where can i read unbiased arguments For and Against Segwit?

[throwaway2232214]

i am sick and tired of BU and other fanboys bashing segwit and also seeing blockstream fanboys singing its praise.

so is there anywhere (preferably off bitcointalk!) that i can read more about unbiased arguments for and against segwit and LN?

[franky1]

i am sick and tired of BU and other fanboys bashing segwit and also seeing blockstream fanboys singing its praise.

so is there anywhere (preferably off bitcointalk!) that i can read more about unbiased arguments for and against segwit and LN?

or just keep an open mind and ask for both, settles the arguments.

heres a hint:

dynamic blocksize: default starting at 2mb base 4mb weight.

that way its both segwit and actual scaling.

[throwaway2232214]

There is already a thread posted here in the forum, no need to create a new one. Suggest you to lock down this thread and post your comment on the existing thread, plus all detailed review has been given there, and stop trying to argue over this.

for your blind eyes:
preferably off bitcointalk!
..... unbiased arguments ....

you haven't even given me any links to that thread you think is unbiased !

go spam your signature somewhere else

[Kakmakr]

I share your pain OP, because I too have been searching for a unbiased comparison between the two. I was hoping someone like Andreas Antonopoulos, would have given a unbiased talk on the subject, but I figure everyone have already picked their favorite implementation.

If I am right, Andreas Antonopoulos supports the Segwit Softfork?

The main problem is, a unbiased article would have to be written  by someone technical and most of these people have formed a biased opinion on the subject already. So the source of the article will be biased.

Even Danny Hamilton seems to have made up his mind? He is normally very open-headed.

[kiklo]

i am sick and tired of BU and other fanboys bashing segwit and also seeing blockstream fanboys singing its praise.

so is there anywhere (preferably off bitcointalk!) that i can read more about unbiased arguments for and against segwit and LN?

Find the Whitepapers on each , read them and make up your own mind. 


 

[Lauda]

-snip-
 that i can read more about unbiased arguments for and against segwit and LN?

You should look for those separately. While one may have plenty more reasons to dislike LN, there is much less to do so with Segwit. There's actually a big page covering the problems/downsides of Segwit on the Bitcoin Core website: Segregated Witness Costs and Risks, and here is the page covering the benefits Segregated Witness Benefits. I think it's at least fairly unbiased considering how openly they addresses many of the potential problems.

If I am right, Andreas Antonopoulos supports the Segwit Softfork?

Yes. Listening to AA talk about Segwit may also be a great place to start.

[jbreher]

-snip-
 that i can read more about unbiased arguments for and against segwit and LN?

You should look for those separately. While one may have plenty more reasons to dislike LN, there is much less to do so with Segwit. There's actually a big page covering the problems/downsides of Segwit on the Bitcoin Core website: Segregated Witness Costs and Risks, and here is the page covering the benefits Segregated Witness Benefits. I think it's at least fairly unbiased considering how openly they addresses many of the potential problems.

Some might consider the creators of The SegWit Omnibus Changeset to be a ... umm ... questionable source for a bias free discussion of the benefits and drawbacks of The SegWit Omnibus Changeset.

[franky1]

the most unbiased fault of segwit.

1)
is that fullnodes should control what is an acceptable rule.
the implementation of segwit is avoiding using fullnode consensus to get it accepted.

when activated full nodes had no choice of acceptance or veto.
at the moment only ~1900 nodes of ~5400 nodes (todays stats) would be able to fully validate segwit transactions if activated today. rendering ~3500 nodes less than full node status, relying on the ~1900 to validate and hand them legit segwit tx they can only relay and part 'test' for conformity (but not full validity)

which is a financial security risk
the hope is that (using todays stats as example) ~1900 nodes is 'enough' decentralized diversity to head the validation on behalf of the 3500 nodes

2)
the end user experience of the 'technical solutions' will not all be solved as promised
RBF, CPFP and CSV are new 'official' mechanisms that replace the double spend problem that malleability 'bug' causes to gateway merchants/services.


3)
the one time capacity growth is only achievable if fullnodes switch and use it, the projections of 1.8x-2.1x is only if 100% of transactions are segwit.
based on the old stat of average tx ~400byte 2500tx a block base assumption

segwit   legacy%   capacity 1.X
    0      100%      1.00
    5      97%        1.02
  18      90%        1.08
  36      80%        1.16
  54      70%        1.24
  90      50%        1.40
109      40%        1.49
127      30%        1.57
145      20%        1.65
163      10%        1.73
181      0%         1.81

so 2500 tx becomes 4500tx
even using the newer 2.1x thats based on increased multisig use which at base assumption is 2150tx a block. which after calculations still amounts to the same ~4500tx 100% utility if everyone switched to segwit, whether the assumption was
standard 2500tx a block base assumption 1.8x
multisigmix 2150tx a block base assumption 2.1x

so expect ~4500tx if 100% utility

the funny thing is while the promise of more capacity is based on 100% segwit utility. there is the equal and opposite one too
if everyone done lean 1in 1out legacy transactions. we would get the ~4200(uncompressed key(old old))~5200(compressed key) transactions (remember the days of the lean tx allowing 7txps)

reality and utility is far different then expectation

4) fee discount
though those that do use segwit get a discount. it has a bait and switch. tx fee's have risen. thus the end user experience is just a fee rollback to last years prices.. try not to think we can get to below 1cent a tx like we did in 2012-14