@SamG - those not invested in bitcoin have little interest in ensuring it succeeds - I agree with everything Mike H did except selling his coins, he lost the will to see bitcoin succeed by giving up on his investment. you will too.
1) If the Bitcoin network can be taken over through a coordinated effort of ASIC manufacturers, mining pools, and one of the most influential & wealthy bitcoiners, this does not bode well for the future of decentralization.
I think quite the opposite I can come up with over a thousand versions in which bitcoin is taken over as a result of centralization, it's not very creative to limit your self.
What maters are incentives, and bitcoin protocol rewards honest cooperation. Until the incentives are undermined this trend is expected to continue and grow. Segwit and the bundled changes including the transaction malleability "fix" are moves counter to rewarding honest cooperation.
2) The much needed fix for tx malleability won't happen because BU will block SegWit, and the BU team will never agree on the best way to implement it.
much needed by whom? I have not seen any BU member reject the fundamental ideas behind segwit, the current implementation is just not being adopted at this time. "never" being a rather fundamentalist position.
2It's especially worrisome since many wallets, exchanges, and device manufacturers have already invested the time to support SegWit.
With all centralized planing there is a miss-allocation of resonators and malinvestment - Core and those subscribing to their centralized planing are not exempt.