So you cede that these issues exist. Great.
Did my reply imply as much? I don't think they are issues - that's why I was asking. After bitserve, fluidjax too pointed out the meaninglessness of focusing on 51% attacks as segwit-specific attack vectors.
Fungibility isn't a real issue, either - still IMHO. As SW transactions become the majority, only old or newborn coins will be left in your Type 1 (coins that were never touched by a SW transaction). Besides, LN acts as a kind of giant mega-tumbler. If/when LN really gets into widespread use, it will only help fungibility rather than undermine it.
Geeze, JJG - you need to look up the definition of 'fungible'. Within the three posts preceding yours, 2/3 of them stated that they were cautious of accepting Segwit transactions until they gained some confidence in it. That is definitively a lack of fungibility. A lack of fungibility is in no way limited to some sort of centralized blacklisting.
Those two posters stated that they were wary of SW transactions right after the soft fork. This hasn't much to do with fungibility in my understanding - more of a reasonable wait-and-see attitude motivated by sane skepticism about the technology itself - skepticism that might have been triggered by the FUD wave that some were spreading at the time.
In fact, IF I am one of those two posters I would ask for a reread of my post:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg40211481#msg40211481Your interpretation is close to what I really said, yup. Even so, I never stated I would not ACCEPT a Segwit tx not even right after the fork. My paranoia doesn't go that far. As I said, I waited for MOVING my funds to Segwit addresses. Something I decided as a prudent (even if overkill) measure because:
- The cost of waiting was none. I had no real need to do it yet, if I had and the need was bigger than the minuscule perceived risk at that time I would have done it. I had the option not to and I took it as it had no cost. It's not much different than if a new denomination bill gets introduced and I decide to change all my cash to it or not. My choice.
- Even so, I would have GLADLY ACCEPTED any segwit tx sent my way at any time. I still do, so if anyone is willing to get rid of their funds in those "pesky" Segwit addresses I can provide one. I will be grateful.
- Also, yes, whatever extreme caution that was considered in the beginning about fully moving to Segwit is long gone. A thing of the past. Let's move on.
About fungibility.... if one (jbreher?) wants to take the term to the extreme meaning (IDENTICAL), then that doesn't really exists. There's no two identical anything. Not in cash -bill denomination, serial numbers, usage wrinkles, etc) not in gold bars -different weight, composition, usage marks, etc- neither in crypto, yeah.
But it is common sense to use the term as SIMILAR/REPLACEABLE and in that respect there is absolutely no lack of fungibility due to Segwit as jbreher is saying. That's complete bullshit.
Poll
