If Core/Segwit is a corporate takeover of Bitcoin, then...

[Bit_Happy]

Perhaps we should raise the block size limit and leave Satoshi's creation alone?
If Core/Segwit is a corporate takeover of Bitcoin, then, exactly how does this community rise up and stop them?

EDIT:
I did not say anything to support BTU:
Also, the Dev's are being paid by Blockstream, thus the phrase "corporate takeover" of Bitcoin.

Fact:
If the majority trusted Core/Segwit, then there would not be an ongoing battle regarding block size.

So:
Where is the solution? 

[1714633487]

1714633487

[1714633487]

1714633487

[1714633487]

1714633487

[1714633487]

1714633487

[BillyBobZorton]

Perhaps we should raise the block size limit and leave Satoshi's creation alone?
If Core/Segwit is a corporate takeover over Bitcoin, then, exactly how does this community rise up and stop them?

Core/Segwit is not a corporate takeover over bitcoin, that is what Buggy Unlimited propaganda wants you to believe.

Satoshi on hard forks:




satoshi would have been against BU or any other attack in the form of a second version (which goes against the majority of current nodes and so on)

If you dont like bitcoin then create an altcoin that is better than bitcoin and people will naturally dump bitcoin for your alt.

[lurker10]

satoshi would have been against BU or any other attack in the form of a second version (which goes against the majority of current nodes and so on)

If you respect what Satoshi said, you must respect this too. He said, quote:

"They vote with their CPU power, expressing their acceptance of valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on them. Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism."

What miners think is true Bitcoin is Bitcoin according to Satoshi. You can't cherry pick some quotes, respect all of his vision or none.

[Holliday]

Perhaps we should raise the block size limit and leave Satoshi's creation alone?
If Core/Segwit is a corporate takeover over Bitcoin, then, exactly how does this community rise up and stop them?

If the economic majority supported simply raising the block size limit, it would have been done yesterday, last week, years ago.

What you are calling "this community" is just an extremely vocal minority. Every single metric besides pool operators shows that a very tiny group wants BU or even a simple block size increase.

If you ignore a mere 4-5 users (and 0 activity shill accounts) on this forum, you would see practically zero threads about increasing the block size or BU on this forum.

So... you want to "stop" what a huge majority of the users actually want. Good luck with that.

I suggest you do like the other big blockers do and switch to Ethereum. Since it makes complete sense to bitch about Bitcoin's utility and then switch to something with far less utility. LMAO.

[Bit_Happy]

...
If you ignore a mere 4-5 users (and 0 activity shill accounts) on this forum, you would see practically zero threads about increasing the block size or BU on this forum.
........

Even if most of the noise is from "shills", we have Dev's being paid by Blockstream and some serious questions being raised about segwit being a "Trojan horse" to centralize Bitcoin. Are you OK with Bitcoin Dev being taken over by a company?




OP updated / EDIT:

I did not say anything to support BTU:
Also, the Dev's are being paid by Blockstream, thus the phrase "corporate takeover" of Bitcoin.

So... you want to "stop" what a huge majority of the users actually want. Good luck with that.

Fact:
If the majority trusted Core/Segwit, then there would not be an ongoing battle regarding block size.

So:
Where is the solution?  

[Holliday]

Are you OK with Bitcoin Dev being taken over by a company?

Are you OK with spreading falsehoods in order to forward your agenda?

[Killerpotleaf]

Are you OK with Bitcoin Dev being taken over by a company?

Are you OK with spreading falsehoods in order to forward your agenda?

the fact that core aligns so well with blockstream's agenda is just a happy coincidence.

[Lauda]

Also, the Dev's are being paid by Blockstream, thus the phrase "corporate takeover" of Bitcoin.

This is complete and utter bullshit, which makes you look like an idiot. Two reasons:
1) The 'developers' are not paid by Blockstream. Some of them are working there, which makes a whole difference to the statement (all, a big part of, a majority of, etc.). Look at the picture from Holliday.
2) These are the very same developers who worked on Bitcoin before they created the company to fund Bitcoin development.

Fact:
If the majority trusted Core/Segwit, then there would not be an ongoing battle regarding block size.

This is not a fact. You are a victim of the disinformation campaign that has infiltrated this community. Do you really think that various agencies aren't trying to push you into hating Core, so that they can stall the progress as much as possible?
Side note: Someone should hire me full time to combat the FUD campaigns. Any agency willing to hire me as pro-Bitcoin to fight all those employed anti-Bitcoin community infiltrators?

[jonald_fyookball]

i'm trying to tone down my posting but come on guys

Greg Maxwell is the author of the core scaling roadmap and the CTO of Blockstream... that's
all I need to answer the question for myself.   Just thought someone should mention that.

Everyone knows there's a handful of people at the core of core (Greg, Pieter, Peter, and Luke)
and everyone else follows them.

This will be my only post in this thread.

p.s. Lauda, why not. Might as well upgrade from the unpaid variety to the paid variety.

[andron8383]

***
the fact that core aligns so well with blockstream's agenda is just a happy coincidence.

Some people have to be payed for work do you think that everybody will work for free ?
if just 3/10 guys have connection to blockstream if segwit is shit you will get answer from other developers.
If you think that you can code better BTC core try do it.
1/2/1000MB move BTC to nowhere. Segwit have at least some NEW technology behind and improvements
Do you think that unlocking block-size limit is step forward in development ?
Try go and write that in ETH-forum that BU is better because it has unlocked blocksize limit - they will have LOL time.