Topic: Segwit Affect on Mining? - Sorry if this has been asked before but... (Read 2258 times)
January 06, 2017, 08:19:16 PM
So what is the general consensus now regarding segwit? Is it happening or DOA?
December 20, 2016, 11:37:35 PM
given the amount of asics currently mining,
would it be possible to change the algo without those miners refusing to allow it?
That would just create an insignificant small fork with the new algo while the main blockchain remained on the standard algorithm. Realistically it would be impossible to get a consensus that would make the existing miners abandon their algorithm.would it be possible to change the algo without those miners refusing to allow it?
seems like a pipe dream then :p
it's quite interesting the way BTC Core manages many forks, with the hard coded conditions that once a certain % of miners are on that code the fork takes place,
obviously they could do the same for an algo shift, but i cant see all those farms switching over
December 19, 2016, 12:41:01 AM
given the amount of asics currently mining,
would it be possible to change the algo without those miners refusing to allow it?
That would just create an insignificant small fork with the new algo while the main blockchain remained on the standard algorithm. Realistically it would be impossible to get a consensus that would make the existing miners abandon their algorithm. would it be possible to change the algo without those miners refusing to allow it?
December 18, 2016, 11:09:18 PM
given the amount of asics currently mining,
would it be possible to change the algo without those miners refusing to allow it?
would it be possible to change the algo without those miners refusing to allow it?
December 06, 2016, 11:38:00 PM
Kano - TY
December 04, 2016, 03:52:59 PM
So for the lightning network enabled by Segwit, who get's the transaction fees processed by the lightning network? Does it just roll up into the main blockchain and therefore go to the miners?
Thx
Thx
December 04, 2016, 10:59:41 AM
Kano - Who are you referring to? For my clarification.
The guy with the L name. 
December 04, 2016, 06:40:43 AM
Isn't it up to the miners to decide if they want to change the algo? If they can decide to change it why would they do it since it would hurt their profits?
December 04, 2016, 02:02:10 AM
SegWit should in theory allow for the miners to collect more transaction fees because more transactions can be included in each block.
One might think this would be a no brainer for miners to accept however down the line, SegWit will probably result in LN taking a large percentage of transaction fees via off chain LN transactions.
The miners will also receive a higher amount of transaction fees with a larger maximum block size without the risk of LN taking TX fees down the line.
One might think this would be a no brainer for miners to accept however down the line, SegWit will probably result in LN taking a large percentage of transaction fees via off chain LN transactions.
The miners will also receive a higher amount of transaction fees with a larger maximum block size without the risk of LN taking TX fees down the line.
December 03, 2016, 10:51:53 PM
Kano - Who are you referring to? For my clarification.
December 03, 2016, 12:05:41 AM
Eric - That is interesting. Where can I track that conversation? Thanks!
Can't find the original, but it was widely discussed:
https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoin_uncensored/comments/42l6fi/anyone_know_why_they_are_considering_changing_the/
If I am not wrong, Luke suggested it in response to the 2mb HF. He said, if we are hard forking for block size, then at the same time, we should also change the mining algorithm to beat mining centralization due to ASIC. He probably never suggested it to cut-off miners against Segwit.
In fact, Luke recently said Miners SHOULD NOT signal segwit if the community is not in widespread agreement that it is a good idea.
I think Luke more than suggested it, he actually inserted a piece of code into the Core library that capable of turning the miners into bricks. Yes, it may not be segwit-specific, but segwit is one of the main arsenals against onchain blocksize increase.
December 02, 2016, 09:54:49 PM
Eric - That is interesting. Where can I track that conversation? Thanks!
Can't find the original, but it was widely discussed:
https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoin_uncensored/comments/42l6fi/anyone_know_why_they_are_considering_changing_the/
If I am not wrong, Luke suggested it in response to the 2mb HF. He said, if we are hard forking for block size, then at the same time, we should also change the mining algorithm to beat mining centralization due to ASIC. He probably never suggested it to cut-off miners against Segwit.
In fact, Luke recently said Miners SHOULD NOT signal segwit if the community is not in widespread agreement that it is a good idea.
I think Luke more than suggested it, he actually inserted a piece of code into the Core library that capable of turning the miners into bricks. Yes, it may not be segwit-specific, but segwit is one of the main arsenals against onchain blocksize increase.
December 02, 2016, 08:32:18 PM
Eric - That is interesting. Where can I track that conversation? Thanks!
Can't find the original, but it was widely discussed:
https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoin_uncensored/comments/42l6fi/anyone_know_why_they_are_considering_changing_the/
If I am not wrong, Luke suggested it in response to the 2mb HF. He said, if we are hard forking for block size, then at the same time, we should also change the mining algorithm to beat mining centralization due to ASIC. He probably never suggested it to cut-off miners against Segwit.
In fact, Luke recently said Miners SHOULD NOT signal segwit if the community is not in widespread agreement that it is a good idea.
December 02, 2016, 08:05:46 PM
Eric - That is interesting. Where can I track that conversation? Thanks!
Can't find the original, but it was widely discussed:
https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoin_uncensored/comments/42l6fi/anyone_know_why_they_are_considering_changing_the/
December 02, 2016, 03:27:07 PM
Eric - That is interesting. Where can I track that conversation? Thanks!
December 02, 2016, 11:31:35 AM
Is segregated witness going to affect mining and if so, how?
I'm in a pool on Genesis and am trying to decide if I should increase my hash power or, if it is getting too expensive to be profitable?
Thanks in advance for all your answers.
I'm in a pool on Genesis and am trying to decide if I should increase my hash power or, if it is getting too expensive to be profitable?
Thanks in advance for all your answers.
I think Luke Dash Jr. a Core dev threatened to switch SHA256 if large miners block adoption of sigwit. So if Core doesn't get their way, your miners can potentially turn into junk if the dev meant business.
December 01, 2016, 10:21:01 PM
Thanks!
December 01, 2016, 04:41:10 PM
Mining pools need to update their configuration and software to work in concert with segwit, otherwise they're unable to support it. Actual miners with hardware it makes no difference to them as all the work is done at the pool level, unless you're one of the rare few who wish to mine solo for yourself, in which case the onus falls on the miner to do what the pool would otherwise do for them.
December 01, 2016, 02:29:44 PM
Is segregated witness going to affect mining and if so, how?
I'm in a pool on Genesis and am trying to decide if I should increase my hash power or, if it is getting too expensive to be profitable?
Thanks in advance for all your answers.
I'm in a pool on Genesis and am trying to decide if I should increase my hash power or, if it is getting too expensive to be profitable?
Thanks in advance for all your answers.
Jump to: