Topic: Do you think BU hardfork or use UASF now is good idea? - page 2. (Read 1393 times)

That might happen, but it will take very long time and people might move to altcoin.

If the market really wants UASF, then why isn't any serious market player signalling for SegWit or UASF?

I see these plays purely as a delusional and last straw way to get the "people" to give BlockStream some sense of viability. And I'm sure that the investors have to be given some sort of story of them trying really hard and really it wasn't incompetence that they lost all that money and still have no product.

Anyway.

UASF is an idea where people running a wallet decide to stop following the miners chain if the miner doesn't vote for SegWit.

There are several important details here.

    Miners can last much much much longer without sending their coins to an exchange than an exchange can last without the miners chain.

    Miners would be embraced again by just voting for segwit. There is no way for miners to be forced to accept, mine or validate segwit transactions. There is not even a reason for miners to start running Core.

The only effect uasf could possibly have is for miners to vote segwit in, without validating it. Which means that if one miner includes segwit transactions he will quickly get himself hard forked off the net because other miners will happily include a transaction spending that segwit tx because it is an everyone-can-spend.

UASF is a stupid idea. There is no way that exchanges will cut their own veins open by using it.
If it were to actually work, it would actually kill SegWit.