Topic: Why Bitcoin needs Segregated Witness (Read 407 times)

seems you didnt check block data but just decided to reply back, with some random social drama of throwing names around...
this is all old drama being re-stirred up from about a few years ago...

your so out of touch with reality that you actually believe craig is some influencer/source
maybe you should also follow the advice i gave windfury. set your browser to block reddit. that way it controls your impulses to try reading stuff from stupid places

craig wright is not an influencer nor is he of any significance. just like samson mow is of no significance..
by you even mentioning his name shows you have no clue about the reality of what actually affects bitcoin

So by that reasoning, surely you must be part of the "core crowd" as well.  Or does your special brain think you've never had a transaction collated by a "pro core pool"?  If you ever get tired of being a lost cause who no one takes seriously, feel free to let us know.



Yeah, you'd much prefer we got our misinformation direct from Craig "Scammer" Wright's sphincter like you do, right?   

yea accusations and social drama on rddit and twitter have already happened in the case of segwit and spam drama.. YEARS AGO (your out of date)
but thats where people then went on and done some research and seen block data didnt match the accusations that spam was caused by anyone against core.. but cause using mixers. where the mixers are pro core and added to blocks that were collated by pro core pools

so you ask where, what, which.... well..

where: bitcoin blockchain
which blocks: blocks within 1 month prior to certain core bips needing adoption in 2015-2016
which transactions: the mass of transactions that have the same taint PATTERN and effect of known mixers
why: the 'wu' group were not causing fee wars/spam blocks(you cant fill a block with expensive fee's and lots of low confirm spam if your doing empty blocks)

as for your drama about antpool, wu and ver... seriously please put a browser ban on reddit and actually force yourself to not get your mis-information from places like that.
if you done some real research you would see real info.
seems you would rather spend hours a day learning and trying out some social drama. rather than researching bitcoin data.

though i do wonder why you keep concerning yourself with bitmain/ver drama as your distraction technique
might be worth you atleast researching topics you want to get involved in. EG if you wanna try correcting info.. first have the correct info.

Where, which blocks, which transactions in the blockchain did you check to see without hesitation, uncertainty, confusion, or doubt that the "Core crowd" spammed the mempool. How about your evidence.

Because someone else could easily accuse that it was Roger Ver, Jihan Wu, and Antpool.

How is Jihan Wu, by the way? I told you.

doomad again obsessed with the "blocksize increase" propaganda
seems doomad can only think in small block vs bigblock debate mindset
the transactions per second/day is the main important factor.

transactions per hard drive byte has NOT improved
transactions per second/day has NOT improved

the argument about a maliciously created block taking over 3 minutes to validate could be solved for both legacy and segwit by simply not allowing 5 tx to fill a block with thousands of sigops per tx

even malleability could have been solved for both legacy and segwit..


the actual reason for segwit, was a gateway tx format to be used for locking/identifying UTXO's so that alternative networks, like sidechains, offchains. can exist by pegging coins to the locked bitcoin utxo

the transaction fee 'discount' is just a fake discount using creative accounting of the witness scale factor just to make legacy more expensive

using segwit as a onchain transaction just to make a tx to another peer offers no real world advantage. just the illusion of benefit

Well spotted.  If you want to read both the pros and cons without being subjected to advertising, you can refer to SegWit Benefits and SegWit Costs and Risks. 

Long story short, it was a way to increase the overall size of blocks while still allowing all the users who don't want to upgrade to keep using Bitcoin just as they always have done.

So this Medium article is just a recap of all the history behind Segwit,but with a call to action at the bottom leading to the Magnum wallet service.Basically,it's just content marketing and nothing more.
It doesn't explain clearly(in plain stupid english) why the blockchain needs Segwit.

wow ending a sentance with 3 capitalised letters.. WOW thats like a real mass of factual information and proof.
...
mayb go do some rsearch next time. check some stats.
gotta love how bottom of the barrel the roadmap defenders get with there 'just mention 3 letters to counter argue'
or their 'wrong coz'.. persons name

but hey, atleast i didnt have to buy a hat.. seems thats the latst thme for a certain group, you need to buy a hat to show your devotion to the roadmap. first it was the UASF hat samson mow was selling now its the virtual hat that gets placed as an forum avatar

evr tried saving money and time, and instead us it towards being independant and looking into the real details

He look, Franky1 is here again spreading his FUD...

windfury. how about you go check the blockchain data rathr then reddit. you will learn more

That's very convenient for the "whoever" to do the flooding of the mempool, and blaming it on the "Core crowd".

You have no evidence for that, and all that is is another conspiracy theory. Tinfoil hats on.

revise history?
here is the most incredible lesson you may learn about bitcoin.
when it comes to bitcoin tx information. you dont learn things from reddit. you actually learn things from the blockchain. yep the immutable blockchain that history cannot be tampered with.

so if you want to use logic rather than reddit. try looking at blockchain data.

as for the whats talking about BTCC suppose to prove.
some funny facts
1. btcc was the mining pool that done alot of fee war drama and spammy crap (hostile)
2. btcc was the pools that was over promising over promoting segwit. but after activation BTCC didnt trust segwit for its own coin rewards
3. btcc was the company that couldnt pay its bills and ended up getting bought out, and dissolved
4. the employee's of btcc pretend things like bitmain are hostile. yet its the btcc ex employees that do alot of social drama propaganda

you might want to do some research. oh and you will find more evidence of btcc's demise, lack of trust of segwit and also the spam fee war stuff by checking immutable blockchain data... not reddit/twitter

but if you would rather trust reddit/twitter drama more than blockchain statistics.. thats your choice

Which mixers? Do you have a source for either claim? I can't find anything about either one.


So we should revise history to incorporate your propaganda? You don't have evidence for anything you're saying.


What is this supposed to prove?

talking about spam
it was actually the core crowd that instigated the spam. as their way of making people think silly half promises core were offering were needed.

i get astonishingly shocked that people actually follow reddit scripts more than basic logic/common sense thoughts

first of all it was proven that mixers rampd up their tx spamming. and yep certain core devs are involved with certain mixers
also pools related to bitmain. were not filling blocks with loads of 1confirm utxo respends. thus it was not bitmain spamming.
also the timing of spam attacks were (not coincidentally) obvious, just by looking at stats to me timed right when cor wanted a bip activated. where opposition would not actually gain anything by spamming at those times

but i guess reddit propaganda vs logic= reddit wins

so here is some basic logic.
reddit propaganda want to suggest anti-cor pools want to ramp up the tx fee.. because they are greedy and risk of going bankrupt

yet
1. anti-core pools happy make blocks and not care about tx fee's (empty blocks)
as oppose to
2. btcc which was very pro core, pro segwit.
3  btcc shown prefrnce to include tx's of its users that also used their other services like gambing(spaming) and partnenrs mixing
4. btcc pools shown to love adding higher than average fee's to thier collate tx lists in a block
5. btcc even got IPO'd by DCG..... are now dead and bankrupt.. which is why you will see all the twitter and rddit scripts sourcing samson mow
funny part is samson mow is butt hurt that he lost his BTCC job but is blaming others

But I'm confident that the "leader" of the "hostile miners", the Jihan Wu ruled-Bitmain is gone, and will not be attacking Bitcoin again.

He has bigger problems. Hahaha.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50332997

He's hiding in Singapore.

the misunderstanding of SegWit has always been the biggest problem that bitcoin faced during this fork!
SegWit did not stop the spam attacks and did not change the cost of such attacks. if the attackers wanted or were capable of continuing their attack they could have done it. and i assure you that in the future we will see more spam attacks against bitcoin because by design bitcoin is vulnerable to spam attacks and will always be.

I'm not so sure about this. Things are certainly better scaling-wise, but Segwit only really helps on legitimate traffic (and not all of these are Segwit transactions). Bad actors don't need to use it, so they can fill up blocks with regular transactions nearly as easily as they did in the past. Additionally, hostile miners could choose not to mine Segwit transactions to compound the issue.

In spite of all the negativity of SegWit in this thread, I can say that SegWit certainly reduced the Spam attacks on the network. It became very expensive to launch a prolonged spam attack on a SegWit network, so more and more attackers decided not to launch these attacks on the Bitcoin network, after this was introduced.

Bitcoin without SegWit was an easy target and one of the reasons why congestion and scaling was a problem during the Bitcoin fork periods. 

Then is that another example of franky1 lying, and making up his own facts again, because I don't know what's going on. Please explain it to a stupid person like me.

there has been no change to the sighash type flags for a very long time. there still are the same 4 of them as always. by the way sighash types are not "op codes" they are more like flags.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/78dae8caccd82cfbfd76557f1fb7d7557c7b5edb/src/script/interpreter.h#L21-L28