Topic: BIP 148 benefits and badness (Read 1438 times)
It deeply worries me that all this is somewhat forced by 18 exchanges. Accepting this way of governance it´s a problem IMO.
Hello,
Can somebody give a link of good article stating the good and bad things BIP148 will brings? or perhaps you can tell me.
I only find explanation how to be ready for 1 august 2017 but not about what will bring BIP148 to bitcoin.
Can somebody give a link of good article stating the good and bad things BIP148 will brings? or perhaps you can tell me.
I only find explanation how to be ready for 1 august 2017 but not about what will bring BIP148 to bitcoin.
hem hem..
sotty guys...
but you are telling us on 1 AUG there will be a bitcoin fork?
a don't understand...
can you explain betteR?
If I understand it correctly, this will be a soft fork and to explain the difference between a soft fork and a hard fork, I will give you this link, https://www.weusecoins.com/hard-fork-soft-fork-differences/
Hard forks is a permanent divergence in the the block chain, commonly occurs when non-upgraded nodes can’t validate blocks created by upgraded nodes that follow newer consensus rules.
Soft forks is a temporary divergence in the block chain caused by non-upgraded nodes not following new consensus rules.
What we might have will be a Chain split. ^still confused^
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-beginners-guide-surviving-bip-148-uasf/
Hello,
Can somebody give a link of good article stating the good and bad things BIP148 will brings? or perhaps you can tell me.
I only find explanation how to be ready for 1 august 2017 but not about what will bring BIP148 to bitcoin.
Can somebody give a link of good article stating the good and bad things BIP148 will brings? or perhaps you can tell me.
I only find explanation how to be ready for 1 august 2017 but not about what will bring BIP148 to bitcoin.
hem hem..
sotty guys...
but you are telling us on 1 AUG there will be a bitcoin fork?
a don't understand...
can you explain betteR?
I thought Segwit supporters were against BU because it would cause a contentious fork, and now these same supporters are advocating a contentious fork brought on by UASF?
I'm so confused and it seems like there is so much disinformation going on. It seems to me Segwit propagandists have been successful in convincing average Joe's they are in love with Segwit (for someone reason).
UASF is just as dangerous as a contentious hard fork, but as long as it brings in Segwit it's justified?
Can someone provide clarity because this whole thing does not make any sense anymore.
I'm so confused and it seems like there is so much disinformation going on. It seems to me Segwit propagandists have been successful in convincing average Joe's they are in love with Segwit (for someone reason).
UASF is just as dangerous as a contentious hard fork, but as long as it brings in Segwit it's justified?
Can someone provide clarity because this whole thing does not make any sense anymore.
UASF is a system based on the game theory (we simply let Jihan to have the blonde girl so we can have the rest. Everyone is happy*) which can eliminate the malicious miners who follow BU before they become the majority. The thing is, there is a danger which is about to hit Bitcoin and his name is Jihan.
Jihan owns the biggest ASIC manufacturing company and while he is getting paid for the miners he sells, he can also can mine with those hardware which he built and make even more money. When you buy an antminer for 2700$, you wait almost a year to get your ROI. Jihan gets it instantly. He makes money while he's selling hardware, he make money by mining... It wouldn't be much of a problem if there was any other players but there isn't. Jihan ate them all. On the top of that, he owns a patent called ASICBOOST which gives advantage to his miners over the others.
He literally became the ultimate villain of bitcoin. The ultimate cancer.
If UASF don't succeed somehow, In a few years, he will acquire so much power over the network and name himself as the CEO of bitcoin (along with vogel rer) and we won't have a chance to escape from this freakshow.
So you better support UASF or bitcoin will be no more.
*A Beautiful Mind
I thought Segwit supporters were against BU because it would cause a contentious fork, and now these same supporters are advocating a contentious fork brought on by UASF?
I'm so confused and it seems like there is so much disinformation going on. It seems to me Segwit propagandists have been successful in convincing average Joe's they are in love with Segwit (for someone reason).
UASF is just as dangerous as a contentious hard fork, but as long as it brings in Segwit it's justified?
Can someone provide clarity because this whole thing does not make any sense anymore.
I'm so confused and it seems like there is so much disinformation going on. It seems to me Segwit propagandists have been successful in convincing average Joe's they are in love with Segwit (for someone reason).
UASF is just as dangerous as a contentious hard fork, but as long as it brings in Segwit it's justified?
Can someone provide clarity because this whole thing does not make any sense anymore.
UASF is a soft fork, hence the SF after the UA. BU is a hard fork. Big difference.
Whether BIP 148 is a good idea is a separate issue.
I thought Segwit supporters were against BU because it would cause a contentious fork, and now these same supporters are advocating a contentious fork brought on by UASF?
I'm so confused and it seems like there is so much disinformation going on. It seems to me Segwit propagandists have been successful in convincing average Joe's they are in love with Segwit (for someone reason).
UASF is just as dangerous as a contentious hard fork, but as long as it brings in Segwit it's justified?
Can someone provide clarity because this whole thing does not make any sense anymore.
I'm so confused and it seems like there is so much disinformation going on. It seems to me Segwit propagandists have been successful in convincing average Joe's they are in love with Segwit (for someone reason).
UASF is just as dangerous as a contentious hard fork, but as long as it brings in Segwit it's justified?
Can someone provide clarity because this whole thing does not make any sense anymore.
It brings Segwit, whether miners like it or not.
You make it happen by running the BIP148 version of the Bitcoin client, which you get from the link near the top of this thread. (mega.nz link at the bottom of the top post)
You make it happen by running the BIP148 version of the Bitcoin client, which you get from the link near the top of this thread. (mega.nz link at the bottom of the top post)
doesn't it require a decent amount of mining too? i've seen some people talking about firing up miners but i assume they're a drop in the ocean for now.
Obviously it needs mining, a chain without a hashrate is useless, but the whole thing is about the snowball/domino effect, where the more hashrate it has, the easier it is to get more hashrate, since miners will start getting nervous past 20%. Remember that legacy will be at constant risk of reorg pretty much forever.
It brings Segwit, whether miners like it or not.
You make it happen by running the BIP148 version of the Bitcoin client, which you get from the link near the top of this thread. (mega.nz link at the bottom of the top post)
You make it happen by running the BIP148 version of the Bitcoin client, which you get from the link near the top of this thread. (mega.nz link at the bottom of the top post)
doesn't it require a decent amount of mining too? i've seen some people talking about firing up miners but i assume they're a drop in the ocean for now.
It brings Segwit, whether miners like it or not.
You make it happen by running the BIP148 version of the Bitcoin client, which you get from the link near the top of this thread. (mega.nz link at the bottom of the top post)
You make it happen by running the BIP148 version of the Bitcoin client, which you get from the link near the top of this thread. (mega.nz link at the bottom of the top post)
Hello,
Can somebody give a link of good article stating the good and bad things BIP148 will brings? or perhaps you can tell me.
I only find explanation how to be ready for 1 august 2017 but not about what will bring BIP148 to bitcoin.
Can somebody give a link of good article stating the good and bad things BIP148 will brings? or perhaps you can tell me.
I only find explanation how to be ready for 1 august 2017 but not about what will bring BIP148 to bitcoin.
Jump to: