Segwit is good for bitcoins

[franky1]

Then if you have more transactions per block, your transaction is more prone to get confirmed sooner than later (and not staying a long time in the unconfirmed transactions pool).

thats not how bitcoin works, your trying too hard to make a placebo effect appear to be segwit related.

segwit is NOT letting in any extra transactions in. segwit is not activated to do that.
secondly next year when it is activated it doesnt make 4 blocks get solved in 15 minutes. or mess with the 'average' timing

segwit has nothing to do with the asic miners hashrate to make blocks

[DGulari]

Then if you have more transactions per block, your transaction is more prone to get confirmed sooner than later (and not staying a long time in the unconfirmed transactions pool).

thats not how bitcoin works, your trying too hard to make a placebo effect appear to be segwit related.

segwit is NOT letting in any extra transactions in. segwit is not activated to do that.
secondly next year when it is activated it doesnt make 4 blocks get solved in 15 minutes. or mess with the 'average' timing

segwit has nothing to do with the asic miners hashrate to make blocks

SegWit does not appreciably help with the scaling problem.  The only thing SegWit does is get the network ready to become the Blockstream Lightning Network where you have to pay a private company to use their 'sidechain channels'.   That is the only true purpose of SegWit.

SegWit is a conversion of Bitcoin to a privately owned crypto 'managed' by Blockstream.  Oh, and they are taking the name 'Bitcoin' to put on their system because they control commit access as Core developers.

Fuck those fucking fuckers.

[mbbtc01]

if segwit can help keep bitcoin secure and give it more of a better future then I say welcome it.  some people might thing it not good but we just have to wait and see what happens to the price of bitcoins and if it the mining community helps it grow. 

[BuySomeBitcoins]

Yes, of course it is good for Bitcoin. Every technological improvement is a good thing for Bitcoin.

SegWit is an AltCoin.  It is not Bitcoin. 

Not only that, it is a fucking stupid alt coin that is being pursued so BlockStream can enable their proprietary side network.  It is a scam folks.  Don't buy it. 

basically the admins of this forum !

[Wind_FURY]

At this stage it's mostly speculation.  I don't think anyone can truly know whether Segwit (and by extension, Lightning) is good or bad for Bitcoin until we see it in action.  There are still concerns over maintaining direct access to the blockchain by individuals, so users can keep transacting directly on-chain without relying on third parties.  For those who believe the advent of this technology could result in users being forced off the chain onto more "custodial" services, then it's fair to see why they're skeptical.  To echo others, this clearly doesn't make it an altcoin, but it is potentially a significant change in ethos.  On the plus side, it is optional and, if it doesn't work as advertised, there is still the nuclear option of a hard fork away from it.

I do not believe it is all speculation from the people who are against Segwit/LN. It is also political because they have a different set of beliefs on how Bitcoin should be taken forward and has divided the community into their own camps. The people in each camp who point at each other accusing that greed and control is the primary motivation of the solution of either Segwit/LN and bigger blocks are hypocrites. Both camps each have their own self interests at hand.

For what it's worth, I'm interested to see Segwit and Lightning up and running so that we can all make an informed evaluation of the pros and cons.

I agree. I am also interested what else can be done with LN. The most interesting use case is the possibility for it to become a bridge to other blockchains.

However, I will say that (despite usage being optional) if people feel they are either being forced to transact either less frequently, or off chain, due to prohibitive costs, or if the off chain transactions start redirecting fees away from the miners and towards some newly created middlemen, causing incentives to become misaligned, then a fork would be all but inevitable in my view.  People won't support a system that doesn't support them.  Give it a chance, but not carte blanche.

True but it will not stop the miners from creating payment hubs. I see it as an opportunity for them to gain more power in the system.

[gribble]

Core is implementing segwit through softfork, that is by lying to old nodes to realize compatibility. This brings significant technical risks and hefty tech debts.

With bottom layer data structure altered, Core wants to lie to old nodes so as to fool them into believing “nothing-has-changed”. This is just as difficult as the twisted hand in the pic above. The risks and debts behind it are so self-explanatory. We can already expect tremendous difficulty in the future development that will be based on this twisted hand.

Why Core says “SegWit almost changed every line of Bitcoin’s codes?” (They wanted to brag about the workload).

Based on the HK consensus, the segwit should have been out in Apr. and online since Jul.,why is it so late in Nov. even under the pressure from consensus and miners? Because core wanted to build a twisted hand.
segwit is bad for bitcoins