note: all the drama queens use drama of blogs to talk about drama.. but ignore the actual block data that refers to bytes of data that refer to code and rules and reason and triggers of changes of rules..

yes there were many debates and attitudes.. but when it actually boils down to what actually occurred and what actually changed and what actually caused what.. rely on the code, and the blockdata

everything else is just social drama of who thinks what opinion belongs to be more important to them..
the blockdata will teach you which parts were important to the network and protocol rules and reveals how certain things had natural selection and some had unnatural selection.. which due to the blockchain being immutable it cant be edited and twisted by social drama.. trust block data not a opinion blog

the real social drama queens do not like their agenda of ass kissing a common cultish group being dismantled. so they turn things into REKT campaigns to try making those against their agenda disappear..

the best way to fight against social drama queens is to rely on facts.. and leave the queens to flap about making themselves look like idiots changing their scripts and try different ways to ass kiss their cultish narrative agendas of blind faith, following and trust of a centralist group humans they want to treat as immortal gods

if nodes are of a substantial portion of a cult(brand) that only sees one path.. then only one path is always followed(like sheep).. it works great when that path has benefits for everyone.. but when that path has flaws. the cult will follow it anyway and not want the flaws fixed due to trust and belief of their dev gods. where the blind belief and trust are: delays, avoiding and evading for the good of their cult(blind faith).

decentralisation works best when opposing views can atleast unite and contribute and agree and consent to a fair balance any majority can accept. thus even opposing something even a diverse majority of open minded opposers think are not of benefit. but agreeing to thing even opposers see as benefit of the majority.. and also not depending on god like creatures to blindly believe in. but instead have options to progress to a new path if the cultish path is going down the wrong path

the OP is a known obsessive of religion and the number 2.625

he has been told in many topics now his maths is below highschool level and his understanding of economics is even worse

the number 2.625 has no linkage to anything bitcoin related.. its just a number he came up with as part of the religious order he wants to promote based on trying to get 8million idiots to fangirls into his cult

when pressed about his number, that there will not be 8 million people hoarding 2.625bitcoin today nor in 117 years he then decides to change his 8m disciple number but wants to hold tight onto his 2.625 magic number he decided on.. kind of obsessive..

the number 2.625 has no relevance to bitcoin at all

after so many topics made by him where he has not even garnered any loyal supporters, its time he realises his cult recruitment campaign died the moment he wrote it

you dont even need to shout bigger blocks.. (its time you drop the cult narrative)
you dont need to shout its 1999 and storage is limited.. (its time you drop the cult narrative) its 2023

even if you dont want to use a microSD card the size of a fingertip and went for more conventional hard drives. you can get more then 1TB for under $100 in this modern age of post millenial mindset. remember its 2023 not 1990s

anyways

if the byte miscounting cludge and the segregation separation were to be removed and everything went to a lean legacy tx format of utilising the SAME 4mb space per block allowed today.. the storage would grow at the same rate as today.. not faster. and the amount of tx count per day would grow meaning the cost per transaction would come down

also it would stop the ordinal scam tx's from being in blocks meaning even more room for genuine transactors

along with a better fee formulation than the current:  legacy *4. and instead have utxo age <70= *100 would penalise other types of spammers too.. meaning less spammers and only penalise spammers for premium fees. would reduce fees even more and make more room for genuine transactions to take priority thus allowing more people to get priority sooner rather being treated as second class users. thus make people want to be active and help support the network and want to run nodes more regularly.. all without "required storage would grow much faster"

again looking at a 4mb block space as being the equivalent of 208gb per year (1tb /5 year) meaning $0.06 a day storage cost comparing to todays ~$2 per tx FEE cost... its the FEES that make less people want to use bitcoin daily as most people on the internet already paid for a modern device just to get online so the device cost is not really a main thought.. its the utility of a payment system cost per use.
when fees are over 30x more then storage and storage comes as standard with most devices these days.. storage is not the main concern

when in doubt. trust the blockchain data as arbitrators. not some idiot on social media that makes a blog.

read what the block data shows as the timeline of events,  not some social queen

if you actually read the block data of which flag bits in blockheaders reached which thresholds to trigger which events, you will see it was actually the NYA agreement that triggered segwit activation.. they just back tracked on the later promise of the 2x base limit.. becasue their actual agenda was just to get segwit activated using the blackmail of rejecting blocks that didnt display their flag bit in blockheader

if still unsure who to believe.. check the immutable blockchain data.. and which bits were associated with which proposal method of activation



the blue line(NYA) https://dcgco.medium.com/bitcoin-scaling-agreement-at-consensus-2017-133521fe9a77
 needed 80% which then triggered the red line(segwit) to then reject non compliant blocks and achieve the unnatural 100% because all outliers were rejected leaving only compliant blocks being seen

note how segwit didnt even get 50%(upto july) demand until the blackmail of the mandated activation was a thing
note segwits unnatural clean linear line to 100% . its unnatural has no wiggles due to the block rejection campaign of the mandated activation proposal triggered due to the NYA agreement
https://dcgco.medium.com/bitcoin-scaling-agreement-at-consensus-2017-133521fe9a77


other thing to note.. the other proposal of a UASF didnt even get 20% at all..


the reason why core were demanding segwit activation before november 2017 is because they were sponsored to make segwit(a feature to offer gatways to corporate subnetwork of middlemen payment charging routes) which had a deadline of from november 2016-nov2017 to activate or the core devs wont get their bonus

the NYA group are ofcourse the corporations that sponsored the core devs in the first place for segwit. rather than a rival.
the 2x element of NYA plea was never coded and was always an empty promise. just a false promise attempt to garner more support for what they really just wanted.. segwit

currently storing 14 years of international currency and the next 4years+ requires


the real concern is not storage cost

the cost to store YEARS of data become pennies per day
however if it costs dollars just to make a transaction. people wont want to use the network daily thus wont want to run a node on the network

transaction cost per daily use is more important factor than blockchain storage cost per decade

do the math
if you can by 1tb storage for say $100 knowing you might need to upgrade every 8 years.. (lets use 5 for convenience)
thats $0.06 a day

compare that to doing 1 transaction per day at $2 to warrant having a PC on each day.
the cost of using bitcoin is over 30x more then the cost of storing bitcoins blockchain

so concentrate on debates about bringing the cost of using bitcoin down becasue the cost of storing bitcoin is not unmanageable

imagine he is using the corporate bitcoin stash as a pension pot for his employees. most tech firms hire people in their 20's-30s. and operating since 1989 meaning 34 years puts most employees way under pensionable age, so no need to dip into the fund yet.. but eventually they will

if you had 10 beers yesterday.. and sold them today for half the price and tomorrow bought 10 beers for the same price you sold them at today. meaning no extra REAL expense on you
also meaning within days your in the same situation as days ago.. did you actually lose anything. no
your still in same beer holding amount as days ago and it didnt cost you anything new

your just using a tax loop hole which inevitable allows you to pay less tax on other incomes. meaning you actually GAIN keeping more value in your hand via less taxes

paper loss is different to real material/intrinsic loss
in REALITY saylor gained the ability to keep more value in his hands compared to if he didnt do that deal

YOUR cult cried to gmaxwell.. look at the events of the months leading up to gmaxwells decisions. it was your mentor and his chums ignorant cries that triggered it

he didnt want YOUR cult crying drama. but sided with the group that kissed his ass and paid him homage even when they are idiots that dont care about bitcoin.. as long as they sing along with the choir songs of the corporate sponsor he will keep them close. he admits he does not like independent review, scrutiny or criticism he wants peaceful calm ass kissing

he admits to not wanting other dev groups operating on bitcoin because he declared he does not have the willingness to review others work. thus wanted only core to rule the protocol. (centralist mindset). he even took his colleague core devs away from this forum due to the scrutiny he did not like them receiving, he called this forum a bad place to discuss cores roadmap

maybe if YOU do some research and learn about bitcoin, blockchains, security and how things work(the politicasl and investments that lead to dev decisions) you wont cry as much nor have to pretend you are being gas lit and burned when someone else is the one inflating you with their gas first

lighting the gas is better then filling you up with gas. try to be enlightened

you can cry all you like about trolls and having your inflated ego burned.. but atleast put some effort into learning the flaws of lightning and who caused it and who is unable to fix the things they have promised for 6 year to fix. but havnt
infact there are more flaws added to lightning in the last two years. so learn when you see new subnetworks in last 2 years grow in more capacity and liquidity than lightning pop up, learn how they came about and why people are choosing those..
short answer.. people have had enough with cores wishful deluded empty promises of future plans and just be patient

just get a drip of yourself and understand that lightning has failed the test of time, its time to move on, ask for something better. ask your gods to do something. (no 'ask' isnt an acronym for ass kiss)
not just kiss their ass, flatter them with compliments while they do other things sponsored by banking institutions, rather than the decentralised bitcoin community they should be taking care of

edit to respond to blackhat(windfury forum-stepdad always coming to windfurys defense when windfury gets burned)
my first 3 paragraphs were answering his question about gmaxwell.. read them it mentions gmaxwells triggers

you go to JAIL pre trial
you go to PRISON post trial

heres a image for you. you like them

he already did sell some.. for tax reasons

imagine you held 700 coins(one stash of many stashes you own) at a $32k average from 2020-2022
then at the end of 2022 you sold 700 coin for $16k average meaning you
put in $22,400,000 and took out $11,200,000
you can claim a loss of $11.2m to offset your company profits to pay less tax.
file your taxes in days. and job done
then within days buy 700 coin with that $11.2m(while market prices are in same region) meaning your not actually at a physical loss in anyway. but got to paper loss for tax claim

so yes he will and has sold coin. the actual question is not if. but instead when and why
i expect him to do the same next december or whenever there is a decent price correct(down to value) to declare a loss for tax claims

did i say to never have drunk any beer in 2012..  i said some(just a 6pack), thus not harm your lifestyle

either way, whatever wasteful consumable you an live without for one day a week is disposable income (anything that becomes a toilet flush the next day) is far better to invest in crypto than to sign up to credit card and use debt to invest

the key is not leave yourself short, but put the excess or wasteful amount into investments. then you wont care as much upfront about the investment but reap the rewards to afford all the blue pills you need later

if someone told you in 2012 to stop drinking a 6pack of beer each evening (42 a week) you took one day off per week from drinking. meaning for 2012 you accumilated ~52btc. where by 11 years later you can cash out $1.5m , would you still get drunk all week



anyways, i prefer the bread loaf measure. or the min wage measure. beer can be all over the place in prices.. and in dizziness if you prefer to consume thousands of bottles rather than invest
min wage is more stable. but bread is less stable but more stable in comparison to beer. beer has too many varieties,strengths and market spread of prices. so min wage and then a stable staple consumable.. not so much beer

minimum wage is better because its national. where was beer is banned in some countries and the price varies from one store to the next or any/all bars/pubs of the same town

alcohol just becomes a headache to manage and a toilet flush 6 hours later.. its a waste

the whole idea of using disposible income to invest, is to use the income that would just go to waste andnot stick around. much better to invest..

if smart. if you invested a 6 pack of beers in 2012 you can now buy 20,000 beers in 2023

its not his personal stash. its where he puts his spare company cashflow to avoid tax. and yes he will sell. he already did sell some and also bought some
he sold 704bitcoin in december (for tax purposes to declare a tax loss to again avoid paying tax)

satoshis reason and math for 21m is not what you think. nor does satoshis decisions or math have anything to do with your math

even cores current code for checking the 21m is bad and insecure.

it actually starts at a satoshi amount of 5,000,000,000 per block (yep check any and all block reward value in 2009 they all start in binary amount of 5,000,000,000 units not 50 units)

which after every 210k blocks the reward divides by 2
in fact and in short its actually a binary amount of
100101010000001011111001000000000
represented in hex of
12A05F200
which then displays in numeric of
5,000,000,000

which every 210k blocks the binary reward amount loses a bit
100101010000001011111001000000000 (5,000,000,000)
becomes
10010101000000101111100100000000 (2,500,000,000)
becomes
1001010100000010111110010000000 (1,250,000,000)
and so on

which if you add up all rewards and average out the timeline of the average block (secured by difficulty to try to keep them at 2016 block per fortnight(~10min/block)) then means after 32 halvings(because there was 32 bits in the first reward binary amount) every ~ 4 years, mean it totals 21m(rounding error) btc or more specific 2099999997690000sat at around 2140

2099999997690000sat /8m = 262499999.71125 is just a rounding error.

it still does not make your scenario fix itself to suddenly be correct of a rational thought to then leave a scenario of of a markt price rise in such a situation of your scenario rounded or not

if you however mentioned a completely different number BELOW 2.43 instead of anything like 2.62X you might have had some rational amount to still be in a market.
but you still held strong on your all coin put in cold wallet and never sold.
thus again the scenario you presented still failed

even when you tried to meander into analogies of secondary market of futures of mortgage debt and oil contracts. you failed to understand their economics. especially if the base market was not operating. thus causing negative affect on the secondary temporary contract market which too would not last

heres a hint if/when they ban all oil trade in say 2050. there will be no oil market. thus.. no oil futures market. you cant have an oils futures market if there is no oil spot market

im not a bitcoin cash fan. i never used it i never even claimed their forked coins of the same key i used on bitcoin ever

you are the ultimate troll that are again spouting silly rhetoric trained on you by an idiot mentor of yours that makes you think those that dont treat core as god must be a fork coin lover

 your mindset of thinking the only solution is to idolise core or use another network, is a failure of your understanding.
core devs and their corporate sponsors should not be the sole cult of responsibility of bitcoin network and its subnetwork progress

 and its really time you look beyond your own scripts of gospel recitation and start to think for yourself for once. its making you look foolish, stupid and empty of any incite

you are just angry that someone is telling you the promises your mentor made to you years ago are broke and unfixable.. yet the 6 years of waiting for LN flaws must atleast be poking at some part of your brain that must atleast wonder what went wrong

have you ever tried to question your gods in a critique way, instead of pandering to their gospel

LN does not need some mass consensus event organise an upgrade/fix for functions... so waiting 6 years for fixes is a lame thing to wait for. if they have not fixed their flaws by now. realise they cant and wont fix it
thus the promise that LN is the "solution" is a dead broken promise. no one should settle for "just be patient" any longer

stop waiting years for the hopes your gods will eventually get to make your favoured subnetwork better.. realise they had their chance to fix LN. they havnt. so its time they and or others try something different to fit the small niche services you want to use offchain

by the way there have been other devs not corporate sponsored and not part of any numbskull pigeon hole group you want to put people into who have made other subnetwork bridges with far more capacity and liquidity than LN, becasue they heard the rumbles of lightning and avoided the strikes(lack of work/delays/excuses/refusals to work) and covered themselves from the shocks your still ignorant of

money is a broad  term of many things.. not all money is the same

fiat money is not just trust/faith .. its actually backed by laws of debt, fines, tax, minimum wage and other charges that keep it in circulation

other monies have other aspects. such as the old gold backed commercial bank money had laws of swaps for gold and bearers promissory contracts

bitcoins values(features and benefits) are based on math and cryptography that form the code of rule. where the economic value(number) is based on an underlying cost of the lowest acquisition cost of a period(wholesale) where the spot market then speculates above it

you do not need faith in bitcoin.. code is law. its does not need trust. it just has transparency
infact if people do start to trust and blindly believe in some entity to manage bitcoin. and pray to them like gods.. bitcoin has failed as a decentralised currency.. no one should be trying to hold anyone up as a god in bitcoin, those that do, fail to understand how bitcoin should work

its not a currency, its a payment system of swapping reserved(locked) account balance
for want of a better example its just hub and spoke model of LN channels
its not even a blockchain. nor anew currency. is just a new messaging system using cryptography to confirm sender/destination messages of payment movements


FED now only works between commercial banks and the fed. where the FED is the hub holding the locked value and giving the commercial banks inbound balance.. commercial bank customers do not have reserved balance in the fed.. in short commercial bank customers are not locked into the fed. they are in a completely different channel/payment system

..

customers of commercial banks make requests to their commercial bank to use the commercial banks corporate reserves with the fed, much like how LN borrows/uses middle men routed channel balance. where the fed then does the same in reverse with another commercial bank.. and another commercial bank then does the same with the destined recipient customer. once both side have sent the correct messages between each other the reserves at the fed are settled in which commercial bank is given which balance. and then the sender commercial bank on separate normal banking system debits its customers balance of that amount. and the recipient commercial bank credits its customers recipient account, completing the session