Topic: Good news everyone: SegWit may finally be activated with majority support (Read 3700 times)
December 27, 2017, 05:46:22 PM
seems like back them support was there but this time around things are looking different and https://coin.dance/blocks shows very few are in support of this fork as i can only see 5% have signalled to support this project SegWit2x which isnt looking good at the moment
December 27, 2017, 05:30:29 PM
I heard that probably Coinbase is going to implement the segwit wallets soon, i dont know if this is real, but far as i know this is going to be fair for all of those who have money in those wallets (and that is pretty risky lmao)
If you think that you will end up with more coins, then you're super wrong. It's more them (potentially) going to 'upgrade' their entire operations to utilize Segwit, which has been active for quite a while now, but severely lacking actual adoption. I am sure that if Coinbase ever ends up doing so, other large economical entities will follow, and thus allow the network to breathe for once. Blocks will likely still be full, but it at least will help making things a bit less worse than how they are right now, which will translate into lower fees.
December 27, 2017, 05:13:45 PM
Isn't the difference here the fact that the new "2x" version has replay protection?
Now it isn't either/or,,,
And did I read Lightening Network accommodation?
No, this will not be 'contentious', as the earlier fork was. Yes this will be a fork that will be labeled a lesser of BTC, but who cares? You get BOTH. And it may fix some problems! And it MAY let a NEW LEVEL of participation to take off, as well as add redundancy of the concept of crypto.
Honestly, if you own 1 for/plus 1, and in the end have more capabilities and redundancy with the improvements,,, then what is the problem? Your investment is protected.
This isn't "either/or". The earlier one, without the replay protection, WAS.
I hope it happens myself....
Now it isn't either/or,,,
And did I read Lightening Network accommodation?
No, this will not be 'contentious', as the earlier fork was. Yes this will be a fork that will be labeled a lesser of BTC, but who cares? You get BOTH. And it may fix some problems! And it MAY let a NEW LEVEL of participation to take off, as well as add redundancy of the concept of crypto.
Honestly, if you own 1 for/plus 1, and in the end have more capabilities and redundancy with the improvements,,, then what is the problem? Your investment is protected.
This isn't "either/or". The earlier one, without the replay protection, WAS.
I hope it happens myself....
December 27, 2017, 05:02:13 PM
I heard that probably Coinbase is going to implement the segwit wallets soon, i dont know if this is real, but far as i know this is going to be fair for all of those who have money in those wallets (and that is pretty risky lmao)
December 27, 2017, 01:19:49 PM
It is annoying to realize that probably 2/3 of the total exchanges are not using segwit wallets only for their own convenience.
That is crap, not even Bittrex who is the major exchange has a segwit wallet
integrated.
That is crap, not even Bittrex who is the major exchange has a segwit wallet
integrated.
because segwit is such a bullshit non-solution. what we are seeing here is the cold-hard truth that segwit did not work, blockstream has failed and should be disbanded.
Segwit is already bigger than Bcash...in fact people making more doge tx's than Bcash. Bcash blocks are always almost empty lol.
December 27, 2017, 01:02:08 PM
i don't know if it is too soon to open up the Champagne bottles or not but it seems like we have some light at the end of the tunnel as SegWit is gaining an overwhelming miners support with the segwit2x proposal https://coin.dance/blocks
... and the moon in 3... 2... 1...
December 27, 2017, 11:27:24 AM
because segwit is such a bullshit non-solution. what we are seeing here is the cold-hard truth that segwit did not work, blockstream has failed and should be disbanded.
Well, they could give it just a teensy weensy little try to see whether they actually like it and it makes a difference. The fact that many of the companies who put out the most blockchain use don't even bother to batch is a stupid and depressing stat.
apparently it makes more sense to integrate with bitcoin cash than to implement segwit. it's all a risk/reward ratio you know. implementing segwit comes at a cost. it costs companies money to get it implemented. on the other hand it almost costs nothing to integrate with bitcoin cash
December 27, 2017, 11:18:29 AM
because segwit is such a bullshit non-solution. what we are seeing here is the cold-hard truth that segwit did not work, blockstream has failed and should be disbanded.
Well, they could give it just a teensy weensy little try to see whether they actually like it and it makes a difference. The fact that many of the companies who put out the most blockchain use don't even bother to batch is a stupid and depressing stat.
December 27, 2017, 11:11:27 AM
It is annoying to realize that probably 2/3 of the total exchanges are not using segwit wallets only for their own convenience.
That is crap, not even Bittrex who is the major exchange has a segwit wallet integrated.
That is crap, not even Bittrex who is the major exchange has a segwit wallet integrated.
because segwit is such a bullshit non-solution. what we are seeing here is the cold-hard truth that segwit did not work, blockstream has failed and should be disbanded.
December 27, 2017, 09:52:21 AM
It is annoying to realize that probably 2/3 of the total exchanges are not using segwit wallets only for their own convenience.
That is crap, not even Bittrex who is the major exchange has a segwit wallet integrated.
That is crap, not even Bittrex who is the major exchange has a segwit wallet integrated.
July 22, 2017, 08:16:06 AM
i am glad to see this topic again and be the bearer of Good News for Everyone.
and so far the Good News continues pouring in. BIP91 activated and now BIP141 is being signaled with almost 100% support. i've got the same feeling that i had when Litecoin was activating SegWit with the same near 100% support.
we have moon in the future...
and so far the Good News continues pouring in. BIP91 activated and now BIP141 is being signaled with almost 100% support. i've got the same feeling that i had when Litecoin was activating SegWit with the same near 100% support.
we have moon in the future...
July 21, 2017, 11:27:25 AM
it feels good to see this topic after about a month and look back at all the drama that has happened during this time! and we are finally here, BIP91 locked and loaded
lets just hope we can get this done and over with hopefully with least amount of bloodshed and as fast as possible, so that we can focus on the future and things that matter...
lets just hope we can get this done and over with hopefully with least amount of bloodshed and as fast as possible, so that we can focus on the future and things that matter...
July 21, 2017, 08:20:08 AM
So if the chain eventually splits, so does the bitcoin. In my understanding there would be two different bitcoins circulating around the networks and they would be deemed as two independent currencies. Will they both be traded in the market?
Exchanges already began to inform their users about coin-splitting services. At least CEX.io did. https://blog.cex.io/news/important-notice-segregated-witness-possible-chain-split-16390
So I don't think it will be much mess in the market.
July 20, 2017, 10:10:45 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.
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.
I am quoting and specifically mentioning your reply here because I do agree with you 1,000% haha. Yes, it is indeed a big shame for the whole Bitcoin community that it took the people responsible for the scaling problem so many months and so many discussions...those time and effort utilized are all way beyond normal. And since we are all dealing with Bitcoin which is supposed to be fast, efficient and cost-wise, these decision makers have been put to a test and they almost failed. However, I am just stating that because we should be learning some lessons here so that when another challenge can come up the same shenanigans and mess could be avoided.
July 20, 2017, 09:43:51 PM
Core devs are gonna be so f*cked. They deserve to be screwed, reamed in the a$$. Bunch of lazy idiots is what they are. Satoshi must be rolling in his grave, if he's really dead.
July 20, 2017, 08:20:35 PM
bip 91 is locked in. segwit will get activated before august 1st.
moon!
moon!
July 20, 2017, 10:14:43 AM
Looking at the entire thread everyone has conflicting replies,so what is really happening,is there a slight possibility of a split and if that happens what will be the future of bitcoin,will it affect the price if there is a split.
I have read a lot of articles and they are just as conflicting as the replies here.
There is no general opinion on what is going to happen after August, 1. It is quite difficult to predict now. Some say everything is going smoothly and the majority is unanimous, other warn that the split is inevitable. In case of the network disruption bitcoin (or bitcoins) will probably face really hard times in terms of price and acceptance among users. So if the chain eventually splits, so does the bitcoin. In my understanding there would be two different bitcoins circulating around the networks and they would be deemed as two independent currencies. Will they both be traded in the market?
July 20, 2017, 05:17:14 AM
Looking at the entire thread everyone has conflicting replies,so what is really happening,is there a slight possibility of a split and if that happens what will be the future of bitcoin,will it affect the price if there is a split.
I have read a lot of articles and they are just as conflicting as the replies here.
There is no general opinion on what is going to happen after August, 1. It is quite difficult to predict now. Some say everything is going smoothly and the majority is unanimous, other warn that the split is inevitable. In case of the network disruption bitcoin (or bitcoins) will probably face really hard times in terms of price and acceptance among users. June 27, 2017, 02:12:44 AM
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.
I know this argument. Has some validity, but I am being pragmatic ... we won't find consensus for an "ideal" solution with minimal technical debt and the absolutely perfect tech. Flextrans is indeed interesting, but it seems that it is an one-man project and would have needed more testing.Just because we don't have a popular alternative doesn't mean we should eat shit. SegWit solves nothing. Research it. It's complete and utter bullshit. A proper block size increase on the other hand is proven and tested solution to the TX fee issue. TX malleability is not even a bug, it has workarounds. But of course the Core would not like you to know that because that knowledge alone renders SegWit into a total joke.
June 26, 2017, 12:53:39 PM
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.
I know this argument. Has some validity, but I am being pragmatic ... we won't find consensus for an "ideal" solution with minimal technical debt and the absolutely perfect tech. Flextrans is indeed interesting, but it seems that it is an one-man project and would have needed more testing.
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.
Market cap is not the same than market share. I agree with you that the scaling war has done some danger to Bitcoin, but the altcoin rally was caused only in part by it - in part also by Ethereum's ICOs and simply awareness for cryptocurrencies that led to greedy speculation, above all in countries like Japan and South Korea.
June 26, 2017, 12:32:18 PM
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
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.
June 26, 2017, 04:49:40 AM
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.
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.
June 26, 2017, 03:09:38 AM
wallet implementation centralization is even worse.
Well, Segwit2x could impose a second popular segwit-capable wallet implementation, apart from Core's AXABlockStreamCoin
. 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.
June 26, 2017, 02:57:16 AM
wallet implementation centralization is even worse.
Well, Segwit2x could impose a second popular segwit-capable wallet implementation, apart from Core's AXABlockStreamCoin
. 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?
June 26, 2017, 01:30:10 AM
segwit and good news, don't make me laugh 
segwit is the shittiest news ever since its inception
bitcoin needs bigger blocks
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.
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
June 25, 2017, 11:48:44 PM
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.
June 25, 2017, 11:17:53 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. 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 read a post with that the miners aint supporting segwit anymore
Source? It doesn't seem so.
June 25, 2017, 05:49:18 PM
segwit and good news, don't make me laugh
segwit is the shittiest news ever since its inception
bitcoin needs bigger blocks
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.
June 25, 2017, 02:24:54 PM
Lol i read a post with that the miners aint supporting segwit anymore beceause of
The technical isseus, there rejecting it
The technical isseus, there rejecting it
June 25, 2017, 02:19:10 PM
segwit and good news, don't make me laugh
segwit is the shittiest news ever since its inception
bitcoin needs bigger blocks
segwit is the shittiest news ever since its inception
bitcoin needs bigger blocks
June 25, 2017, 01:45:59 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).
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.
June 24, 2017, 08:54:41 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).
June 24, 2017, 03:51:01 PM
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. Losing all that talent could be a big blow for Bitcoin.
June 23, 2017, 02:17:15 PM
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. Losing all that talent could be a big blow for Bitcoin.
June 23, 2017, 01:22:08 PM
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.
June 22, 2017, 05:27:27 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.
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.
June 22, 2017, 02:41:55 AM
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.
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.
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.
Losing all that talent could be a big blow for Bitcoin.
June 21, 2017, 07:32:34 AM
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.
June 20, 2017, 01:30:46 PM
The bottomline is the CORE developed Segwit WILL be activated. That much is very much clear at this point.
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.
June 20, 2017, 11:14:25 AM
Looking at the entire thread everyone has conflicting replies,so what is really happening,is there a slight possibility of a split and if that happens what will be the future of bitcoin,will it affect the price if there is a split.
At its base level its a fight for control of potential future revenue between the Core development team (and blockstream) and Bitmain (jihan wu). Core have an interest in limiting blocksize as many of their projects focus on off chain activity, and even if they aren't going to patent anything they are probably looking at sizeable future consulting revenues. Bitmain have an interest in preserving their dominance of miner sales (and their mining revenue), interestingly this means that while BTC tanking is bad , it also means the moon is bad - as the moon will result in many more (possibly larger, and professional) potential entrants into the mining manufacturing area , and i am prepared to bet that the lions share of bitmain's revenue comes from miner sales - not the bitcoin price appreciating.
June 20, 2017, 11:00:20 AM
Looking at the entire thread everyone has conflicting replies,so what is really happening,is there a slight possibility of a split and if that happens what will be the future of bitcoin,will it affect the price if there is a split.
June 20, 2017, 07:50:55 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.
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!
June 20, 2017, 03:37:25 AM
But it's segwit2x... it is the same as the regular segwit?
The problem with segwit 2x is that the code has never being tested and i am not sure how it will go if they are planning to activate it and you really cannot trust to run a billion dollar valuation network and start planning on upgrading without any real testing,it will be a disaster.are you just making a random comment based on pure assumption or did you really open github, checked the code, and also checked its testnet called testnet5 on port 18554 and saw it has not been tested?
June 20, 2017, 03:16:42 AM
Segwit2x in pretty much standard Core's SegWit plus 2MB hard form in the future - miners are aiming to do forking withing next six months after SegWit activation.
This is a totally positive move if we are going to avoid a permanent split as seems like Bitcoin will stay on one chain and USAF (scheduled for 1st August) will be avoided.
This is a totally positive move if we are going to avoid a permanent split as seems like Bitcoin will stay on one chain and USAF (scheduled for 1st August) will be avoided.
June 20, 2017, 02:46:54 AM
We are close at this point, but I will only pop a bottle (I seriously will) if activation becomes reality. It will finally end something that has been splitting the community into several sides for quite a while now. It will allow Bitcoin to grow further, and cope with the highly increased demand in a far better way. After all, things work better if we have the majority to agree on something. 
June 20, 2017, 02:30:21 AM
You should check out Jimmy Song's latest blogpost about SeGWit2X
Segwit2x: What you need to know
https://medium.com/@jimmysong/segwit2x-what-you-need-to-know-b747e6326266
It could help SegWit get activated, more info in the post.
Segwit2x: What you need to know
https://medium.com/@jimmysong/segwit2x-what-you-need-to-know-b747e6326266
It could help SegWit get activated, more info in the post.
there is nothing to know about segwit2x it's just segwit with the weight limit changed, if i'm correct should be from 4MB to 8MB, which i remember was planned in the roadmap of 2016 for 2017 and 2018, but they changed their mind and aimed at pure segwit
June 20, 2017, 02:21:33 AM
But it's segwit2x... it is the same as the regular segwit?
The problem with segwit 2x is that the code has never being tested and i am not sure how it will go if they are planning to activate it and you really cannot trust to run a billion dollar valuation network and start planning on upgrading without any real testing,it will be a disaster. 
June 20, 2017, 01:47:10 AM
Well at this point as long as something gets done so we aren't stuck in more drama I'll be a happy camper
Goes to the Segwit S2 Crowd if it nears consensus.
https://medium.com/@DCGco/bitcoin-scaling-agreement-at-consensus-2017-133521fe9a77
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-March/013921.html
Some light data on what it does.
Goes to the Segwit S2 Crowd if it nears consensus.
https://medium.com/@DCGco/bitcoin-scaling-agreement-at-consensus-2017-133521fe9a77
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-March/013921.html
Some light data on what it does.
June 20, 2017, 12:45:51 AM
Watching adoption / signalling on http://coin.dance/blocks:
As of block 472079, we have:
- in the last 100 blocks: 92 signalling for Segwit or Segwit2x, 8 not (92% approval).
- in the last 144 blocks (~1 day): 133 signalling for Segwit or Segwit2x, 11 not (~92,4% approval).
We are very close to 95%. I'm optimistic - that would mean that probably the BIP91/148 mechanism would not be necessary (only to work as a threat in the background).
As of block 472079, we have:
- in the last 100 blocks: 92 signalling for Segwit or Segwit2x, 8 not (92% approval).
- in the last 144 blocks (~1 day): 133 signalling for Segwit or Segwit2x, 11 not (~92,4% approval).
We are very close to 95%. I'm optimistic - that would mean that probably the BIP91/148 mechanism would not be necessary (only to work as a threat in the background).
June 19, 2017, 10:00:41 PM
You should check out Jimmy Song's latest blogpost about SeGWit2X
Segwit2x: What you need to know
https://medium.com/@jimmysong/segwit2x-what-you-need-to-know-b747e6326266
It could help SegWit get activated, more info in the post.
Segwit2x: What you need to know
https://medium.com/@jimmysong/segwit2x-what-you-need-to-know-b747e6326266
It could help SegWit get activated, more info in the post.
June 19, 2017, 01:03:21 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.
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.
i will also be relieved.
scaling issues will (hopefully?) stay with bitcoin. that is the curse of mass adoption: massive scaling.
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.
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.
June 19, 2017, 12:21:58 PM
Just counted: According to coin.dance, 46 from the last 50 blocks support Segwit, either via BIP141 or Segwit2x. That's 92%!
What I have heard is:
- Segwit2x supporting parties will first signal separately with a custom message ("NYA" for New York Agreement)
- then they will switch to signalling via bit 4 (like in the original "Barry Silbert Agreement")
- and finally, they will switch to bit 1, so they and the "traditional BIP141" miners will signal together for Segwit.
What I have heard is:
- Segwit2x supporting parties will first signal separately with a custom message ("NYA" for New York Agreement)
- then they will switch to signalling via bit 4 (like in the original "Barry Silbert Agreement")
- and finally, they will switch to bit 1, so they and the "traditional BIP141" miners will signal together for Segwit.
June 19, 2017, 11:46:33 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.
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.
If somebody tech minded could answer the bolded above that'd be great, please.
i am not an expert but i believe it is. at least now it has turned into a more compatible solution than the it was before. i believe they have implemented BIP91 which makes it compatible with what you are caling "regular SegWit"
you can also read this comment: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19646403
June 19, 2017, 10:23:09 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
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
Potentially it's Jihan bluffing because he'll lose that hack he had with the ASIC's or whatever?
Glad to see that SegWitx2 is basically implemented with Core.
Definitely nothing but Jihan selling woof tickets
June 19, 2017, 10:15:49 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
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
Potentially it's Jihan bluffing because he'll lose that hack he had with the ASIC's or whatever?
Glad to see that SegWitx2 is basically implemented with Core.
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
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
June 19, 2017, 10:01:53 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.
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.
If somebody tech minded could answer the bolded above that'd be great, please.
From what I surmised listening to people far more adept than I, Segwit2x will be incorporating core dev Segwit. So if you signal for Segwit2x you are signaling for core dev Segwit by default.
June 19, 2017, 09:54:59 AM
Even though I dont understand the basis for this SegWit as I have read several posts on the subject matter for and against but I believe the best is yet to come and if people that are more vast in the technicalities of bitcoin can be happy about it, then a non-techie guy like myself does not have any other option than to be happy because whether increase/decrease happenings to bitcoin affects everyone including myself.
Correct. We that doesn't understand much can't do much also about this.
We just go with the flow. Though we understand English, sometimes they are like talking in a different language which is from ancient times.
Just going to bookmark this and somehow see some comments with a better explanation or a shallow one.
June 19, 2017, 09:48:24 AM
Even though I dont understand the basis for this SegWit as I have read several posts on the subject matter for and against but I believe the best is yet to come and if people that are more vast in the technicalities of bitcoin can be happy about it, then a non-techie guy like myself does not have any other option than to be happy because whether increase/decrease happenings to bitcoin affects everyone including myself.
June 19, 2017, 09:45:56 AM
Hmm, i don't want things to moon just yet. Maybe in 5 years. Rather have it all collapse
June 19, 2017, 09:44:21 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.
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.
If somebody tech minded could answer the bolded above that'd be great, please.
June 19, 2017, 09:32:35 AM
That's good news for sure. I can't wait to see what the future holds for bitcoin and at the same time I hope that it won't cause a big drop in the price when it will get implemented
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.
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.
June 19, 2017, 09:26:45 AM
In about one month.
June 19, 2017, 09:16:19 AM
when will we know?
June 19, 2017, 07:05:33 AM
i don't know if it is too soon to open up the Champagne bottles or not but it seems like we have some light at the end of the tunnel as SegWit is gaining an overwhelming miners support with the segwit2x proposal https://coin.dance/blocks
... and the moon in 3... 2... 1...
Jump to: