is a separate network. like ripple

bitcoin had to change to be LN compatible
litecoin had to change to be LN compatible

if LN was to be a sole feature of bitcoin then LN would get designed around bitcoin, not the other way round.

i know your new to this, but these discussions have gone on for years.
anyway
LN is not following the ethos of bitcoin or litecoin. LN has an ethos of their own. they will accept multiple coins and will try to lock funds in and try not to get people to broadcast transactions back to the chain..
they try promoting that as their benefit.
(using a factory(fortknox) means you give the unbroadcasted tx back to the factory and they resupply you with a new unbroadcast tx to re-migrate/balance your funds across the channels)
but if you follow golds history of bank notes you will see the whole game plan.
i know your probably going to twist it into how fabulous that sounds to never need to use the blockchain. but look how that turned out for people that had gold in 19th century, before banking it

remember: "if it aint your sole control private key, it aint your coin"

bitcoin in-> play with promissory notes--> crappy brass, nickel and copper coins(altcoins) out because they are cheaper and faster to transact with onchain
(when you hear bitcoin devs themselves say bitcoin is broke/cant scale.. so heres a bank-esq payment model...you know something is up)

---

how is LN inferior (i already mentioned the whole byte bloat of segwit inferiority. and how opcodes will add malleation in segwit)
1. its not a push payment. its a 'if other users are only, get everyone involved to sign' payment system
2. its not a pay direct. its a 'set up funds that go on average 5 different directions incase someones asleep'
3. its not community audited. thus tampering/thefts/blackmail do(and have) happen
4. because of routing, you have to share your funds with others
5. its not sole control. it co-signed

---

as for the employment contract of november 2016 with a deadline of november2017..
check the dates of the Bip
https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org/msg04294.html
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0141.mediawiki
"For Bitcoin mainnet, the BIP9 starttime will be midnight 15 november 2016 UTC (Epoch timestamp 1479168000) and BIP9 timeout will be midnight 15 november 2017 UTC (Epoch timestamp 1510704000). "
oh and by the way

check their payday
https://www.crunchbase.com/funding_round/blockstream-undisclosed--0e4380a7
PS they wanted their funds in BTC so the investors had to buy $25m of coin... now go check the market chart for mid november 2017 (heres a hint the buyup started november 12th. finished in november.. (everything after that was just community reaction)

---

as for calling me troll shill 'wrong because wrong'. thats just because they cant actually counter me using hard data so resort to name calling and insults.. yea sometimes when they poke i bite. but i do try to entertain them with statistics and data which they cant counter. so they resort to putting their head in the sand

i even use data direct from the source itself. like sipa and lukeJR and gmax
P.S (the bilateral split.. thats a term gmaxwell used.. not me)

i have tried to ask them to learn a few things before replying or sitting back and having a coffee, relaxing and think of things critically before replying. i think even you are aware that i try. yea i dont say it in a cuddly way. but doesnt mean it wasnt said

but a couple years on .. and some dont know the basic concepts of consensus, multisig anyonecanspend which has been the main things they argue about and pretend dont apply to things like segwit LN and bitcoin. (facepalm)

but in the end its their own ignorance harming only them. but when they try entering a discussion and dont actually show data and statistics and just point fingers at altcoins and personalities and call names.. again they are making themselves look bad as people who care about bitcoin.. and their only goal is to look good for their lil boys club of like minded cabin fever group

im not interested in their kardashian drama they read about on reddit. social name calling and pointing at altcoins is not related in anyway to protecting the bitcoin network. but its the only rebuttle they have

i care about the network and the control paradigm being played out that is reducing bitcoins utility and ethos into a currency that needs co-managed banking (facepalm)

anyway i do hope you can brush off the wishy washy mindsets that want co-managed accounts. and instead realise that bitcoin can scale onchain. and that legacy transactions can offer more transactions per byte if they just removed the 1mb wall wishy washy trick code

its called "consensus"

i think the OP meant UPGRADES. not critical bug updates
EG the difference between the mandatory segwit UPGRADE ... vs the 0.16.3 critical UPDATE

segwits team of the mandatory game plan due to not getting the amount of votes needed but having private investor $25m contract deadline of november 2017 was just wrong on so many levels. to threaten pools with block rejects and nodes with ip bans if they didnt comply in august

i do find it funny how they are not organising such mandatory node ban ceremony to protect the network, but did so for an upgrade

PoS costs nothing. so PoS coins have a zero cost acquisition of creation and just rely on the cost acquisition of people buying it to support a bottomline value.

if gold cost $1 to mine, the price of gold would tank because miners would sell it at instant profit to value at $1 and speculate (hype, FOMO) above that in bubble prices/waves if ups and downs above that. in the $2 area

in bitcoin mining. SMART miners plan a year in advance. they get their FIAT from private investors to cover the bills. and in exchange the private investors get BTC at a certain rate. thus not impact the market directly
some smart pools when bitcoins price is below mining cost. they actually buy the coin on the market and hand that to the private investor. thus keeping the price up (afterall why waste electric to get something more expensive)

there are a couple silly mining farms that actually pushed the boat and foolishly went short term sighted turned off too many rigs during alst december. sold load of coins to buy more rigs an then turned loads of rigs on after december. to then realise they had to turn loads off when the price couldnt sustaiin them
thus having to sell the rigs at second hand discount
https://data.bitcoinity.org/bitcoin/hashrate/2y?mining_pool=BTCC+Pool&t=a
BTCC was victim to this.. and now sits at the dizzying low of 0.5% network hashrate
where as pools like antpool. just played the progressing increase every few weeks and just paying off their investors. which is why their hashrate has shown a more smooth progressive climb not really reacting to price swings of the market.
https://data.bitcoinity.org/bitcoin/hashrate/2y?mining_pool=AntPool&t=a

anyway
smart mining pools locate themselves near energy grids where the power company produces more electric than the population demands. and this electricity excess cant be recouped/stored, resent out later... and so they would just lose it without making any money.. so smart pools buy some of that excess. which pools love as they get a discount. and power companies love because they get money for nothing.

maybe requesting the big segwit promoters to act first.

after 2 years of endless 'segwit is perfect solution, well tested blah blah blah'... well
(i know it was only activated in 2017. but since 2015-16 they been saying how great it is working on testnets and how perfect it is)

btcc
https://www.blockchain.com/btc/block/0000000000000000000d5996219bc24e4f98c6113c2b29c7a5283e181b631730
wheres their trust in bech32(bc1q) addresses

LukeJR
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3318
wheres their trust in bech32(bc1q) addresses

achow101
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=290195
wheres their trust in bech32(bc1q) addresses

theymos
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=35
wheres their trust in bech32(bc1q) addresses

.....
and now the cherry on top

the main guy.. the segwit code master himself.. pieter wuille(sipa)
http://bitcoin.sipa.be/
Tips and donations: 1Nrohb....

its not lower fee's
dont you get it.
its like walmart.. raise the prices via increasing(not decreasing) the minrelay/dust..
and then put a sticky label on that says 'rollback' 75% off if your a walmart loyalty card holder

the relay/dust should be 10x lower than they were in 2015.. they are not. infact they are higher than 2015
then ontop they x4 legacy transactions prices..

its a bait and switch

this is not me poking the bear or countering anything you have to say.
but now devs are adding/reactivating some opcodes that reintroduce malleability attacks done using bech addresses...

(i just thought that was something funny worth adding to your point)

the devs know all about it. and they were wanting to rename a few opcodes with warnings.
(they had to take a few steps back and re-think a few things)

lies?
kinda funny..
i actually go out of my way to do the math. i even post in examples, stats and other things.
did you even check the link about the UTXO set
UTXO DATA CANT LIE
its stuck in the blockchain.. its literally above the laws of truth that cant be edited..

but hey. when others who just say "he lies".. they can never actually back it up .. they just say "wrong because wrong"
wow such powerful proof.

ok you called me a liar.. so.. show me a UTXO set that has 20 million segwit addresses(40%)
show me a month of blocks that have actual real 40% segwit utility
show me a month of blocks that have actual real 30% segwit utility

the only parts people cant agree on is my method of explaining.
i try to keep it simple using analogies or rounding numbers for simple math demo purposes. then get some anal social drama queens try knitpicking my ELI-5 explanations without taking it all into context of simple explanation

i understand you are new to segwit and still learning. but these discussions with me devs and others have been going on for a couple years now. so yea sometimes when a non-dev gets involved and tries social drama distractions of name calling by poking the bear.. yea i bite..


i have done.
but they just send in their non-dev buddies to social drama the topic to death.
but just so you know. devs have once they put their personal attack hats on the floor and start wearing their critical thinking caps. end up changing some code or plans.

the funny thing is. segwit and LN is not open dev desired. its actually contracted employed code that benefits financial investors that contracted them to make bitcoin LN compatible.

the banana(fruit) is the input, value output value
the skin is the signature/scripts

segwit addresses (bc1q) is the layer of paint added to the fruit to add a few xtra bytes to the data
the layer of paint added to the skin is the extra few bytes th signature uses

they went a whole 2 years coding something that doesnt offer real scaling.
no... you still nee the skins to verify the transaction is valid.. and also when someone else is syncing from you. they need the skins so they can validate their copy FULLY AND INDEPENDENTLY

as i said if you put the skin back on a segwit tx is 250bytes not 225 like its comparative legacy
so if there was no 2 box and just 1 big box..... segwit vs legacy would if utilising the entire 4mb
be like this
legacy=17777 tx of 225byte
segwit=16000tx of 250byte
as best case scenario

if your a full node.. you are part of the relay network. you need to show the skin to show the fruit is ripe (legit/valid)
yes people can prune the skin(signatures) . but then they are not part of the blockchain relay/archival network
new nodes wont sync via you because you dont have the signatures for them to self check and validate the blocks they get.

you become just a midweight node(gmax buzzword downstream.. luke jr: filtered). only relaying transactions and the latest block(as long as u dont prune it first). and not helping new users sync up and be part of the network.
EG legacy nodes(<0.13) are not full nodes. they dont get the signatures. they get the peeled banana version and they blindly trust someone else validated the block and blindly pass it on as good. (critical security alert if there was a bug)

if you think deleting the signatures is good.. then maybe you might aswell turn off your full node and just use a litewallet


again with the 2box trick your not getting 16k-17k transactions your only getting
.. the 2 box (1mb:3mb)
legacy=4444 tx of 225 with 0 in box two
segwit=5952 tx in box one. 0.488mb in box 2

segit uses 1.488mb for 5952 basic transaction..
so same basic transaction
same 1.488mb space but as space a legacy can fully utilise
is: 6612 legacy transactions for 1.488mb

but yea. i know you want peeled banana's to make it look good.. but then your not a full node(as explained) so go play with a lite wallet and not have any block data to worry about because you trust other nodes to tell you the skin is ripe

a good test to see if the community really want it..
breadwallet should ask BTCC pool (the biggest segwit promoter of 2015-2017) to start using segwit as its address to receive its blockrewards..

its been a year and even they have not done so yet
https://www.blockchain.com/btc/block/0000000000000000000d5996219bc24e4f98c6113c2b29c7a5283e181b631730
-> 13TET...
not
-> bc1q

hmmmm

i might also add this.. and just let people who keep promoting 40%.. to take a few steps back and realise. segwit is not as popular as they thought
https://p2sh.info/dashboard/db/bech32-statistics?orgId=1
(hint: 0.764% of al btc is stored on a bech address (132k coins))
(unspent outputs = ~80k of 50million)

seems just as fast as people put funds into addresses starting bc1q, they take them out

hmmmm

LN is not bitcoin

LN is a separate network that multiple coins will use.
and guess what.. you do need to pre plan LN

funds in LN are locked. you need to pre plan how much you want to lock up and also divide it up into multipl channels to get, hopefully the best chances of making payments should:
one channel be temporarily unavailable
not have enough funds themselves to pot potato payments
other partners of partners be offline
destination offline
one of the partner of parters closes their channel
the list goes on

put it this way.
imagine your bob (b)
wife is Alice(A)
charlie(c) is someone you usually have coffee with

ok you put in $130 into 2 channels. $65 to your wife and $65 to a channel with charlie because he has connection to starbucks.
A[0.01 : 0.01]B[0.01 : 0.01]C[0.01 : 0.01]starbucks

imagine your wife went on a coffee date with loads of her friends and she had a $65 bill with starbucks
A[0.0 : 0.02]B[0.0 : 0.02]C[0.0 : 0.02]starbucks
great your wife paid starbucks $65

and now you have nothing you can pass to charlie if you ever want a coffee yourself
see the downside of the routing yet?? where others can raid you dry before you spend funds yourself

but although between you and your wife and you and charlie. you appear to have the same combined value..
but that funds is not split between the 2 channels. its now offset in your wife channel allotment to you

now you know ur wife just raided you. and you have 2 choices. give some of your 0.02 to your wife and hope she knows someone who knows someone thats connected to charlie or starbuck if you ever want to taste coffee this month.

or close the channel with your wife. get your funds (one onchain tx close) and then put the funds back in so that you and charlie have funds to play with(another onchain to add to BC channel)

..
LN devs have seen these issues and are now inventing factories
...
where instead of direct depositing into your channels.... with direct onchain proof in the channel
you deposit fund $130 into a factory(fortknox) and the factory gives you a unbroadcast(offchain) TX that you use for your channel with your wife and channel with charlie. thus now charlie, you and your wife are trusting the factory to honour itself
instead of trusting the blockchain

and then if your wife raided BC.. you then get the factory to disavow the funds from AB(without broadcasting) and give out fresh unbroadcasted tx's to resplit the funds.

but now you cant broadcast a tx at a later date because the channel funds are not directly yours, they are factory owned. so you need factory, your wife and charlies permission if you ever were to exit LN. by again disavowing the currnt balance and then get the factory to honour a tx where the funds go to an address you solely own that you want broadcast

in short
LN is becoming the whole fortknox of 19th century gold. locking it up and letting people play with unaudited promissory notes in the hope you never request your gold back into your own sole control..... sound familiar to banking strategy of 19-20th century

..
yea i know i went double dep into the whole LN concepts.. but much easier instead of the hot potato games of LN and the factoriy issues that fortknox plagued the gold banking era.. but its much easier if your planning to spend $130.. just buy some giftcards with them merchants.. job done

bitcoin is not ready for the big mass adoption of users.

this is because bitcoin needs to be ready with mass adoption of merchants

at the moment the big businesses at the edges of the bitcoin ecosystem are not promoting to merchants because they want thir bitcoin varient of ripple set. (im talking about the separate network of hubs and co managed accounts called LN)

where the services like bitpay and coinbase will be hubs to get fee's for offering routed paymnt services.
once the portfolio of bitcoin services have their separate network that is bitcoin and litecoin compatible and they start their ripple style network of trust using factories and multisig hubbed channels.

and then. at that point will they start getting merchants to join their hubs and accept payments via the LN network and start the promotion rally with merchants and then the users after that

thus coaxing people to buy bitcoin and deposit it into addresses co managed by the services to then make payments to mrechants on LN.

remember LN is not bitcoin
LN is a separate network that is bitcoin and litecoin compatible and is not a blockchain payment system

the portfolio of services are just waiting out for lightning to be coded better, battle tested and ready for services to hub up the network to grab fe's per transaction while locking funds up that eventually they end up keeping by trying to keep users from wanting to withdraw coins out of LN by making things like bitcoin unpractical to user as a 'better' payment system

to them they can make more that way than to waste money now promoting bitcoin itself as the payment system.. so thats what they are doing

no calm down.
think about it only 1800 coins are made a day.
so IF (apocalypse hat on) all pools all combined all had the next gen rigs running in november(that in itself seems too OverTheTop of a scenario).. the total coin that is cheaper than $5800 is just 1800coins per day while network hashrate is below 90exa.

now if you imagine the price in november was todays $6500. selling all mined coins all at once on bitfinex(looking at volume) would only push the price down to 6200
so all pools would need to sell all coins of about 3 days in one go to dip to 5800(that in itself seems too OverTheTop of a scenario).

chances are not all pools will swap out rigs instantly so their costs would remain higher and not wanna sell so low
chances are pools wont want to sell all their coins anyway even if there is a bit of short term profit
changes are hashrates would be higher. so the costs vs profit would too be less appealing to want to tank the price
chances are if a sell off did occur. many buyers would celebrate a discount and a buying frenzy would occur fighting off the sell off to keep prices up.

so relax its not a guaranteed dump in november. but do expect some movement in hashpower and prices is all im saying