Good news everyone: SegWit may finally be activated with majority support - page 2.

cellard

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1252

Quote from: Amph on June 19, 2017, 10:07:25 AM

the bad thing is that bitmain is saying that they will shift their hashrate to their own shit coin bitcoin clone, so the network will be unsecure with a major hashrate dropping

i hope this is not something that can promote a 51% momentarily, because it would be a disaster, or bitmain itself would do it instead since they would not support bitcoin core anymore

Nobody will ever run JihanCoin. And if he stops mining the real chain for JihainCoin, he would disclose how much hashrate he has exactly and he doesn't want that, he wants people to think he has a ton of hashrate.

The problem here are the idiots that want to fire Core devs to put Jeff Garzick and the other morons in charge of bitcoin with the btc1 fork. If that happens then it's time to dump.

jubalix

legendary

Activity: 2632

Merit: 1023

Quote from: Torque on June 19, 2017, 12:47:25 PM

Good lord, I will be so relieved when we can finally put all this SegWit / scaling crap behind us.

And here I thought the analysis-paralysis in Corporate America IT was bad, often with endless meeting-upon-meeting discussions and multi years delay in the simplest of move forward decisions....

This SegWit crap has put that to absolute shame.

Brilliant analysis ..... its amazing how something that achieves consensus like BTC caused one of the most bitter and //lyisng fights ever.

How much more can you shoot yourself in the foot

I mean BTC what threw away 35~40% market share in the process in 4 months. It's hard to think of any other comparable even even in tech.

Hyena

legendary

Activity: 2114

Merit: 1015

Quote from: d5000 on June 26, 2017, 02:57:16 AM

Quote from: Hyena on June 26, 2017, 01:30:10 AM

wallet implementation centralization is even worse.

Well, Segwit2x could impose a second popular segwit-capable wallet implementation, apart from Core's AXABlockStreamCoin Wink

. In any case, Segwit itself is not what leads to a "wallet implementation centralization". This centralization has more to do with the tradition to regard the Core client as the "reference implementation". But Core formally is not different from any other development team that tries to code and distribute a Bitcoin client - only these informal mechanisms give them so much power over code and protocol. As already said, Segwit2x could change that, so you should embrace it if you favour a more diverse "development ecosystem".

Quote

better increase the block size to 4 MiB until a better scaling solution is invented by someone else than blockstream

With Segwit2x we'll get probably about 4 MB blocks. Isn't that exactly what you want?

segwit as a technical solution is complete nonsense, there's so much material about it online, just research it. I want a proper protocol upgrade that does not introduce any additional technical debt. take flextrans for example, way better solution to the same problems segwit attempts to solve.

d5000

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 6249

Decentralization Maximalist

Quote from: Hyena on June 26, 2017, 01:30:10 AM

wallet implementation centralization is even worse.

Well, Segwit2x could impose a second popular segwit-capable wallet implementation, apart from Core's AXABlockStreamCoin Wink

. In any case, Segwit itself is not what leads to a "wallet implementation centralization". This centralization has more to do with the tradition to regard the Core client as the "reference implementation". But Core formally is not different from any other development team that tries to code and distribute a Bitcoin client - only these informal mechanisms give them so much power over code and protocol. As already said, Segwit2x could change that, so you should embrace it if you favour a more diverse "development ecosystem".

Quote

better increase the block size to 4 MiB until a better scaling solution is invented by someone else than blockstream

With Segwit2x we'll get probably about 4 MB blocks. Isn't that exactly what you want?

Hyena

legendary

Activity: 2114

Merit: 1015

Quote from: rogerwilco on June 25, 2017, 05:49:18 PM

Quote from: Hyena on June 25, 2017, 02:19:10 PM

segwit and good news, don't make me laugh Grin

segwit is the shittiest news ever since its inception
bitcoin needs bigger blocks

A larger number of end users isn't what makes a coin decentralized. Visa has millions of end users. What makes a coin decentralized is how many miners and nodes there are.
The bigger the blocks, the fewer people that can mine or run a node, the more centralized it becomes.
That's why people don't want JihanCoin.

we all know this is bullshit, pretty useless to bring this as an argument in 2017. it might have worked 2 years ago when people were uninformed but today, come on. you've got to be better than that. Grin

but sure, for the lulz let me play along with your fallacy. so let's say miner centralization is bad. guess what's even more bad. yep, wallet implementation centralization is even worse. bitcoin doesn't belong to blockstream you know. clearly they haven't been able to solve the TX fee problem, they have failed. worst company ever. better increase the block size to 4 MiB until a better scaling solution is invented by someone else than blockstream

pooya87

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 10611

the signalling support chart seems so freaking funny. it started 8-9 days ago and went up to nearly 90% support right away. i mean look at this thing 819 blocks out of last 1000 blocks are signalling for SegWit2x! i just hope we can finally find some middle ground and activate SegWit so we can move out of this stalling situation.

d5000

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 6249

Decentralization Maximalist

Quote from: pixie85 on June 25, 2017, 01:45:59 PM

It's impossible to keep it indefinitely. You're right about the demand not being overwhelming and that this upgrade will be enough to solve the problems for some time.
Unfortunately if Bitcoin keeps growing at exponential rate we'll be looking at double the number of transactions in the next 2-3 years, especially with SegWit active and no vulnerabilities or hacks.

I agree on the doubling prediction, but then in 3 years the 2MB+Segwit blocks (effectively 8MB maximum) will have still about three times the needed capacity. I expect full 2MB+SW blocks in 5-8 years, but it can be enough forever if sidechains and LN were the preferred methods to handle most smaller transactions. I've wrote that in the last post. Wink

Quote from: Dakustaking76 on June 25, 2017, 02:24:54 PM

i read a post with that the miners aint supporting segwit anymore

Source? It doesn't seem so.

rogerwilco

member

Activity: 107

Merit: 10

Quote from: Hyena on June 25, 2017, 02:19:10 PM

segwit and good news, don't make me laugh Grin

segwit is the shittiest news ever since its inception
bitcoin needs bigger blocks

A larger number of end users isn't what makes a coin decentralized. Visa has millions of end users. What makes a coin decentralized is how many miners and nodes there are.
The bigger the blocks, the fewer people that can mine or run a node, the more centralized it becomes.
That's why people don't want JihanCoin.

Dakustaking76

sr. member

Activity: 579

Merit: 267

Lol i read a post with that the miners aint supporting segwit anymore beceause of
The technical isseus, there rejecting it

Hyena

legendary

Activity: 2114

Merit: 1015

segwit and good news, don't make me laugh Grin

segwit is the shittiest news ever since its inception
bitcoin needs bigger blocks

pixie85

hero member

Activity: 2184

Merit: 531

Quote from: d5000 on June 24, 2017, 08:54:41 PM

Quote from: pixie85 on June 23, 2017, 02:17:15 PM

In 2 - 3 years we'll need another update, because 2MB will not be enough, maybe then it'll be their time to shine.

I have some hopes that 2 MB and Segwit could be enough "for eternity".

We now have about 3,5-4 transactions per second added to the mempool, from which about 3-3,5 make their way to the blockchain and 0,5-1 are discarded because of the full blocks. That shows that the demand is not so overwhelming that the Segwit blocks alone will be full forever. I expect ~1,1-1,3 MB blocks after Segwit activation in August, with many blocks then having less than 1 MB because of the smaller backlog, rising to 1,6-1,8 MB in mid-2018 if the positive development continues. After the 2MB hardfork, Segwit2x provides a theoretical maximum of 8 MB (practically a bit less), but I doubt this number will ever be reached.

So we have plenty of time to test second-layer-technologies (LN, Rootstock+Lumino, other sidechains, maybe even extension blocks or child chains...) that surely will get some traction in the next two years.

BTW: 96% of the last 100 blocks supported Segwit or Segwit2x (as of block 472775).

It's impossible to keep it indefinitely. You're right about the demand not being overwhelming and that this upgrade will be enough to solve the problems for some time.
Unfortunately if Bitcoin keeps growing at exponential rate we'll be looking at double the number of transactions in the next 2-3 years, especially with SegWit active and no vulnerabilities or hacks.

d5000

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 6249

Decentralization Maximalist

Quote from: pixie85 on June 23, 2017, 02:17:15 PM

In 2 - 3 years we'll need another update, because 2MB will not be enough, maybe then it'll be their time to shine.

I have some hopes that 2 MB and Segwit could be enough "for eternity".

We now have about 3,5-4 transactions per second added to the mempool, from which about 3-3,5 make their way to the blockchain and 0,5-1 are discarded because of the full blocks. That shows that the demand is not so overwhelming that the Segwit blocks alone will be full forever. I expect ~1,1-1,3 MB blocks after Segwit activation in August, with many blocks then having less than 1 MB because of the smaller backlog, rising to 1,6-1,8 MB in mid-2018 if the positive development continues. After the 2MB hardfork, Segwit2x provides a theoretical maximum of 8 MB (practically a bit less), but I doubt this number will ever be reached.

So we have plenty of time to test second-layer-technologies (LN, Rootstock+Lumino, other sidechains, maybe even extension blocks or child chains...) that surely will get some traction in the next two years.

BTW: 96% of the last 100 blocks supported Segwit or Segwit2x (as of block 472775).

South Park

hero member

Activity: 2884

Merit: 794

I am terrible at Fantasy Football!!!

Quote from: Wind_FURY on June 22, 2017, 01:56:41 AM

If Segwit2x is implemented what would that mean for the Core developers? Are they out or are they included in the new implementation and allowed to continue development?

Losing all that talent could be a big blow for Bitcoin.

If my memory serves me right the developers of Core were not invited and are not part of the New York Agreement, so we do not know what it is going to happen, at first I was optimistic, but this seems like another politic maneuver of the miners to try to get their way, so I doubt the devs are going to try to become part of this new development which will indicate the scaling wars are going to continue.

pixie85

hero member

Activity: 2184

Merit: 531

Quote from: Wind_FURY on June 22, 2017, 01:56:41 AM

If Segwit2x is implemented what would that mean for the Core developers? Are they out or are they included in the new implementation and allowed to continue development?

Losing all that talent could be a big blow for Bitcoin.

With Segwit activated Core Devs will still have a go. Bitcoin requires constant development and this time their idea didn't gain the majority of votes, but we still have a lot to do. In 2 - 3 years we'll need another update, because 2MB will not be enough, maybe then it'll be their time to shine.

South Park

hero member

Activity: 2884

Merit: 794

I am terrible at Fantasy Football!!!

I will be happy if can get all this discussion finally behind us, it has been too much and the threat of BIP 148 was simply too much in my opinion, things could have gotten very difficult for bitcoin but if miners are finally accepting segwit without the need of going that far then this will be better, lets just hope that segwit can finally be activated once and for all.

600watt

legendary

Activity: 2338

Merit: 2106

Quote from: Denker on June 20, 2017, 07:50:55 AM

Quote from: pereira4 on June 19, 2017, 09:31:55 AM

But it's segwit2x... it is the same as the regular segwit? Or are you forced to run non-Core software in order to benefit from the segwit activation? Because im never going to use anything that isn't released by Core as everyone else that isn't a idiot will do.

Unless Core approves then it's useless because Core is responsible for all the software and got the best devs.

The hard fork in 3 months is simply insanity, it's not happening period.

So far there isn't much code written for Segwit2x as far as I know and barely tested.
So miners could just run BIP91 which is compatible with BIP148 and will activate the original Segwit. So there is no tweaked SegWit version, which is good.You as user continue running your core client!
As soon as we have Segwit the Shilbert side will write their code for a HF, which is of course will not be merged by Core. So what's going to happen is that Shilbert and Co will create a new client (btc1 I believe) which everybody needs to run so that a smooth HF could happen!
And of course I will not run a shitty client which isn't coded by Core!Furthermore I'm not interested in bigger blocks. 2x doesn't mean 2MB by the way. The blocksize the miners are planning to have is bigger than that!
So imo the HF with a majority of users, as miners some wish, will not happen! So Let Jihan and his shills fork off if he wants and create their Chinacoin.
SegWit2x is just to save face for the miners by the way! Without the pressure of UASF BIP148 they wouldn't do this. They could have agreed to BIP141 since months! Now they learn it the hard way!

cool off... segwit is segwit. a compromise is not ideal for either side. but for the sake of bitcoin this civil war has to stop.

iamTom123

hero member

Activity: 490

Merit: 501

Like many of the thousands of members in this forum, I am also a techie-challenged and as far as this Segwit is concerned there are things that are still beyond my own comprehension but since I am also a part of the Bitcoin community (we all are) let me say that personally I am really hoping that soon we can get all move on from this scaling problem.

When finally Bitcoin can be able to unclog all the stacked up transactions in the blockchain we can be able to say that we are finally flying to the moon and even into the stars.

There would be other problems soon but they can just be peanuts compared to what we have now. I have a strong faith that we can be able to surmount this great scaling challenge.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

If Segwit2x is implemented what would that mean for the Core developers? Are they out or are they included in the new implementation and allowed to continue development?

Losing all that talent could be a big blow for Bitcoin.

azguard

legendary

Activity: 1484

Merit: 1001

Crypto-News.net: News from Crypto World

Quote from: Vishnu.Reang on June 20, 2017, 01:07:20 PM

Earlier everyone was afraid whether SegWit will be able to achieve the 80% consensus needed for its implementation. Now when it seems like 80% consensus is within attainable limits, a lot of users are casting doubt about the code. I don't care much. I love challenges, and SegWit is one of such challenges. Life would be boring without them.

It can be good if the same effect like in case of LITECOIN will happen to bitcoin, then lets start this. Off course there are still divided opinions on this matter (read here some also and in news around net), that it might be downfall, but i dont think it will happen.

This will probably be the best thing to happen to bitcoin in long time.

RoyBatty

newbie

Activity: 30

Merit: 0

The bottomline is the CORE developed Segwit WILL be activated. That much is very much clear at this point.

Topic: Good news everyone: SegWit may finally be activated with majority support - page 2. (Read 3700 times)