Because of SegWit we will have to write up to16x the memory to the chain, thus every node, to price out this behavior vs the protocol satoshis left us. Scammers can write up to 4x the data for up to 1/4 the price. 16x the ratio of energy:bits. We have lots of healing to go, including the battle to revert the economics of blockspace back to the constants/ratios Satoshi gave us before leaving. BIP 110 doesn’t address this. 1 sat = 1 sat, but 1 bit ≠ 1 bit. Everyone is focused on the necessity for constants in the “coin” part of the system but neglect the necessity of constants on the “bit” part of the system. Blockspace supposed to be where Bits=Coins in 1:1 exchange and proportionality. Miner centralization doesn’t really matter if we cannot fully conserve the work they perform because we broke a fundamental conservation law in logic. 9 years and counting….. Luckily in terms of energy, pre-Segwit blocks carry a much large % of the cumulative work performed on the system.

Samson Mow and Blockstream puppeteers will profit from BIP110's predictable failure.

Both talks are pretty milk-brain, to be honest. James O'beirne: Don't worry about centralization risks because you can just trust cores, assumevalidUTXO, plus, who runs a full node anyway, Pleb? Then, trust miners to broadcast weak blocks for mempool diffs (totally small change and not a way to DDoS the Peer Gossip Network.🙄) Jamison Lopp: But the miners money. Money miners. We need miner money. Please bro, you gotta trust me. This is about miners making money. Let me put shitcoins on Bitcoin, man. Honestly, the through line in both of their talks is that we should care more about miners than the node runners. And honestly, fuck miners. If mining isn't a profitable business looks like they're just going to have to collapse then. All of these extra mental gymnastics and mealy mouth rationale all to say "help me keep my ad hoc industry alive." No.

How do you know it will fail activation, because of no miner support?

Infromation assymetry.