Going by node count, BU's chances of a soft fork are all but done by this point.
Roger Ver owns bitcoin.com
https://www.whois.com/whois/bitcoin.com
If he were to hardfork BU and change the content of bitcoin.com to information about his altcoin, it certainly would be a massive "fuck you" to the entire BTC community.
Topic: My take on BU's long-term impact on the price of BTC (Read 2478 times)
I think this was all a coordinated plan to get the price back to sub $1000 so whales can buy. Same thing with LTC, they crashed the price so they can buy sub $10.
I do not think so. The truth is slowly showing that there is a conspiracy with the miners and the Bitcoin Unlimited developers. Its like the Chinese miners have hired their own set of developers to take control and do with Bitcoin any roadmap they want.
Well this is going to fail. Either we change the POW or UASF will be used to continue core's roadmap if they continue blocking SegWit.
If miners think they are the ones in charge they will have to learn it the hard way. Millions of $ in invested mining rigs and asic developemnt might be worthless soon.
I was a proponent of UASF BIP 148, but upon further analysis, I think it's a suicide mission. Think about the impact of an UASF without miner consensus. The split is guaranteed. Jihan controls several pools, the hashrate is a big weapon in the PoW world, like it or not.
As a result, this leads us to an inevitable PoW change, killing every miner's business. It's a chaotic situation.
How are we supposed to solve this smoothly? I don't think there's a way. Maybe having a price crash to get rid of Jihan and enable segwit is a good thing, but we risk a lot in the process.
Not really. Segwit support is slightly going up, yes but it is not something to celebrate over. We should give it more time.
Like I said, I'm not a SegWit supporter per se, I'm just glad that miners are using it as an excuse to fight BU.
Do you really think that will happen after their investment in ASIC and very large mining farms? They will impose their will on the network and use dirty tactics to get what they want.
Well, so far you've been wrong. Let's hope this continues to be the case. BU will hardfork before it gets activated, that's a near guarantee by this point.
It's a tie. Segwit has won on every department, but the hashrate is still blocked by a centralizing actor, which is ridiculous but that's how the system works.
UASF is an option, to attack this ridiculous centralization.
UASF is an option, to attack this ridiculous centralization.
It is slightly bonkers that a handful of people can do this. Look at what Litecoin's getting up to with the prospect of Segwit and they don't have the slightest scaling problem either.
It just goes to show how little vision the average miner who isn't enjoying asicboost has.
That's why BTC will get segwit with either hashrate or UASF because what the people want, we didn't sign up for Jihan Coin where a single person gets to block everything else. So signal what users want or get UASF.
you got things all backwards, Jihan isn't a threat to bitcoin. Blockstream is.
SegWit is a poison pill to bitcoin, and I'm glad litecoin is being a good labrat (because that's all they're good for) and takes the poison pill for us.
maybe that will safe bitcoin.
but blockstream might just blame the death of litecoin on something else.
What is the worst thing which could go wrong with Litecoin implementing Segwit? Nothing.
It could only prove whether Segwit is scalable or not.
In the end, we need some method to increase the transaction capacity of Bitcoin.
As we can see, LTC got hyped a lot thanks to the possible SegWit implementation, what is a very good event. We may see at least how SegWit will work with litecoin, for me it is something like an experiment.
If SegWit will work good for litecoin, then im one hundred percent sure that the support for SegWit among the miners will increase.
It's a tie. Segwit has won on every department, but the hashrate is still blocked by a centralizing actor, which is ridiculous but that's how the system works.
UASF is an option, to attack this ridiculous centralization.
UASF is an option, to attack this ridiculous centralization.
It is slightly bonkers that a handful of people can do this. Look at what Litecoin's getting up to with the prospect of Segwit and they don't have the slightest scaling problem either.
It just goes to show how little vision the average miner who isn't enjoying asicboost has.
That's why BTC will get segwit with either hashrate or UASF because what the people want, we didn't sign up for Jihan Coin where a single person gets to block everything else. So signal what users want or get UASF.
you got things all backwards, Jihan isn't a threat to bitcoin. Blockstream is.
SegWit is a poison pill to bitcoin, and I'm glad litecoin is being a good labrat (because that's all they're good for) and takes the poison pill for us.
maybe that will safe bitcoin.
but blockstream might just blame the death of litecoin on something else.
What is the worst thing which could go wrong with Litecoin implementing Segwit? Nothing.
It could only prove whether Segwit is scalable or not.
In the end, we need some method to increase the transaction capacity of Bitcoin.
It's a tie. Segwit has won on every department, but the hashrate is still blocked by a centralizing actor, which is ridiculous but that's how the system works.
UASF is an option, to attack this ridiculous centralization.
UASF is an option, to attack this ridiculous centralization.
It is slightly bonkers that a handful of people can do this. Look at what Litecoin's getting up to with the prospect of Segwit and they don't have the slightest scaling problem either.
It just goes to show how little vision the average miner who isn't enjoying asicboost has.
That's why BTC will get segwit with either hashrate or UASF because what the people want, we didn't sign up for Jihan Coin where a single person gets to block everything else. So signal what users want or get UASF.
you got things all backwards, Jihan isn't a threat to bitcoin. Blockstream is.
It depends on whose side you are trying to be with. You have the right to argue for one side but it does not make it automatically right. Let us leave history to the judge of that.
Quote
SegWit is a poison pill to bitcoin, and I'm glad litecoin is being a good labrat (because that's all they're good for) and takes the poison pill for us.
Would care to explain why? It is easy to say one thing without fully understanding the situation. That is the reason why I ask a lot of questions so that I will learn the real issues and have the knowledge to make comments on them.
Quote
maybe that will safe bitcoin.
but blockstream might just blame the death of litecoin on something else.
but blockstream might just blame the death of litecoin on something else.
Death of Litecoin? That is funny.
It's a tie. Segwit has won on every department, but the hashrate is still blocked by a centralizing actor, which is ridiculous but that's how the system works.
UASF is an option, to attack this ridiculous centralization.
UASF is an option, to attack this ridiculous centralization.
It is slightly bonkers that a handful of people can do this. Look at what Litecoin's getting up to with the prospect of Segwit and they don't have the slightest scaling problem either.
It just goes to show how little vision the average miner who isn't enjoying asicboost has.
That's why BTC will get segwit with either hashrate or UASF because what the people want, we didn't sign up for Jihan Coin where a single person gets to block everything else. So signal what users want or get UASF.
you got things all backwards, Jihan isn't a threat to bitcoin. Blockstream is.
SegWit is a poison pill to bitcoin, and I'm glad litecoin is being a good labrat (because that's all they're good for) and takes the poison pill for us.
maybe that will safe bitcoin.
but blockstream might just blame the death of litecoin on something else.
Not really. Segwit support is slightly going up, yes but it is not something to celebrate over. We should give it more time.
Like I said, I'm not a SegWit supporter per se, I'm just glad that miners are using it as an excuse to fight BU.
Do you really think that will happen after their investment in ASIC and very large mining farms? They will impose their will on the network and use dirty tactics to get what they want.
Well, so far you've been wrong. Let's hope this continues to be the case. BU will hardfork before it gets activated, that's a near guarantee by this point.
I am almost in the same opinion as you but I believe if Bitcoin Unlimited support reaches 50% and stays there, the hard fork will be inevitable. Everyone should start preparing for replay attack protection.
Not really. Segwit support is slightly going up, yes but it is not something to celebrate over. We should give it more time.
Like I said, I'm not a SegWit supporter per se, I'm just glad that miners are using it as an excuse to fight BU.
Do you really think that will happen after their investment in ASIC and very large mining farms? They will impose their will on the network and use dirty tactics to get what they want.
Well, so far you've been wrong. Let's hope this continues to be the case. BU will hardfork before it gets activated, that's a near guarantee by this point.
Not really. Segwit support is slightly going up, yes but it is not something to celebrate over. We should give it more time.
Like I said, I'm not a SegWit supporter per se, I'm just glad that miners are using it as an excuse to fight BU.
What? You confuse me. Is it not the other way around? The miners support BU and are using that to oppose Segwit and Core.
Do you really think that will happen after their investment in ASIC and very large mining farms? They will impose their will on the network and use dirty tactics to get what they want.
Well, so far you've been wrong. Let's hope this continues to be the case. BU will hardfork before it gets activated, that's a near guarantee by this point.
I thought you said support for Segwit is going up and the support for Bitcoin Unlimited is going down? Now I am really confused by you.
Not really. Segwit support is slightly going up, yes but it is not something to celebrate over. We should give it more time.
Like I said, I'm not a SegWit supporter per se, I'm just glad that miners are using it as an excuse to fight BU.
Do you really think that will happen after their investment in ASIC and very large mining farms? They will impose their will on the network and use dirty tactics to get what they want.
Well, so far you've been wrong. Let's hope this continues to be the case. BU will hardfork before it gets activated, that's a near guarantee by this point.
IMHO, SegWit's won, not because it's been activated, but because its definitely stopped BU's momentum to a terminal degree.
Just goes to show that those who try to hijack bitcoin's good name will inevitably get burned.
I mean FFS Roger, come up with a more original name for your own damn coin.
Just goes to show that those who try to hijack bitcoin's good name will inevitably get burned.
I mean FFS Roger, come up with a more original name for your own damn coin.
It can be also seen in reverse. The miners having their support behind Bitcoin Unlimited has neutralized the activation of Segwit and they also see this as a small victory for themselves. Segwit opens up the possibility of the LN which reduces their bonuses collected in fees. The status quo is ok with them because of the "fee market" structure. Maybe this is what the miners really want all along. Higher fees.
Except for the fact that SegWit support has been going up while BU support is going down. So, it can't be seen in reverse. Besides, SegWit isn't trying to present themselves as a hostile takeover of the network.
Not really. Segwit support is slightly going up, yes but it is not something to celebrate over. We should give it more time.
Bitcoin Unlimited support go down but it has been ganing its losses lately. You can check the graphs of both.
https://blockchain.info/charts/bip-9-segwit
https://blockchain.info/charts/bitcoin-unlimited-share
Quote
I agree that the fee problem is a bitch. But here's the thing: if the miner isn't happy with the fees they are getting, they can quit and that will make room for other miners willing to settle for less. That's the beauty of the system.
Do you really think that will happen after their investment in ASIC and very large mining farms? They will impose their will on the network and use dirty tactics to get what they want.
Except for the fact that SegWit support has been going up while BU support is going down. So, it can't be seen in reverse. Besides, SegWit isn't trying to present themselves as a hostile takeover of the network.
From the looks of it we can tell that both support for SegWit and Bitcoin Unlimited decreased recently. Week ago SegWit was backed by more that 30% of hash power, today it is 28.5%.
Same with BU, it was supported by 38%-39% miners at its peak, now it is 36.9%
Miners are waiting for some other solution and are tired of SegWit vs. Bu never ending debate?
https://coin.dance/blocks
What kind of a pattern do you think this chart looks like its about to follow to you?
https://coin.dance/nodes/unlimited
A chart that is shooting to the moon or a chart that has plateau'd after a tremendous pump and is about to fall on its knees.
We'll know for sure in about 2 weeks, if not less.
And for the record, I'm not pro-SegWit necessarily, I'm just anti-BU
Except for the fact that SegWit support has been going up while BU support is going down. So, it can't be seen in reverse. Besides, SegWit isn't trying to present themselves as a hostile takeover of the network.
From the looks of it we can tell that both support for SegWit and Bitcoin Unlimited decreased recently. Week ago SegWit was backed by more that 30% of hash power, today it is 28.5%.
Same with BU, it was supported by 38%-39% miners at its peak, now it is 36.9%
Miners are waiting for some other solution and are tired of SegWit vs. Bu never ending debate?
https://coin.dance/blocks
IMHO, SegWit's won, not because it's been activated, but because its definitely stopped BU's momentum to a terminal degree.
Just goes to show that those who try to hijack bitcoin's good name will inevitably get burned.
I mean FFS Roger, come up with a more original name for your own damn coin.
Just goes to show that those who try to hijack bitcoin's good name will inevitably get burned.
I mean FFS Roger, come up with a more original name for your own damn coin.
It can be also seen in reverse. The miners having their support behind Bitcoin Unlimited has neutralized the activation of Segwit and they also see this as a small victory for themselves. Segwit opens up the possibility of the LN which reduces their bonuses collected in fees. The status quo is ok with them because of the "fee market" structure. Maybe this is what the miners really want all along. Higher fees.
Except for the fact that SegWit support has been going up while BU support is going down. So, it can't be seen in reverse. Besides, SegWit isn't trying to present themselves as a hostile takeover of the network.
I agree that the fee problem is a bitch. But here's the thing: if the miner isn't happy with the fees they are getting, they can quit and that will make room for other miners willing to settle for less. That's the beauty of the system.
IMHO, SegWit's won, not because it's been activated, but because its definitely stopped BU's momentum to a terminal degree.
Just goes to show that those who try to hijack bitcoin's good name will inevitably get burned.
I mean FFS Roger, come up with a more original name for your own damn coin.
Just goes to show that those who try to hijack bitcoin's good name will inevitably get burned.
I mean FFS Roger, come up with a more original name for your own damn coin.
It can be also seen in reverse. The miners having their support behind Bitcoin Unlimited has neutralized the activation of Segwit and they also see this as a small victory for themselves. Segwit opens up the possibility of the LN which reduces their bonuses collected in fees. The status quo is ok with them because of the "fee market" structure. Maybe this is what the miners really want all along. Higher fees.
The Resurgence of Litecoin
Last but not least regarding SegWit is the fact that the world’s second oldest cryptocurrency, Litecoin (LTC), is on the verge of signaling SegWit activation in their own network, spurring a boost in new mining software aimed to take advantage of the likely event of its activation. Litecoin has always been touted as the more environmentally-friendly version of bitcoin since not nearly as much computing power is necessary to keep its network running and blockchain secured. This has pushed the price of LTC to fresh highs on speculation that lower fees and faster transaction times provided by SegWit may give it an edge over bitcoin in terms of future user adoption. Still, if anything’s certain, it’s that the future of cryptocurrency is always uncertain. A mantra heeded to potential speculators hoping to capitalize one way or another on last week’s events could best be put in terms of an ancient axiom: “change is the only constant.”
The best case scenario for Litecoin is to become a testbed for Segwit. It still remains to be seen if it gains an "edge" on Bitcoin. Maybe if the dark markets started accepting Litecoin then we should have something to be worried about. But right now, as is, everything is still ok. Maybe LTC might gain some of the market that BTC has but it will not wholly dominate it.
They will keep on fighting and try to fork the network away from the Core developers because Bitcoin is about the one which has more hash power securing the blockchain.
If we had a blatant miner hijack then I for one would be long gone. It would basically be Chinese miners versus the rest of the world, as there really isn't very much going on China itself and never has been.
They could theoretically gather the grunt to steer Bitcoin in the direction they want. They'd be left selling them to the few hundred people left on Chinese exchanges as everyone else would be shopping elsewhere.
It's a tie. Segwit has won on every department, but the hashrate is still blocked by a centralizing actor, which is ridiculous but that's how the system works.
UASF is an option, to attack this ridiculous centralization.
UASF is an option, to attack this ridiculous centralization.
It is slightly bonkers that a handful of people can do this. Look at what Litecoin's getting up to with the prospect of Segwit and they don't have the slightest scaling problem either.
It just goes to show how little vision the average miner who isn't enjoying asicboost has.
That's why BTC will get segwit with either hashrate or UASF because what the people want, we didn't sign up for Jihan Coin where a single person gets to block everything else. So signal what users want or get UASF.
It's a tie. Segwit has won on every department, but the hashrate is still blocked by a centralizing actor, which is ridiculous but that's how the system works.
UASF is an option, to attack this ridiculous centralization.
UASF is an option, to attack this ridiculous centralization.
It is slightly bonkers that a handful of people can do this. Look at what Litecoin's getting up to with the prospect of Segwit and they don't have the slightest scaling problem either.
It just goes to show how little vision the average miner who isn't enjoying asicboost has.
Jump to: