Whats the likelihood of a coin/network split/fork come Aug 1? - page 2.

Nagadota

hero member

Activity: 574

Merit: 500

ClaimWithMe - the most paying faucet of all times!

Quote from: Viscount on May 31, 2017, 11:50:29 PM

UASF is getting propulsion and Core devs back it up if there'll be vast nodes' support. I doubt very much that jihan dare to split without community he's nothing Cool

"I hate Jihan Wu for agreeing with a chain split"

"I think the solution is to do this chain split"

And then there's Quantus busy not being a hypocrite. UASF, at least BIP148, is very risky, and not only does it not have miner support (of course), it doesn't have node support yet either. There's still under one thousand nodes signalling for it.

Viscount

sr. member

Activity: 243

Merit: 250

UASF is getting propulsion and Core devs back it up if there'll be vast nodes' support. I doubt very much that jihan dare to split without community he's nothing Cool

Quantus

legendary

Activity: 883

Merit: 1005

"UASFers are playing chicken to win and they just threw their steering wheels out of the window and cut their brake lines." --reddit/r/bitcoin

And /r/bitcoin is all...

SEGWITNESS ME! lol get it? *cricket*
*sigh* I fucking hate every last one of you. Will not Lauda of course.

I hate analogues but this really does sum up my fear of the current situation.

pooya87

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 10611

Quote from: hardtime on May 31, 2017, 10:46:46 PM

Though dude, I really am one who is going to ignore it for a whole nother reason, I think this just simply isn't going to happen, Ver may threaten to do stuff like this but threats are threats and I don't think anyone from BTU would simply pull the trigger on this suicide shot. They'd be hurting themselves, and the miners that they employ. Can't see it happening in the least bud, even if I gave the reasons on why people are ignoring.

you seem to have been ignoring more than you should have Cheesy

this is no longer BU chain split, this time it is SegWit chain split which is being enforced by a BIP called BIP148 or UASF.
if you don't ignore the comment by -ck above you, you can read the details too.

hardtime

sr. member

Activity: 490

Merit: 251

Make winning bets on sports with Sportsbet.io!

Quote from: Quantus on May 31, 2017, 08:30:30 PM

Your all crazy if you think you can ignore this.

Well I think it's less crazy and more people in denial that something like this could / may happen and don't want to face something like this happening head on, and it does make sense as such a shock to the entire Bitcoin community would really send ripples through the price and would probably make a hefty number of you lose money. So I'd be scared as well, and would try to ignore this for as long as possible when something like this comes up.

Though dude, I really am one who is going to ignore it for a whole nother reason, I think this just simply isn't going to happen, Ver may threaten to do stuff like this but threats are threats and I don't think anyone from BTU would simply pull the trigger on this suicide shot. They'd be hurting themselves, and the miners that they employ. Can't see it happening in the least bud, even if I gave the reasons on why people are ignoring.

-ck

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Given that the actual number of nodes advertising BIP148 support is less than 12%, and less than half of those are actually uasf enforcing nodes (the rest are just using the comment functionality), the chance of a successful major split from the rest of the network is very slim. Additionally the bulk of the core devs are increasingly opposed to BIP148 as it currently stands. It's my prediction that BIP148 will die a slow painful death without ever becoming popular enough to be relevant while other UASF options are explored, though ultimately I still predict there will be a compromise of some sort and a miner activated change in the end.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

I believe that a split is a possibility. As I understand it, the nodes will start activating Segwit through BIP148 and if there are a small group of miners going with it but the majority are not, then the split is going to happen.

Did I get that correctly?

Quantus

legendary

Activity: 883

Merit: 1005

Your all crazy if you think you can ignore this.

Variogam

sr. member

Activity: 276

Merit: 254

The question is whether it does matter. At one point in time Clams used snapshot of Bitcoin ledger and from this point it separated from Bitcoin. So again all Bitcoin users going to own BIP148 coins for free and from this point it separates from Bitcoin. The chance for BIP148 coin to get most proof of work anytime in future and make huge Bitcoin reorg is virtually zero (big incentives for every Bitcoin user for not it happen, ever).

If it mean all the people behind BIP148 leave Bitcoin, it would be big step toward the reasonable SegWit + 2MB HF agreement, which has higher support as a way to scale Bitcoin.

BitHodler

legendary

Activity: 1526

Merit: 1179

It's not the best option, but it is in fact something in the way of the 'majority' that has the power to force through changes.

However, at this point it's obvious that a good number of nodes are tied to just a handful of entities, so the majority thing hasn't really that much value anymore.

At this point one thing is sure, miners don't mind current situation to last another 6 or 12 months as they generate more fee income than ever before.

But the thing is, if we go for UASF, there are chances of a chain split to happen, but if we wait much longer, then BU might initiate a hard fork resulting in again, a chain split.

Situation is critical and the closest possible way to make Bitcoin finally support larger blocks, is through UASF.

Quantus

legendary

Activity: 883

Merit: 1005

Anyone who tells you UASF is safe is ether a lier or doesn't know what there talking about.

Bitcoin Core developers don't openly support it and certainly don't promote it.

The Mining cartel can spin up as many nodes as they like when the time comes to prevent it; thats if they don't already control a majority. For all we know they may already operate a majority of nodes.

The vast amounts of VC money flowing into the network completely eclipses the money being used by the average user base.

I support the Core developers they are the only ones that have any scrupuls but exchanges and service providers may ultimately side with the banks if they think its in their best interests to do so.

I don't understand where all this confidence is coming from.

People need to be told the network could split come Aug 1 into two distinct coexisting chains.

Even if we changed the POW to something else the mining cartel has the capital and manufacturing capability to pick a winner and come out on top every time. They have the resources to be first to market with any new hardware like ASIC etc.

Topic: Whats the likelihood of a coin/network split/fork come Aug 1? - page 2. (Read 1726 times)