gotta laugh
"A transaction that spends one or more SegWit outputs is considered a SegWit-transaction. "
so a TX of
in
1addressR4nd0m
1addressR4nd0m
1addressR4nd0m
bc1qrand0maddr355
out
1addressR4nd0m
where only 25% of 'spend' are segwit.. they class as a full segwit tx (facepalm)
what there needs to be is stats of how many UTXO are using bc1q addresses.. that would show true 'adoption'
not the stupid biased in favour of segwit indntification that site uses
in most cases the single bc1q address of these biased tx's only include a bc1q address not because a user is paying another user from funds they intentionally wanted to use segwit with. but the "change" address has defaulted to created a segwit change address (by default rather than user intentionally chosen) thus users are kind of duped into gtting their change back as segwit. thus this stat is not adoption rate(choice).. but fostering rate(not intentional choice but default result)
..
the segwit stats of that site. is biased stats like they do in saudi arabia
legalising female drivers. but knowing most saudi males dont want thir wives driving, stats realistically are low. so what they do is employee femail public bus drivers. and so every bus passenger is then classed as a communter with a female driver to bump the stats. yea not one femal per bus(journey) but 1 female per passenger. thus a bus of 10 passengers would be 10 communtes with a female driver. not 1 communte
again whats needed is a UTXO breakdown of legacy vs segwit utxo
