Topic: Segwit2X:Users care which side wins? Or do they? (Read 591 times)

PTB cares about TWO THINGS

1.) Who controls BTC-CORE, e.g. who writes the CODE, the CODE is what makes the block-chain, already the new BTG ( Bitcoin-Gold  ) doesn't import the classic block-chain, they have their own blockchain, and their own addresses. SEGWIT will also create their own block chain data-structures. The entire "FORK" program BCC,BTG, BSEG are all designed to fragment and create FUD ( read the Chinese plan to take over BTC )

"He that controls the BTC SOURCE control's BTC in the future"

2.) They "PTB" ( Kosher Nostra ) they want the BITCOIN-BRAND, the name, the $200+ Billion USD market-cap and good will.

It's clear here on this forum that the little people only care about "FREE SHIT COINS", but this is only dilution of BTC, and violates Satoshi's original limit of BTC to 21 Million.

The full nodes run SOURCE CODE, which they download from "BITCOIN CORE", or who ever has the MOST POLITICAL muscle to convince +51% of the MINERS to run that source code. The Block-Chain/Merkel Tree don't mean fuck, every time a new source is installed they can easily automate a -reindex and reformat the entire blockchain/database as the wish.



HE WHO CONTROLS the SOURCE CONTROLS BTC

Eventually IMHO the plan of NYA is to go closed source, once they take over BTC with SEGWIT-2, then they will say that the block-chain needs to be encrypted, and that the source needs to be closed to prevent hacking, and the BTC will be just like the "FEDERAL RESERVE BANK", with the exact same ppl running BTC.

Unfortunately I doubt you will get an answer. Everytime I hear someone say,'B2X is corporation takeover bitcoin", I have yet to hear that person back it up with facts when challenged. Now, personally I am terrified of the consequence of fork. What I know for sure we need a solution to these high transaction fees. And we were deceived into thinking 2X will be implemented after segwit. We all know LN is not ready, to me increasing the block size does buy us sometime while we look for more permanent scaling solutions.

Users should absolutely NOT care about which side wins because it is not about sides. The Bitcoin network is decentralized and votes and agrees on the state of the network every 10 minutes. People vote with their full nodes with has the complete history of the Blockchain.

I am also afraid that the segwit2x can harm the bitcoin. Before the HF on 18-19 Nov the price may have some drops and dips, but the 'free money' hope will hold it comparetively high. Many noob traders don't understand the risks this HF brings (unlike Bcash HF in 1 Aug). The truth is that after the HF there will be much FUD and this is never good for the price. I can only imagine what may happen to the price if such uncertainty is in the air for days and weeks. If the bad news from China lead on several occasions to 30-ish% drop in price for a day, imagine what will do the fear of 2x chain killing the legacy chain. The stupid and greedy pool owners don't understand that if the investors are dissapointed by a too heavy blow on the price, they will never go to the 2x chain. There is a possibility that both coins combined will have much less value in the long run. Now, I am a hodler and don't want this to happen, but if the price goes above 6K once again, I may be tempted to sell and wait better times to invest again.

I don't have the technical knowledge to choose really and am relying on the people who do to make the correct decision.

i think a better question would be "how many users understand which side is correct and by how much?"

that in my opinion is the most important question that should concern everyone. are people just blindly following, investing, dreaming about the future? or are they actually knowledgeable enough to at least understand why things like bitcoin cash are bad or maybe even good?

that is one of the things that occupies my thoughts these days. and i try to educate myself enough so that whey i say i am against BCH fork (or Segwit2x or others in the future) i say it because i understand what i am saying (even if i am wrong) not just following what others say emotionally.

The solution is slow the shops down, make them serve beer. Ring a bell every block solved.

All the world's shops must bow before Satoshi.

It's never going to be faster. 10 minutes is the sweet spot. It may be faster with layers on top, but I don't think the core ways in which the original chain operates are going to change now.

I don't agree - we want a faster Bitcoin for example. You can only use it in shops, for example, once it gets a lot faster.

yes people like me only want to use bitcoin to make another money but if there is any free of coins that people could get then we are waiting for the free one. i think with the segwit2x, people can know and learn the process of bitcoin, the journey of bitcoin itself is still a long way to go and we need to know what is happen in bitcoin itself.

Fork all they want. I'll stay with the original, core's roadmap makes much more sense, increasing blocksize is the easiest way to scale but trade-offs are inefficiency, security and much more prone to censorship. Anyone who thinks increasing blocksize is the only way to scale is uncreative, like tax easiest way for government revenue. #NO2X

Of course users should care, not just that, they should understand what segwit2x is. These two previous forks, especially the august one, gave a wrong idea that this will just be another altcoin. People should know the positive and negative side of implementing segwit2x. This confusion and ignorance of the matter will be more destructive than the downside of the proposal itself.

Social media polls aren't very representative and can just easily be manipulated. Like, there's a poll on CoinDesk with nearly even results for all 3 options - support, oppose, not decided, but lets not forget that CoinDesk belongs to the same DCG that is behind the fork. Users who frequently engage in Bitcoin discussions usually have pretty strong opinion on the fork - just check /r/Bitcoin or this forum, you'll rarely see anyone undecided. Those who don't have their opinion yet are probably newbies or people who threat Bitcoin very casually, because both don't have enough knowledge to understand what's happening. But they would quickly learn if someone from the forkers would tell them to install btc1 client and import their private keys - because that sounds really suspicious even for unexperienced users.

I think bitcoin user just want use normal bitcoin. it is good enough for us. only trader need something new to fud, rumor and get money

There's no "lol okay sure" about it. Simply put, 2MB segwit blocks are against the consensus rules built into the vast majority of bitcoin nodes out there. When the fork hits, those blocks will not be propagated by the nodes running now, only new btc1/2x nodes.

That surely is a confusion among people who don't know much about Bitcoin and the fork. According to me the name "Bitcoin" should not be given to anybody as it reminds of everyone that it's the king of cryptocurrencies. Whichever fork happens for whatever reason should use any other name other than Bitcoin. It will surely lead to a confusion among people as to which side they are in and which coins they are using.

The upgrade should be done as it improves the overall capability of Bitcoin but it has to tackle some major problems like the change in name itself, letting the customers choose what they want, protection from hackers and other issues in splitting the chain.The split will enhance the networks capability and it must be done at some point of time when the network will be overloaded. So if the split provides security and enhances the network at the same time then there should not be any problems in people supporting it.

I think so. Segwit2X may not need to do this because I find it just a trick to create new coin to get more profit for them.

Lol okay sure. But honestly how would that ever be measured? Number if downloads? It doesn't seem realistic to gdt an accurate number of people using any wallet.

How do you justify this story?

SegWit was the corporate takeover.  It was pushed by Core developers working for Silicon Valley startups that want to push the transaction fees into their payment channels.  It definitely favors corporate interests.

The 2x upgrade will increase the blocksize, which should lower transaction fees, and improve confirmation times.

Tell me exactly how a larger block size will favor a corporate takeover of Bitcoin.  Keep in mind increasing the block size was promised by the lead developer of bitcoin EVERY TIME scaling issues were raised.

We were promised a fix to the scaling problems.  Segwit hasn't fixed anything.  Increasing the block size will fix the problem. 

As far as I can see, not implementing 2 Mb blocks will favor the corporate takeover of bitcoin, assuming bitcoin doesn't just fail entirely over the issue.

And if most of the people will terrified no wonder the bitcoin value will fall down because they easily panic and sell their bitcoins  without knowing and understanding what is the true objective of SegWit2X event, but im waiting to this opportunity to happen because i will have the opportunity to purchase bitcoin in cheapest price once again.