Topic: SegWit is cancelled ? - page 2. (Read 2855 times)
I nominate Lauda to be the official spokes person for core. :p
so no segwit benefit for ages yet?, if ever.
(you lost me a bit there, need more time to compute)
But can anyone test such theories as (i think yours) a miner including a segwit block, pre segwit, to then activate later?
Or would that be off scope/unpredictable to achieve in test mode.
(you lost me a bit there, need more time to compute)
But can anyone test such theories as (i think yours) a miner including a segwit block, pre segwit, to then activate later?
Or would that be off scope/unpredictable to achieve in test mode.
What do you estimate the best case for segwit to have any effect on tx backlog, tx's that I presume are supposed to keep growing.
(remember bitcoin adoption?)
Anyway, 6 months minimum before segwit has any effect on tx backlog, probably, most likely longer.
(remember bitcoin adoption?)
Anyway, 6 months minimum before segwit has any effect on tx backlog, probably, most likely longer.
(a)IF segwit was active in 2016 (before LN, before CPC is a thing) then segwit possibly could handle 1.8x current block capacity..(for 1.8mb real data)
(b)IF segwit was active in 2017 due to the request to include the 2mb hard fork aswell (making the 5.7mb total bloat with CPC or 3.6mb without CPC) then the capacity would be ~3x current capacity
now for the backlog question..
no one knows how many people will transact in the future..
imagining lets say only 2500tx average are let in a block currently[1] .. but where 5000 people doing individual transactions every 10 minutes (backlog example)
[1] estimate based on block 412946 & block 412945 being recent and offering around 2500tx for 998kb
segwit in 2016 would still not quite allow all them transactions in.. (average allowance increases to 4500tx)
segwit+HF 2017 would (as the capacity is about 7600tx per block) as long as popularity stayed below 7600 people making tx per 10 minute(average).
Then, even worse, segwit will be rushed and effectively released untested.
Who has access to this segwit/presegwit testnet?
Who has access to this segwit/presegwit testnet?
its available for anyone to download the testnet release on github.
Remember though, Carlton says,
" If you're unaware of the [core segwit] scaling plans and their level of progress/acceptance, you only have yourself to blame."
lol carlton. lol another PR guy that cant quote states and tries the word twisting game.
but in the fluffy clouds of testnet segwit is perfect...... carlton and lauda will tell you segwit is perfect, without them even personally knowing a single line of code.
not only did lauda fail at coding but carlton could not even explain the basics of uninstalling a program in linux..
so when i see them two mouth pieces talk.. all i see is the words "blockstream PR department rambles"
What do you estimate the best case for segwit to have any effect on tx backlog, tx's that I presume are supposed to keep growing.
(remember bitcoin adoption?)
Anyway, 6 months minimum before segwit has any effect on tx backlog, probably, most likely longer.
Then, even worse, segwit will be rushed and effectively released untested.
Who has access to this segwit/presegwit testnet?
Remember though, Carlton says,
" If you're unaware of the [core segwit] scaling plans and their level of progress/acceptance, you only have yourself to blame."
lol carlton. lol another PR guy that cant quote stats or realistic information and tries the word twisting game.
but in the fluffy clouds of testnet, segwit is perfect...... carlton and lauda will tell you segwit is perfect, without them even personally knowing a single line of code.
not only did lauda fail at coding but carlton could not even explain the basics of uninstalling a program in linux..
so when i see them two mouth pieces talk.. all i see is the words "blockstream PR department word of the day"
its truly funny how blockstream are dead against 2mb of block data using traditional transactions along with linear signature validation..
but blindly think that 2.85mb of segwit+confidential payment codes+other features is acceptable.. while only allowing the same amount of transaction capacity as 2mb of traditional transactions.
and also funny that their roadmap allows for 5.7mb blocks when blockstream decide its ok for the hard fork.. yet they cant explain what network bandwidth restrictions are currently preventing 2mb now but weirdly and suddenly not an issue for 5.7mb next year...
if i was to type blockstreamers mindset into a program.. id get endless logic errors
are people even listening to lauda..
he doesnt even know C++,
proof he has to seek guidance from his blockstreamer buddies
he even thought bitcoin-core was coded in java...
meaning he cant even recognise java to know core is not java.
he has no coding experience nor personally used segwit testnet.. all he has done was got info from blockstreamers about how many unicorns it can handle flying through the clouds
he is just a blockstream PR guy, on the side of theymos..
he doesnt even know C++,
Whoever I've asked previously (as I don't do C++ myself) said that the complexity is overblown by a 'certain group'.
proof he has to seek guidance from his blockstreamer buddies
he even thought bitcoin-core was coded in java...
Quote
January 17th 2016 20:24
Lauda: Bitcoin does not use Java right?
Lauda: Bitcoin does not use Java right?
meaning he cant even recognise java to know core is not java.
he has no coding experience nor personally used segwit testnet.. all he has done was got info from blockstreamers about how many unicorns it can handle flying through the clouds
he is just a blockstream PR guy, on the side of theymos..
I suspect that reflects the bias of the site owner to employ such people.
No definitive, or even defined explanation on segwit here.
or anywhere.
Remember though, Carlton says,
" If you're unaware of the [core segwit] scaling plans and their level of progress/acceptance, you only have yourself to blame."
slightly edited.
are people even listening to lauda..
he doesnt even know C++,
proof he has to seek guidance from his blockstreamer buddies
he even thought bitcoin-core was coded in java...
meaning he cant even recognise java to know core is not java.
he has no coding experience nor personally used segwit testnet.. all he has done was got info from blockstreamers about how many unicorns it can handle flying through the clouds
he is just a blockstream PR guy, on the side of theymos..
he doesnt even know C++,
Whoever I've asked previously (as I don't do C++ myself) said that the complexity is overblown by a 'certain group'.
proof he has to seek guidance from his blockstreamer buddies
he even thought bitcoin-core was coded in java...
Quote
January 17th 2016 20:24
Lauda: Bitcoin does not use Java right?
Lauda: Bitcoin does not use Java right?
meaning he cant even recognise java to know core is not java.
he has no coding experience nor personally used segwit testnet.. all he has done was got info from blockstreamers about how many unicorns it can handle flying through the clouds
he is just a blockstream PR guy, on the side of theymos..
-snip-
Update: No.
Either you are, or you misinterpreted my initial words. What I initially said "< 2 months", i.e. my statement had nothing to do with Segwit, but the release of the HF code as per HK agreement. Aside from that, I'm not particularly interested in "I won't do X, until you do Y" games nor the correlation between the releases.Update: No.
And I just helpfully demonstrated to you how the two are intimately and inextricably linked together. You apparently just want to just stick your fingers in your ears and say “lalalalalalamycat”…
I will leave the decision up to you, gentle reader, if you wish to do the same.
That Lauda Girl is a joke.
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4k8rsa/maxwell_the_vandal_calls_adam_luke_and_peter_todd/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4k74cr/maaku7_i_dont_know_anyone_who_is_actually_working/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4khh07/hello_china_hello_chinese_miners_what_are_you/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4kipvu/samsung_mow_austinhill_blockstream_now_its_time/
And I just helpfully demonstrated to you how the two are intimately and inextricably linked together.
You see just what you want to see. Jihan Wu might just mean no SegWit activation until fully ready and tested (in wallet as a feature to send coins using new SegWit transactions). It would make sence. And if no hard fork delivered as promised around July, miners can just merge BIP109 or some variation of this like with longer grace period + higher treshold as there is consensus between miners + market for this, so no big deal anyway.
For the scrolling impaired:
...
There are rumors that miners will not activate segwit until Core has coded a HF blocksize increase for them... given Core's lack of desire to do this... it could be a VERY long time before anything happens. I would be shocked to see any additional capacity before the halving comes and goes.
There are rumors that miners will not activate segwit until Core has coded a HF blocksize increase for them... given Core's lack of desire to do this... it could be a VERY long time before anything happens. I would be shocked to see any additional capacity before the halving comes and goes.
Is there any source for this? Are you referring to P. Todd's tweet?
Peter Todd's AMA on the chinese forum.
Quote
much of the hashing power has already said they're not going to run segwit until a hard-fork is released,
Maybe I'm just reading what Peter Todd wants to see? I guess it's possible.
Jihan's tweet was in reference to the word-play that Core and their PR team is now using, where "release" = "pull req".
Gregory Maxwell called Adam, Luke, Peter, BlueMatt all dipshits for even agreeing to a hard fork in July 2017, and you think it is easy peasy to get done... Well, I guess optimism can be good trait. Delusional optimism? not so much.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14835202
And I just helpfully demonstrated to you how the two are intimately and inextricably linked together.
You see just what you want to see. Jihan Wu might just mean no SegWit activation until fully tested and ready (in wallet as a feature to send coins using new SegWit transactions). It would make sence. And if no hard fork delivered as promised around July, miners can just merge BIP109 or some variation of this like with longer grace period + higher voting treshold as there is consensus between miners + market for this, so no big deal anyway.
Take a look at the to-do list.
"* Do tests in a mixed network of upgraded and non-upgraded nodes."
That should take a while.
Then when all these parts are put together, all that will need testing.
Far more than a small block increase, which is more predictable.
Part of the problem of promising something that still needed making.
With no back up plan for delays, proper testing time or lack of general adoption.
-snip-
Update: No.
Either you are, or you misinterpreted my initial words. What I initially said "< 2 months", i.e. my statement had nothing to do with Segwit, but the release of the HF code as per HK agreement. Aside from that, I'm not particularly interested in "I won't do X, until you do Y" games nor the correlation between the releases.Update: No.
And I just helpfully demonstrated to you how the two are intimately and inextricably linked together. You apparently just want to just stick your fingers in your ears and say “lalalalalalamycat”…
I will leave the decision up to you, gentle reader, if you wish to do the same.
-snip-
Update: No.
Either you are, or you misinterpreted my initial words. What I initially said "< 2 months", i.e. my statement had nothing to do with Segwit, but the release of the HF code as per HK agreement. Aside from that, I'm not particularly interested in "I won't do X, until you do Y" games nor the correlation between the releases.Update: No.
If anyone is manipulating with word-play… it is you, and those that you do PR for.
That would be my cat. My cat does not make mistakes.The code is being thoroughly tested while also some missing pieces are being added.
How can it be thoroughly tested while still adding "missing" bits?Update: Again, I have never said that there's no correlation between the HF code and Segwit. I said that there's no correlation in my post, which there isn't as it was solely about the time remaining until HF code needs to be released.
...SegWit is critical for LN to work which is critical (in addition to not raising the maximum block size) to blockstream ever becoming profitable.
Has anyone from the Blockstream actually clarified on what's their revenue generation model yet? I reckon they must have pitched to investors with something bigger than LN.
I doubt Blockstream can profit from LN, as anybody can use similar features, just look at Thunder alpha testing from Blockchain.info - and their online wallet definitively have most Bitcoin users, so Blockstream LN could not even compete here to be most used. I guess you have to look elsewhere for Blockstream investments revenue model.
About the SegWit, bit delayed but Im confident in one or two months it become activated by miners after most wallet implement it - no point now anyway when wallets not ready.
Is segwit cancelled?
No, (not yet) just not made yet, just not tested yet, just not released yet.
The code is being thoroughly tested while also some missing pieces are being added.
How can it be thoroughly tested while still adding "missing" bits?
All this year, by you and others, we were told "Segwit in April!" Now, you say < 2 months... Is this some kind of twist on the BFL "2 weeks" strategy?
That "< 2 months" has nothing to do with Segwit. It was the time left until the HF had to be proposed (as per agreement it was 'up to 3 months after SW code was release'). I can't tell you any exact dates, and I doubt that anyone can. Pushing something too early could end up being a huge disaster. Let’s connect some dots here. Don’t worry, I’ll guide you.
If miners will not activate segwit until HF code is released, tested, and compiled for use (see above statement by 30% miner, he could block segwit himself)… Your < 2 months applies to both segwit and the HF binary releases.
See? So it doesn’t have nothing to do with segwit, it has everything to do with segwit.
Update: No. If anyone is manipulating with word-play… it is you, and those that you do PR for. “Release” magically morphing into “Pull Req”, for example.
...SegWit is critical for LN to work which is critical (in addition to not raising the maximum block size) to blockstream ever becoming profitable.
Has anyone from the Blockstream actually clarified on what's their revenue generation model yet? I reckon they must have pitched to investors with something bigger than LN.
All this year, by you and others, we were told "Segwit in April!" Now, you say < 2 months... Is this some kind of twist on the BFL "2 weeks" strategy?
That "< 2 months" has nothing to do with Segwit. It was the time left until the HF had to be proposed (as per agreement it was 'up to 3 months after SW code was release'). I can't tell you any exact dates, and I doubt that anyone can. Pushing something too early could end up being a huge disaster. Update: No. Stop trying to manipulate with word-play; that's not what I was talking about nor what your reply was about.
All this year, by you and others, we were told "Segwit in April!"
Now, you say < 2 months... Is this some kind of twist on the BFL "2 weeks" strategy?
Sounds about right lol.Now, you say < 2 months... Is this some kind of twist on the BFL "2 weeks" strategy?
No segwit is not cancelled. SegWit is critical for LN to work which is critical (in addition to not raising the maximum block size) to blockstream ever becoming profitable.
No. The ETA was April for the code to be released, not merged (!). There's a huge difference here and it seems like users do not know. The code is being thoroughly tested while also some missing pieces are being added. The last time that I was looking into this, the information pointed towards a release in Core 0.12.2 which is the next version.
Yeah, the difference being whether it has some impact on the capacity of the network, or none.
Peter Todd's AMA on the chinese forum.
There's a difference between releasing code and merging it. From what I understand, the people that were part of the HK agreement are currently working on a proposal and it should be released in < 2 months.Quote
much of the hashing power has already said they're not going to run segwit until a hard-fork is released
So Core is planning to author a HF pull req that they have zero intention of merging... I'm sure that'll go over well with miners.
Here's what the guy with 25-30% of the hashrate says:
All this year, by you and others, we were told "Segwit in April!"
Now, you say < 2 months... Is this some kind of twist on the BFL "2 weeks" strategy?
Jump to: