Author

Topic: [2017-06-14]BIP 148 + SegWit2x? A Bitcoin Scaling Compromise Might Not Be So Eas (Read 4105 times)

jr. member
Activity: 58
Merit: 10
if LTC didn't have a problem then BTC souldn't have either. but i hope it has  Smiley
sr. member
Activity: 2618
Merit: 439
BIP 148 + SegWit2x? A Bitcoin Scaling Compromise Might Not Be So Easy


Could two of bitcoin's more polarizing scaling proposals unite?

As demand for alternative blockchain assets continues to grow, some technologists are starting to wonder if a more collaborative means of solving one of the network's long-perceived problems could be achieved.

The idea is that two of the better-known scaling proposals, SegWit2x and BIP 148, might be equipped to work together given that both are attempting to upgrade the network with Segregated Witness (SegWit), a network optimization first proposed by developers in 2015.

Yet, each project is currently paving the way for a scaling optimization differently, and in ways that are ultimately incompatible with the other.

BIP 148, for example, is moving ahead with its user-activated soft fork (UASF) that would seek to push SegWit live without explicitly asking miners for support. SegWit2x, meanwhile, plans to pair SegWit with a 2 MB block-size increase, boosting transaction capacity further by tweaking the bitcoin's underlying rules.

And that collision could lead to a split – one that turns bitcoin into two competing assets. Adding to the drama is that the upgrades are set to take their next steps at around the same time.

If all goes according to plan, users will be able to begin running SegWit2x on 21st July. Likewise, BIP 148 will be triggered on 1st August, an event some are calling "Bitcoin Independence Day". Yet, because of the incompatibility between the two proposals, those that begin running SegWit2x could end up on an entirely different bitcoin network than those running BIP 148, with entirely different bitcoins trading at an entirely different value.

http://www.coindesk.com/bip-148-segwit2x-bitcoin-scaling-compromise-might-not-easy/
Jump to: