Little note to readers, SegWit is actually already surpassed as a technology by
Flexible Transactions that give the same advantages, but not the problems that this new technology, now many months past deadline, is still plagued by.
See more at;
dev-tech-talk/flexible-transactions-int ... 10897.html
Has the core team been presented with this or have they discussed this new tech at all, would be nice to know what they think about it?
The Flexible Transactions project has code implementing it in Bitcoin Classic and I personally wrote and submitted a BIP (bitcoin improvement proposal) to the main bitcoin development list. This got approved (see
bip134) shortly after a discussion.
Various core developers made short comments, nothing in-depth. They are certainly aware of it.
I've seen some comments from Greg on reddit, but mostly just a simple rejection.
The rationale with those rejections tended to show a deep misunderstanding of the concept presented in FlexTrans. First he claimed that this would make transactions grow in size, so I clarified following documents showing it actually decreased it. Then he stated he didn't see the need for a new format if the purpose is only decreasing the size, rejecting that the actual reason for the proposal is that it solves malleability better than SegWit does.
Tom,
Today I read that Blockstream's CEO has stepped down, in fact he has left the company to pursue other avenues. For that, they have swapped in Adam Back, who is not a public scammer, though just as worst, he is the puppet master with a long history of problems. He must not be anywhere near any Bitcoin protocol level development.
I'm sure the financiers of this investment were wined and dined with grand words, and that's exactly it, they were scammed.
Adam Back and his gang of cronies will not only take all of your money, they will give you up to the authorities if you are doing anything wrong "on a silver platter".
I've read people say, "well I read about him on wikipedia, it looks good". Didn't anybody ever teach you looks can be deceiving? How can you base your opinion of somebody solely off of a wikipedia article? That's crazy. You must always do as much due diligence as you can.
Let's look at one example of the rift in the community and problems at the protocol level. There are few involved that have no regard for their customers advice, complaints or anything of the sort. Few that had no role in the initial creation of Bitcoin. Over 900 complaints have been filed in a thread I have compiled. Nearly 80 days on record of pure problems with no end in sight. Only for the thread to be locked "due to spam reports". Eerily similar to the ghost spam reports I have read on reddit, making peoples posts disappear. Countless polls in favor of increasing the blocksize. Fees are denying access to Bitcoin in third world countries, anybody living on the bare minimum can't afford it, this is what gives Bitcoin its value, the people of our world and their need of a peer 2 peer digital cash system.
You all need to remember this. Trust no one, and when you do need to trust someone, know when and how much to trust them. This is Harvard business advice 101.
My advice is that if anyone is left who is careless enough to go down the path of Blockstream and Bitcoin Core, it is at your own risk. You will not be able to say you haven't been warned.
I hate talking of doom and gloom, but this is the reality of the situation. There is no better way to explain this.