he's reading from a script. not speaking from his heart.
like someone is telling him what to say.
now lets see gmaxwell talk about his companies agenda when someone mentions bitcoin having a dictating leader.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SeHNXdJCtE"for wallet behavior, clients non normative stuff, yes sure go fork, please go fork, stop bothering me." (context of the community wanting him to join consensus, and him saying no)
"we are vulnerable to people wanting to jam bitcoin, either traditional money system or another cryptocurrency system" (context of dictatorship control)
and ofcourse gmaxwell loves his altcoins(monero) aswell as being paid to make hyperledger(bankers cryptocurrency system) and being part of the group that owns bitcoincore, bitcoinj XT, knots green address, bloq and many more bitcoin wallets
when the horses mouth(maxwell) is telling you that if you want change that is not dictated by those paid by bankers, requires forking off to an altcoin to get momentum.. you start to see the problem
What you are describing is what I and others call a bilaterial hardfork-- where both sides reject the other.
I tried to convince the authors of BIP101 to make their proposal bilateral
bitcoins single most best security feature is not the blockchain or PoW. its consensus.
the funny thing is gmawell hates consensus in bitcoin but loves it and concentrating on in in hyperledger
the funny thing is gmawell hates dymantic blocksize in bitcoin but loves it and concentrating on in in monero
funny how he pretends to say it keeps him up at night(context of banker takeover). yet he could always resign from blockstream and stop playing with altcoins and just do something positive for the bitcoin community. but im guessing he sleeps like a comforted baby and to use his words is looking forward to "the experiment failing".
he has lost all care for bitcoin and is happy in the banker camp of hyperledger who are slowly taking over and gaining ground with having ownership of well over 51% of code
as for segwit. its november 16th and after core said it needs 18 months for any other big thing to beactivated.. core are saying segwit by christmas. with code only pblicly usable ON BITCOINS MAINNET!! for a couple weeks.
as for the malleability fix.
does it fix double spends. nope. RBF, CPFP now allows double spends
did it ever have an issue for LN. nope because LN is a dual signing process. so a tx cannot just be manipulated after broadcast to then override the first tx. due to it needing second party signing on the second manipulated tx. thus the dual signing alone countered that.
as for linear/quadratic fix.
is there ever a need to have 1000 signatures in one tx? um no.. so limiting sigops could have solved it.
as for the 2mb debate.
is setwit preventing bloat to be well under 2mb. nope. it can go upto 4mb due to enough buffer space for payment codes and other features. BUT still hindering the transaction capacity growth.
yep 1.8mb block for ~4500 is the new expectation. the other 2.3mb buffer is for mondane non transaction capacity bloat features like confidential payment codes and mundate data to pair to a hyperledger sidechain
