No idea, to be honest. It seems to have plateaued at ~11% with little signs of adoption growth for weeks. Some major service providers such as Coinbase have yet to deploy SegWit, once they do we should see some further increase in SegWit transactions. Hard to say when they will be ready though, some time during 2018 I suppose. Whether this will suffice to push SegWit adoption to 90+% is yet another question though.

...is what I would say if SegWit were widely used, Lightning Network could be activated by the flick of a switch and transaction growth would be linear

However SegWit is nowhere as widespread as it should be, Lightning Network will take time to be widely accepted and the amount of transactions will likely grow much faster than what my initial guess was.

Point being, 1) our current situation would be much better if SegWit transactions were more common and 2) SegWit alone is no long term solution.



On BTC? I don't think so, as SegWit itself is deemed to be the malleability fix.

On BCH? I think they are working on one, but am not sure about their progress. Either way I doubt that BCH will adapt LN anytime soon, as LN was one of the main criticisms of the BCH community regarding BTC's scaling approach.



I guess LN will serve as an additional incentive to adopt SegWit, as it will have a larger impact on transaction fees, meaning that once LN becomes production ready you'll likely see an uptick in SegWit transactions as well. Also LN will likely take some time until it sees widespread adoption, so the sooner deployment starts the better!

According to blockchain.info there's currently just short of 300,000 BTC transactions being handled per day, with roughly 160,000 BTC transactions being stuck in the mempool. If someone flipped a switch and all of a sudden 90% of transaction were to be SegWit transactions, close to doubling the current possible transaction throughput, those stuck transactions were gone within a day and every transaction that followed would have little trouble getting confirmed, even with a low fee. In 2015 miners earned only about a 1/50 in transactions fees of what they earn today, so my educated guess would be that transaction fees would be only 1/50 of what they are today.

Keep in mind however that even with 90% segwit adoption, given the current growth of transactions, we'd be looking at the same problem again in about 2-3 years time. So scaling solutions such as Lightning Network are required in the long term.



In theory you could use Lightning Network without SegWit, given a transaction malleability fix. In practice, such a fix currently only exists with SegWit, so right now SegWit is required for Lightning transactions.

alt bullrun hasnt even started 

Automatic flagging for AML checks is triggered when you send or receive an international wire transfer over the value of £10,000. That doesn't mean other conditions will not get an account flagged but in general, it is single large transfers rather than lots of smaller ones. Also, the source of the funds is important, if it comes from a UK private individual or company account it is better than coming from a crypto exchange's account.
Similarly when you withdraw taking out a few hundred a day from an ATM will be fine but if you walk into a branch and withdraw over £10,000 in cash then expect to get noticed.