Are there people out there who disagree that the Core scaling roadmap is working

[Marlo Stanfield]

If you think about going back through the past 2 or 3 years with scaling issues and arguments and proposing a hypothetical future where BTC is $xxxx and fees are 10 sat a byte or less often enough, as well as block weight resulting in 2mb blocks, I have a hard time imagining even the most ardent anti-Core person really disagreeing that this would be a bad outcome.

Yet I suspect even if the face of excellent numbers, people still can't overcome their cognitive biases/emotions and will still argue doom and gloom, or that this is a bad result thus far. Hopefully I'm wrong, but it seems to be common. Especially these days with the internet, that people dig themselves so deep in to certain worldviews that reality begins to become irrelevant. Are there still a sizeable amount of people like this within the community?

[1714020486]

1714020486

[1714020486]

1714020486

[1714020486]

1714020486

[1714020486]

1714020486

[cryptorTUX]

If you think about going back through the past 2 or 3 years with scaling issues and arguments and proposing a hypothetical future where BTC is $xxxx and fees are 10 sat a byte or less often enough, as well as block weight resulting in 2mb blocks, I have a hard time imagining even the most ardent anti-Core person really disagreeing that this would be a bad outcome.

Yet I suspect even if the face of excellent numbers, people still can't overcome their cognitive biases/emotions and will still argue doom and gloom, or that this is a bad result thus far. Hopefully I'm wrong, but it seems to be common. Especially these days with the internet, that people dig themselves so deep in to certain worldviews that reality begins to become irrelevant. Are there still a sizeable amount of people like this within the community?

I am not sure if it is working or not. So far it seems to be working specially with vast acceptance and implementation of Segwit but still this doesn't mean it is perfect. lightining network is something I see more people are moving towards but there are also few drawbacks as you can only transfer as much money as there is available through the opened channel and honestly I am skeptic to see this being used by everyday users. Bit let's let the market to decide what has value and what doesn't have value.

[franky1]

yes because core have not solved anything

the price is not affected by code. the price is fluid and people speculate on greed. 99% dont even know a line of code or who is behind coding it
scaling has not be dealt with.. in 2009 they estimated that bitcoin could handle 7tx/s

show me a block since 2017 that has exceeded 7tx/s (4200 tx)

as for features like segwit. adoption has not jumped to 100% adoption. funny part is that on average its ~10% of a block is segwit.
even funnier. the pools that flagged an undying belief that segwit is great code. dont actually trust it enough to use segwit transactions for their own block rewards
even while writing this. the most vocal supporting pool of segwit, which is BTCC. is still using legacy addresses for its block rewards
https://blockchain.info/block/0000000000000000002dd71853f6d273cf1ddb30e82316a742adf61e14cfdecc
..
lots of people are getting errors. even in the block created while writing this. someone tried to use new scripts. but ended up with the 0.001($7) test amounts being treated as a fee
https://blockchain.info/tx/7a0fb9f33a72fe5b7033c9db101760bc79dc2def545f1445b67fc60e7d48c21c
https://blockchain.info/tx/762a4068e2cd9778c74947bd7de041e06deb2d14d3a4417e6a85ddb65139a7f8
https://blockchain.info/tx/41cbcafd9d76909bbbdf7ce030e8d464d0717a122b42e2cfca5c1479488b0c94
..
the only thing that has changed is that the collaberation of the core devs, their friendly mixers and their friendly pools have stopped spamming the network now their features are locked in.
this is not due to their features working, because hardly anyone is actually using them.
but due to them needing to spam the network as a propaganda move to make people feel that something needed to be done. and then argue only core could do it..



with that said, no one should just hand core the reigns of bitcoin. because devs retire, devs get bored. devs' get paid off to do nasty things. and without other independant teams separate from core being on the same level playing field of consensus(core dont want a level playing field) it puts too many eggs into one basket.

but hey, i know many core promoters will just buzz word that core are kings, core are conservative, core deserve to maintain the network alone

care to ask yourself why core devs call it an "experiement" and why after 9 years. core still class it as being beta tested

[BrewMaster]

as i said during the transaction fee ATH, it was a spam attack against bitcoin. now that it has stopped we are seeing fees go back to normal levels and the chaos has vanished. it had nothing to do with scaling. not saying that SegWit isn't good or second layer is bad. just saying don't confuse things with each other.
we don't know who was behind it and how many different groups, but we saw that everyone benefited from this spam attacks!!!

- miners earned a shitload of money for delaying the adoption of scaling solutions.
- Roger Ver and Bitmain got their wish and earned a shitload of money by creating their centralized altcoin called bitcoin-cash by doubling what they had and also Bitmain by selling a lot of mining equipment! not to mention by abusing difficulty and switching back and forth between BTC and BCH
- altcoins got their wish and started receiving some attention because bitcoin users were mad at the situation and were looking for alternatives, they got disappointed but still the pumps in altcoins were amazing.
- core developers got their wish and activated Segregated Witness which they were pushing for some time and couldn't get the support past ~25%

Chaos isn't a pit.
Chaos is a ladder.
Many who try to climb it fail and never get to try again.
The fall breaks them. And some are given a chance to climb, but they refuse. They cling to the realm or the gods or love.
Illusions.
Only the ladder is real.
The climb is all there is.

[Philomena86]

I do not know exactly about this but I think let the market make a decision about its existence

[DooMAD]

Yet I suspect even if the face of excellent numbers, people still can't overcome their cognitive biases/emotions and will still argue doom and gloom, or that this is a bad result thus far. Hopefully I'm wrong, but it seems to be common. Especially these days with the internet, that people dig themselves so deep in to certain worldviews that reality begins to become irrelevant.

That looks like a pretty accurate assessment.  It's like there's a kind of "feedback loop" where it's all too easy to reinforce your own beliefs and not consider what's actually happening in the world around you.  For some, it seems there's no way back to reality.  They try to paint naturally occurring events as some big conspiracy or deliberate act of collusion.  But all they're going to do is isolate themselves with such paranoid delusions.

I was initially skeptical of the scaling roadmap, but I now see the wisdom in it.  I think we're on the path to success.  Let the detractors complain about it if they like.  They're free to choose another path, or even more than one path if they like.  The best part about disagreements in crypto is that you can keep coins on multiple chains if there's an impasse that results in a fork.  You aren't restricted to binary choices here.  You can hedge your bets and store value on any number of forks or other blockchains.

Everyone can pursue the ideals they think are best to achieve scaling.  Time will tell which one turns out to be most successful in achieving that goal.  But I think with all the great ideas in the pipeline like atomic swaps, Schnorr Sigs, MAST, AMP Payments and probably loads of others, it certainly appears as though this chain has a bright future.  And if it turns out I'm wrong, I've still got some fork coins on other chains.

[beliveinsomeone]

I'm not sure if it works or not. The Lightning network is something I see a lot of people are aiming for but there are some downsides as you can only transfer as much money as possible through the open channel. Let the market decide what value and what value does not.