The "Segwit pump" wasn't caused by Segwit only.There were other factors pumping the Bitcoin price back then.
90% of the Bitcoiners don't care about Segwit or Taproot.They only care about the Bitcoin price.
Maybe there will be some short term hype arround Taproot,which might cause the BTC price to go up,but I think that the hype will be temporary and it won't lead to a significant and stable price increase.
The scaling debate was just an excuse for Roger Ver and other pseudo-Bitcoiners to push their forked pseudo Bitcoin garbage,like BCH,BSV,etc.I don't even remember the names of those forked "Bitcoins".
Topic: Taproot will follow segwit pump (Read 319 times)
During the scaling debate, months before the UASF cleared the path to a true understanding of Bitcoin, community, and consensus, as a newbie, what was your viewpoint on “big blocks or small blocks”? I was also a newbie with a different perspective. 
100 sat/byte, that is still too high except when the mempool is congested, it can even go higher. I will use vbyte because weight are used for transactions except when using legacy addresses to make transaction. Nested segwit, native segwit and the upcoming taproot are using weight for transactions. Right now, the mempool is not that congested, even 11 sat/vbyte will get your transaction confirmed early. This has been how bitcoin transactions has been but it depends on how congested mempool is. You can first use mempool observers to check the vbyte to get transaction confirmed early.https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#BTC,2h,weight
https://mempool.space/
You quoted someone else's comment but I understood you responded to me.
I know how to use the calculations, to look at mempool and all that. But if you read my comment, it was talking about the big block small block argument period before the whole Bitcoin forks episode. So we did not even have at the time vbyte numbers to my knowledge. If you needed a transaction urgently, 100 satoshi even sometimes was not enough and I was talking about it being cheap at the time because of BTC price.
Personally? I felt very hurt by the fees because I was using a site that adjusted fees and it made me pay a lot of money. But guess what? I found out how to use Electrum to set my own fees. I saw that actually even with 100 satoshi per byte fees I actually paid very little.
100 sat/byte, that is still too high except when the mempool is congested, it can even go higher. I will use vbyte because weight are used for transactions except when using legacy addresses to make transaction. Nested segwit, native segwit and the upcoming taproot are using weight for transactions. Right now, the mempool is not that congested, even 11 sat/vbyte will get your transaction confirmed early. This has been how bitcoin transactions has been but it depends on how congested mempool is. You can first use mempool observers to check the vbyte to get transaction confirmed early.https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#BTC,2h,weight
https://mempool.space/
During the scaling debate, months before the UASF cleared the path to a true understanding of Bitcoin, community, and consensus, as a newbie, what was your viewpoint on “big blocks or small blocks”? I was also a newbie with a different perspective.
Personally? I felt very hurt by the fees because I was using a site that adjusted fees and it made me pay a lot of money. But guess what? I found out how to use Electrum to set my own fees. I saw that actually even with 100 satoshi per byte fees I actually paid very little.
If it was all equal and about fees only I would choose the cheaper one but even as a newbie it was easy to see the people who opted for the split were commercial, thinking about money, were not as good about developing concerns as Bitcoin, and I was not convinced about block security (as in, 51% attack) as so many altcoins show they are vulnerable. Imagine, since the time I was new, LTC, ETH and others always have network down times, and reorganization and confusion. Never with Bitcoin except because of the BCH fork,,, to my newbie understanding.
So anyway, long story short I was not a small blocker but a regular blocker;)
Like if you have a computer, and you always have option of buying more HDD or just keeping your disk cleaner and more efficient.
I have the same theory. The scaling debate brought instability, then which Segwit activation stabilized and ended the debate. It also brought divisiveness, which Segwit couldn’t fix, BUT I’m confident none of the big blockers that matter SODLed. Roger Ver still HODLs Bitcoin. It would be stupid of him, or anyone, to sell Bitcoin for Bcash.
I was very new when all of that happened. All I knew was that the miners who wanted bigger blocks went their way but eventually they also saw how bad the other camp was and everyone then decided to go Segwit. No more debate other than stubborn things about price and speed but I remember,,, this was proof of how Bitcoin becomes stronger after overcoming a difficulty.
Taproot is nowhere near to causing the same conflict so I do not see it as a big difficulty.
During the scaling debate, months before the UASF cleared the path to a true understanding of Bitcoin, community, and consensus, as a newbie, what was your viewpoint on “big blocks or small blocks”? I was also a newbie with a different perspective.
I have the same theory. The scaling debate brought instability, then which Segwit activation stabilized and ended the debate. It also brought divisiveness, which Segwit couldn’t fix, BUT I’m confident none of the big blockers that matter SODLed. Roger Ver still HODLs Bitcoin. It would be stupid of him, or anyone, to sell Bitcoin for Bcash.
I was very new when all of that happened. All I knew was that the miners who wanted bigger blocks went their way but eventually they also saw how bad the other camp was and everyone then decided to go Segwit. No more debate other than stubborn things about price and speed but I remember,,, this was proof of how Bitcoin becomes stronger after overcoming a difficulty.
Taproot is nowhere near to causing the same conflict so I do not see it as a big difficulty.
Then someone posted that Segwit did not have much effect on the price, which I simply disagreed.
Or it might already be priced in. But I will be wrong, and my plebness will show again. Hahaha.
What I think is that despite popular belief SegWit didn't cause a "pump" because lack of SegWit (before its activation) was preventing the money from coming in so when it got activated and the drama ended, all those moneys waiting to jump in, jumped in and price went up to what it should have reached if there were no drama.Or it might already be priced in. But I will be wrong, and my plebness will show again. Hahaha.
In other words removal of drama let the rise that were supposed to happen months before, finally happen.
With that logic, Taproot shouldn't cause any significant rise itself because there is no drama. But at the same time we have had another kind of "drama" which was the unreasonable drop which lasted a couple of months which kept the price below $60k. This undervalued state with all the FUD campaigns have created a nice build up and the panic buyers are waiting to jump in causing a big rise sooner or later.
I have the same theory. The scaling debate brought instability, then which Segwit activation stabilized and ended the debate. It also brought divisiveness, which Segwit couldn’t fix, BUT I’m confident none of the big blockers that matter SODLed. Roger Ver still HODLs Bitcoin. It would be stupid of him, or anyone, to sell Bitcoin for Bcash.
Then someone posted that Segwit did not have much effect on the price, which I simply disagreed.
Or it might already be priced in. But I will be wrong, and my plebness will show again. Hahaha.
What I think is that despite popular belief SegWit didn't cause a "pump" because lack of SegWit (before its activation) was preventing the money from coming in so when it got activated and the drama ended, all those moneys waiting to jump in, jumped in and price went up to what it should have reached if there were no drama.Or it might already be priced in. But I will be wrong, and my plebness will show again. Hahaha.
In other words removal of drama let the rise that were supposed to happen months before, finally happen.
With that logic, Taproot shouldn't cause any significant rise itself because there is no drama. But at the same time we have had another kind of "drama" which was the unreasonable drop which lasted a couple of months which kept the price below $60k. This undervalued state with all the FUD campaigns have created a nice build up and the panic buyers are waiting to jump in causing a big rise sooner or later.
I believe it did have an effect on the price. Because before Segwit was a long debate called the scaling debate which had the community divided, and anti-Bitcoiners were attacking Bitcoin. The direction of Bitcoin might have been a little questionable. Segwit’s activation through a UASF closed all questions.
But, I am not seeing any big debate is going on right now in bitcoin communities hence what kind of effect we could expect along with this taproot upgrade? I read few such upgrade on some altcoins and they experienced pumps and dumps as well (when we are having multiple upgrade scheduled then people I may start ignoring).
Before you post, read through the topic and get the context. I said Taproot upgrade MIGHT be priced in because compared to the Segwit upgrade, Taproot doesn’t have much attention from the community like Segwit had.
Then someone posted that Segwit did not have much effect on the price, which I simply disagreed.
Quote
I agree bitcoin ecosystem is not having any frequent major upgrades. So we may expect some strong bull run which will be triggered by this taproot upgrade.
Or it might already be priced in. But I will be wrong, and my plebness will show again. Hahaha.
I believe it did have an effect on the price. Because before Segwit was a long debate called the scaling debate which had the community divided, and anti-Bitcoiners were attacking Bitcoin. The direction of Bitcoin might have been a little questionable. Segwit’s activation through a UASF closed all questions.
But, I am not seeing any big debate is going on right now in bitcoin communities hence what kind of effect we could expect along with this taproot upgrade? I read few such upgrade on some altcoins and they experienced pumps and dumps as well (when we are having multiple upgrade scheduled then people I may start ignoring).I agree bitcoin ecosystem is not having any frequent major upgrades. So we may expect some strong bull run which will be triggered by this taproot upgrade.
You can't really compare taproot with segwit fork so I don't expect this would be the reason for any major price change,
In 2017 was also US election, this year US election proved to me how it affected bitcoin price in uptrend direction. Also there are other factors that resulted to bitcoin price uptrend in 2017. I too do not think segwit activation really have effect on the price (I am only guessing this), I haven't known much about bitcoin at the time (2017) and I am lazy to relate segwit activation to price of bitcoin few days before and after the the activation.
I believe it did have an effect on the price. Because before Segwit was a long debate called the scaling debate which had the community divided, and anti-Bitcoiners were attacking Bitcoin. The direction of Bitcoin might have been a little questionable. Segwit’s activation through a UASF closed all questions.
You can't really compare taproot with segwit fork so I don't expect this would be the reason for any major price change,
In 2017 was also US election, this year US election proved to me how it affected bitcoin price in uptrend direction. Also there are other factors that resulted to bitcoin price uptrend in 2017. I too do not think segwit activation really have effect on the price (I am only guessing this), I haven't known much about bitcoin at the time (2017) and I am lazy to relate segwit activation to price of bitcoin few days before and after the the activation.Taproot benefits are mostly related with scripts and multisig setups, and I doubt many people are using this options.
Yes, but also as the transaction input increases, with just one, two or very little output, the more the transaction fee will be reduced if compared to even segiwt. It will also helps consolidation, making input consolidation comes with lower fee if compared to segwit. You can't really compare taproot with segwit fork so I don't expect this would be the reason for any major price change, but I am not worried about that because we have our good old fiat printing machine for that purpose.
Taproot benefits are mostly related with scripts and multisig setups, and I doubt many people are using this options.
Taproot benefits are mostly related with scripts and multisig setups, and I doubt many people are using this options.
I believe you might be right. It’s not actually about the technical upgrade itself, or what improvements of each upgrade brought to the protocol. It’s about what argument “one upgrade” brought, and how it won against troll-narratives of the flat-Earthers.
Something that reduces the size or cost of a transaction is only helping users to transact in a much efficient and cost-effective ways, so there isn't anything that connects it to price speculations.
I would say that it would be more accurate to say that all technical upgrades help one part of the users to pay lower fees for on-chain transactions, because even today a significant part of the crypto community thinks that these fees are too high. This of course goes hand in hand with those who promote Bitcoin as a “store of value/digital gold” and various altcoins as cryptocurrencies to be used for payment.
People can be given various favorable options, but the problem is that the level of knowledge among average users is so low that it takes years for any serious adaptation of any upgrade.
--snip--
SegWit pump? I do not know that such a thing ever existed...
SegWit pump? I do not know that such a thing ever existed...
Exactly going to be my point here.
I mean, how can someone even adjoin two completely different matters into one subject? How can segwit or taproot become the reason for a major price change when both of them doesn't even belong to the genre of speculation and are rather more technically connected? Something that reduces the size or cost of a transaction is only helping users to transact in a much efficient and cost-effective ways, so there isn't anything that connects it to price speculations.
Will taproot really have that huge impact? FYI, I'm not much expert; I only understand taproot in theory but technically, I don’t know anything at all.
You answered right after your question - because if you, as a longtime member of this forum, do not understand what this is all about, why do you expect that the majority who have even less knowledge of technical matters will react to something like Taproot? In addition, for something to have an effect, mainstream media would have to write a lot about it - and it's not a story that can be sold to the average reader who hasn't even figured out what SegWit is.
SegWit pump? I do not know that such a thing ever existed...
There is no direct correlation between the implementation of Taproot and the changes in the price of Bitcoin because the latter is more of speculative nature while the former is determined by pure technical need. However, the price of bitcoin is slightly dependent on the scale of its adoption and the pace of adoption, both of which may potentially be affected by the activation of Taproot. Given that the soft fork is aimed to make bitcoin more private and fungible, it is clearly not going to make bitcoin more attractive for regulators, which may negatively impact both the price and the speed of adoption. At the same time, it may result in increased usage of the Lightning Network due to enhanced privacy upon opening/closing channels, which in turn may considerably hasten the adoption and therefore the growth in the price of bitcoin.
You can't really compare taproot with segwit fork so I don't expect this would be the reason for any major price change, but I am not worried about that because we have our good old fiat printing machine for that purpose.
Taproot benefits are mostly related with scripts and multisig setups, and I doubt many people are using this options.
Taproot benefits are mostly related with scripts and multisig setups, and I doubt many people are using this options.
OP, any probability for a pump/price surge because of Taproot might already be priced in in my opinion. If everyone expects it, everyone buys weeks before the “expected date”, then by the time of “the date”, nothing. BUT I also said the expected pump for the halving was also priced in. I was never more wrong in my life.
Now that we have more institutional investors and retail traders from traditional markets, I wonder what do they think of this or if they know anything about it. They probably understand it as just an asset with a limited supply and a good store of value but doesn't know what goes on in the network. I'm also in a group that transitioned from stocks to crypto but none of them discusses about technical details on blockchain. All they talk about is chart formations, market sentiments, and the next big thing.
I think it will be us, the retail investors/traders who has a basic knowledge of the major upgrade, that will kick start the next wave. They will follow when they see volume picking up.
I think it will be us, the retail investors/traders who has a basic knowledge of the major upgrade, that will kick start the next wave. They will follow when they see volume picking up.
Jump to: