I do not feel like upgrading my core wallet.

[franky1]

OMG
all your IF if if.
your not thinking about risk your thinking of shying away from risks with 'if' statements
you are not even considering malicious intent to double spend.
instead your saying if there is no double spend then you can accept a tx with 1 confirm

Are you ignorant, blind, terrible at reading comprehension, or all of the above?

The only IF that I said is IF A MINER DOES NOT UPGRADE. How about this, it means exactly the same thing: Miners who do not upgrade and continue to operate as they do now will not have their blocks orphaned by those who do upgrade.

the point of FULLY VALIDATING INCLUDING SIGNATURES is to rule out malicious or accidentally nasty data.

untill all pools are running updated software
untill all pools are proven not to be malicious
untill all nodes before yours are proven to not be malicious.

then you should not trust the data you receive.
but in utopia then you can be comforted to not need to fully validate a transaction, because you TRUST the network will do it for you.

in which case validating independently and diversly and decentrally is no longer required..

so think about this:
why do you think bitcoin needs to be independently and decentrally validated..
think about bitcoins whole ethos. think about why double spends happen why orphans happen

segwit has not fixed that and its still a problem which is the point of needing decentralized and independent validation.. to not trust a miner is uptodate and ethical.

let me guess.. next month you will be saying segwit is such a success nodes are not needed because all the pools are running core and they alone can hold the blockchain. and you will start promoting only running lite clients because you think independent security is not relevant

come on wake up!!
ask yourself why decentralized nodes exist.
why not let just the pools hold the blockchain.. if they are so ethical and perfect

[achow101]

This is pointless. You just keep running around in circles screaming the same things you said earlier, not listening to what anyone else has to say, constantly ridiculing them and thinking you are correct and everyone else who doesn't think the same is wrong.

Are you ignorant, blind, terrible at reading comprehension, or all of the above?

The only IF that I said is IF A MINER DOES NOT UPGRADE. How about this, it means exactly the same thing: Miners who do not upgrade and continue to operate as they do now will not have their blocks orphaned by those who do upgrade.

the point of FULLY VALIDATING INCLUDING SIGNATURES is to rule out malicious or accidentally nasty data.

What does that have to do with ANYTHING that you quoted? I never said that fully validating was unnecessary. All I said regarding validation is that a non-upgraded node will still be validating the rest of the transaction. It is still validating, albeit partial validation. It is not just "blindly accepting" all segwit transactions.

let me guess.. next month you will be saying segwit is such a success nodes are not needed because all the pools are running core and they alone can hold the blockchain. and you will start promoting only running lite clients because you think independent security is not relevant

Stop putting words in my mouth. At no point in time have I said any of that sort and at no point in time will I say anything of that sort. I have said nothing except facts which you can look up and verify yourself by reading the source code. All you have said are baseless statements, false statements, and slander against me and others who do not share your viewpoint. And the occasional true statement. Much like Donald Trump.

[franky1]

This is pointless. You just keep running around in circles screaming the same things you said earlier, not listening to what anyone else has to say, constantly ridiculing them and thinking you are correct and everyone else who doesn't think the same is wrong.

Are you ignorant, blind, terrible at reading comprehension, or all of the above?

The only IF that I said is IF A MINER DOES NOT UPGRADE. How about this, it means exactly the same thing: Miners who do not upgrade and continue to operate as they do now will not have their blocks orphaned by those who do upgrade.

the point of FULLY VALIDATING INCLUDING SIGNATURES is to rule out malicious or accidentally nasty data.

What does that have to do with ANYTHING that you quoted? I never said that fully validating was unnecessary. All I said regarding validation is that a non-upgraded node will still be validating the rest of the transaction. It is still validating, albeit partial validation. It is not just "blindly accepting" all segwit transactions.

let me guess.. next month you will be saying segwit is such a success nodes are not needed because all the pools are running core and they alone can hold the blockchain. and you will start promoting only running lite clients because you think independent security is not relevant

Stop putting words in my mouth. At no point in time have I said any of that sort and at no point in time will I say anything of that sort. I have said nothing except facts which you can look up and verify yourself by reading the source code. All you have said are baseless statements, false statements, and slander against me and others who do not share your viewpoint. And the occasional true statement. Much like Donald Trump.

do you agree pools should not be 100% trusted to not make bad data
do you agree pools should not be 100% trusted to not be malicious
meaning nodes have a real reason to FULLY validate

do you agree that orphans do happen and while nodes cannot FULLY validate a transaction as not being malicious/ bad more orphans can occur
and while not all pools are uptodate there is a heightened risk even further

do you agree that nodes should not 100% trust data they receive
do you agree that nodes should 100% independently and FULLY data they receive

overall do you agree that for those not upgrading.. they should be more wary of risk

anyone can steal someones chequebook and right a destination an acceptable date and an acceptable amount.. but the cheque is not valid unless its fully validated.
any banks cashing a cheque without the signature risks a double spend. and should "accept" the cheque and let it pass on to other more uptodate banks to validate the cheque using uptodate technology before its then deemed safe

again wait a few confirmations to ensure it doesnt orphan because bad data and malicious intent is and always will be a risk and thats why nodes are important

[achow101]

do you agree pools should not be 100% trusted to not make bad data
do you agree pools should not be 100% trusted to not be malicious
meaning nodes have a real reason to FULLY validate

do you agree that orphans do happen and while nodes cannot FULLY validate a transaction as not being malicious/ bad more orphans can occur
and while not all pools are uptodate there is a heightened risk even further

do you agree that nodes should not 100% trust data they receive
do you agree that nodes should 100% independently and FULLY data they receive

overall do you agree that for those not upgrading.. they should be more wary of risk

Yes.

anyone can steal someones chequebook and right a destination an acceptable date and an acceptable amount.. but the cheque is not valid unless its fully validated.
any banks cashing a cheque without the signature risks a double spend. and should "accept" the cheque and let it pass on to other more uptodate banks to validate the cheque using uptodate technology before its then deemed safe

Please stop with your analogies. They are usually incorrect. I know exactly how Bitcoin works; just because my opinion differs from yours does not mean that I am wrong nor that I don't understand how it all works.

again wait a few confirmations to ensure it doesnt orphan because bad data and malicious intent is and always will be a risk and thats why nodes are important

Yes.

Why are you asking all of these questions? They are irrelevant to the point at hand. At no point in time have I ever said that fully validating was bad and that miners were trustable. All I was trying to do was to point out that the statement "non-upgraded nodes just blindly accept segwit transactions" is incorrect. You have taken this and spun it way out of control. Just stop.

[franky1]

overall do you agree that for those not upgrading.. they should be more wary of risk

Yes.

again wait a few confirmations to ensure it doesnt orphan because bad data and malicious intent is and always will be a risk and thats why nodes are important

Yes.

took you long enough

good day

[jimbobway]

Depending on your current version if you upgrade your client could be significantly faster in downloading blocks.  Do it regardless.

[SirLancelot]

consequences?

You will miss lots of changes and development that comes with the upgraded version plus I think the upgraded version is more secure than the non upgraded. So, there are lots of advantages in upgrading.

[Wind_FURY]

consequences?

May we know the reason why? Is it laziness, a form of protest or something else? Maybe you are now leaning towards setting up a Bitcoin Unlimited node perhaps? It is your choice really but I am curious on what the reason is for the hesitation to upgrade.