SegWit (26.8%) vs Bitcoin Unlimited (32.2%) - page 2.

freedomno1

legendary

Activity: 1834

Merit: 1094

Learning the troll avoidance button :)

Quote from: -ck on March 18, 2017, 04:32:33 PM

You've all got to stop looking at the percentages as though they're some meaningful trend. The values are simply representative of the number of pools supporting one or the other. Once one pool decides to move from legacy to segwit or BU, the percentage will slowly rise by the hashrate of the pool till it levels out again. There is no "trend" in that; it's a stepwise change. The last rise in BU% was antpool choosing to signal BU as a protest against UASF and as a result the proportion of BU has gotten 3x higher, but no other pool is signalling it so the percentage has again levelled off. Yes, the overall signalling of BU is higher than segwit at the moment, but that doesn't mean there is any ongoing trend for either of them, until the next large pool decides to signal something.

Pretty much this until the trend is signaled all we see are the flags.
Nothing else per se although the bitcoin exchange announcement did damper a few people since Bitcoin Unlimited is now treated as the alt-coin if it is listed
https://poloniex.com/press-releases/2017.03.17-Hard-Fork/

Unless they build in replay protection
However, none of the undersigned can list BTU unless we can run both [blockchains] independently without incident. Consequently, we insist that the Bitcoin Unlimited community (or any other consensus breaking implementation) build in strong two-way replay protection,"

DXB2017

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

its will be real interested in next coming days.

-ck

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

You've all got to stop looking at the percentages as though they're some meaningful trend. The values are simply representative of the number of pools supporting one or the other. Once one pool decides to move from legacy to segwit or BU, the percentage will slowly rise by the hashrate of the pool till it levels out again. There is no "trend" in that; it's a stepwise change. The last rise in BU% was antpool choosing to signal BU as a protest against UASF and as a result the proportion of BU has gotten 3x higher, but no other pool is signalling it so the percentage has again levelled off. Yes, the overall signalling of BU is higher than segwit at the moment, but that doesn't mean there is any ongoing trend for either of them, until the next large pool decides to signal something.

mindrust

legendary

Activity: 3276

Merit: 2442

Actually I want to see btc holders money halved when we see a split. Grin

I guess some people just want to watch the world burn.

In the end, your halved money will be my doubled money :d

cybermods

member

Activity: 65

Merit: 10

Jack of all trades, master of none.

The only thing that should be split is the skulls of the people pushing for it. Roll Eyes

BrewMaster

legendary

Activity: 2128

Merit: 1293

There is trouble abrewing

Quote from: RealBitcoin on March 18, 2017, 09:48:38 AM

So it looks like segwit has gained a hard 3% since I have last been on the forum. Impressive, with this pace it may be activated by 2050.

last time you were around (and said goodbye to bitcoin Grin

) the percentage was about 25-26% so it is about the same and besides the small changes are because it is not "hashing power" it is number of blocks mined. and finding a block is not a fixed thing (depends on luck)

Quote from: RealBitcoin on March 18, 2017, 09:48:38 AM

Seriously, why cant just people reach a compromise? What if the chain splits in 2? Nobody would want that.

there are still brainless newbies who want it because they think their money is going to be doubled if we see a split!!!

OmegaStarScream

staff

Activity: 3500

Merit: 6152

Quote from: bitjoin on March 18, 2017, 10:12:34 AM

I dont believe the results are accurate. With all the alt coin pumping going around and people trying to destroy BTC it seems.

What are you talking about? those percentages are pretty accurate because the hashing power is generated by the miners and altcoin pumping and dumping has nothing to do with that.

bitjoin

hero member

Activity: 1372

Merit: 500

I dont believe the results are accurate. With all the alt coin pumping going around and people trying to destroy BTC it seems.

RealBitcoin

hero member

Activity: 854

Merit: 1009

JAYCE DESIGNS - http://bit.ly/1tmgIwK

So it looks like segwit has gained a hard 3% since I have last been on the forum. Impressive, with this pace it may be activated by 2050.

Seriously, why cant just people reach a compromise? What if the chain splits in 2? Nobody would want that.

Paashaas

legendary

Activity: 3620

Merit: 4813

Quote from: AngryDwarf on March 14, 2017, 02:48:55 PM

Crap out exploit:

https://coin.dance/nodes

That is dropping like a rock... Cheesy

This is not even a suprise for me it was inevitable.

AngryDwarf

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 501

Quote from: Eugenar on March 14, 2017, 02:46:43 PM

Quote from: AngryDwarf on March 14, 2017, 02:40:25 PM

On a positive note, that means people are seriously looking at the BU code now to toughen up any exploits. Amusing watching the BU node count go down though (yep, they took mine out too!)

Is yours DDosed?

Crap out exploit:

https://coin.dance/nodes

Eugenar

sr. member

Activity: 1274

Merit: 278

Quote from: AngryDwarf on March 14, 2017, 02:40:25 PM

On a positive note, that means people are seriously looking at the BU code now to toughen up any exploits. Amusing watching the BU node count go down though (yep, they took mine out too!)

Is yours DDosed?

AngryDwarf

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 501

On a positive note, that means people are seriously looking at the BU code now to toughen up any exploits. Amusing watching the BU node count go down though (yep, they took mine out too!)

xskl0

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 260

Bitcoin SV is Bitcoin

I read somewhere that BU just need 75% of consensus.

AngryDwarf

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 501

Looks like someone has noticed a fix going in to the repository and has decided to exploit it.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

Quote from: Lauda on March 14, 2017, 01:46:23 PM

Quote from: Carlton Banks on March 14, 2017, 01:43:31 PM

It has nothing to do with "this part of the code" Lauda, or "interpreting" as your poorly chosen quote states. Any assert statement is a logical evaluation, and 0 is literally a false evaluation (1 evaluates as true), assert statements are logical evaluations by definition

Was this necessary? It makes no difference to those who don't understand it anyways. More information can be found following that up and the reddit commits.

Don't talk about code you don't even understand: that's the point

If you want to help people, there's not much point in presenting and commenting on code in a way that doesn't teach anyone anything, your explanation can only serve to confuse someone who is trying to learn, and bolster your reputation for comprehending the code, which is obviously pretty limited (and I'm not even an accomplished coder)

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 3000

Terminated.

Quote from: Carlton Banks on March 14, 2017, 01:43:31 PM

It has nothing to do with "this part of the code" Lauda, or "interpreting" as your poorly chosen quote states. Any assert statement is a logical evaluation, and 0 is literally a false evaluation (1 evaluates as true), assert statements are logical evaluations by definition

Was this necessary? It makes no difference to those who don't understand it anyways. More information can be found following that up and the reddit commits.

Quote from: Carlton Banks on March 14, 2017, 02:08:45 PM

Don't talk about code you don't even understand: that's the point

You're becoming worse than franky. Lips sealed

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3080

Quote from: Lauda on March 14, 2017, 01:31:59 PM

For those unfamiliar with this part of the code, here's an explanation on the 'assert(0)':

Quote

In assert(0) the 0 is interpreted as false, so this assertion will always fail, or fire, when assertion checking is on.

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/34236653/what-does-assert0-mean

It has nothing to do with "this part of the code" Lauda, or "interpreting" as your poorly chosen quote states. Any assert statement is a logical evaluation, and 0 is literally a false evaluation (1 evaluates as true), assert statements are logical evaluations by definition

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 3000

Terminated.

Quote from: OmegaStarScream on March 14, 2017, 12:41:34 PM

Another update, Bitcoin Unlimited is now 32% while SegWit is still 26% since the last updated I have made. I'm the only one thinking that BU will get activated sooner or later? without forgetting that they only need 75% while SegWit require 95% signalling in order to get activated.

BTU has no activation threshold AFAIK. 75% is what they prefer.

Let me just leave this here: Bitcoin Unlimited Remote Exploit Crash
Professional code at its finest:

Code:

else if (inv.type == MSG_THINBLOCK)
{
//irrelevant
} else {
assert(0);
}

For those unfamiliar with this part of the code, here's an explanation on the 'assert(0)':

Quote

In assert(0) the 0 is interpreted as false, so this assertion will always fail, or fire, when assertion checking is on.

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/34236653/what-does-assert0-mean

OmegaStarScream

staff

Activity: 3500

Merit: 6152

Another update, Bitcoin Unlimited is now 32% while SegWit is still 26% since the last updated I have made. I'm the only one thinking that BU will get activated sooner or later? without forgetting that they only need 75% while SegWit require 95% signalling in order to get activated.

Topic: SegWit (26.8%) vs Bitcoin Unlimited (32.2%) - page 2. (Read 8430 times)