Nick Szabo  🔑

Dear Nick what is your objection to #SegWit2MB?

It tries to appease an ignorant mob at further expense to Bitcoin's security.

"Further"? What else do you object to @NickSzabo4? You support decrease in block size?

SegWit has many security & tps benefits but big security flaw by increasing bandwidth reqrmnts. 2MB trad is flaw++ w/o any security benefit.

Well the benefits are doubling TPS but you're right about security risks, we'll publish information on different scenarios to assess this

Here's a suggestion: get on IRC and talk with bitcoin developers and protocol people. Invite peer review on approach and proposals. #wizards

Hint: block size is not the central issue. The secure integrity of a global currency is the central issue.

I am a strong proponent of technical feasibility over political ones, simply because it will avoid politics.

In an ideal scenario that would be simple but technology is also driven by human purpose and that's the tension here which purpose and how

Given Mimblewimble and LN, the ideal scenario is getting closer.

Lightning also needs scaling the base layer as well so most channels will be comprised of a dozen transactions

security question: do you understand that most security properties are lost if users can not keep up with validation?

We do and will publish information on this subject to discuss it openly. Any good analysis on block size vs security / descentralization?

Why would you make this proposal without having already seen a security analysis or done your own?