Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[jbreher]

but nodes will NOT reject "non-segwit blocks" they will accept such blocks, no?
nodes will accept that block, and later realize that miners didnt build ontop of that block for a reason that node does not understand.

Doesn't matter. Miners won't build atop blocks they know will be orphaned by other miners. The chain that gets extended will be the one with segwit blocks. When the segwit chain exceed the size of the non-segwit chain (i.e., next block interval), the nodes that accepted the earlier non-segwit block will see the longer chain is the segwit chain, and switch over to that. With nary a whimper.
[doublepost=1500494704][/doublepost]

i guess one way to split the coins will be to pre-send coin to an exchange that will recognize and credit its users with "BCC".

Yes. There are several ways to split the coins. But who is making it drop-dead easy? Anyone?

I picture a service that provides a user with a t=0- address to pay to, splitting it into a t=0+ BTC address and a t=0+ BCC address provided by the user, skimming 1% or so off the top. Could be helpful and lucrative.

so far i haven't seen anything from any exchange about BCC other then coinbase, explicitly stating that they will rob there users of their BCC

OKCoin and ViaBTC are doing such. Anyone here ever dealt with these? How about for a US customer?

 

[adamstgbit]

@adamstgbit BIP91 is segwit without the 2X part, I'm guessing 34% of miners signaling for it have no clue and think they are cooperating with the NYA.

It's tweets like this from BTCC that lead me to believe some have no shame in pulling out.

ic...
one would think that signaling NYA means you'll run the software and see the NYA to the end. FFS, why make an agreement at all.

its hard to imagine how a big minning pool can commit to an agreement and not see bailing out half way threw as anything other then breaking the agreement.

seems as tho Core's values are rubbing off on miners. if Core dose it, it must be OK.
[doublepost=1500495288][/doublepost]

Doesn't matter. Miners won't build atop blocks they know will be orphaned by other miners. The chain that gets extended will be the one with segwit blocks. When the segwit chain exceed the size of the non-segwit chain (i.e., next block interval), the nodes that accepted the earlier non-segwit block will see the longer chain is the segwit chain, and switch over to that. With nary a whimper.

That's what i'm saying

1 min a node thinks a block is valid the next minute, "the segwit chain exceed the size of the non-segwit chain (i.e., next block interval), the nodes that accepted the earlier non-segwit block will see the longer chain is the segwit chain, and switch over to that."

not saying its going to break things, but might cause some confusion.

and in this case, this consent " ops i accept a block that miners refused to build on " will happen to every single non-minning-node on the network.

 

[AdrianX]

Well 90% are signaling for the NYA on bit4, but the concern is WTF are 77.1% of them doing signaling for segwit that triggers the 80% activation threshold without activating the NYA commitment to do the 2X fork!

 

[adamstgbit]

bit4 bit1 bip141 segwit segwit2x segwit2xminus2x

lol i dont even.....

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

I don't understand why Garzik agreed to make SW2X activation compatible to core. That's just retarded.

Bobby Lee's statement should be enough of a casus belli for Bitmain et al. to withdraw their SW2X support and only support a HF+SW at same block height activation mechanism.

This is horseshit.

 

[Dusty]

I totally agree: the only way to make segwit2x successful is to activate segwit with an hard fork raising the block size.

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

Oh and all that while Core was on it's way to make a huge mistake.

UASF was core's self destruction, never disturb your enemy when he is making a mistake. The big block miners sadly did disturb them.
I was rather optimistic about SW2X at first but now it looks like Jihan didn't understand what happened.

edit: I heard BU is creating an Bitcoin ABC compatible version, would be great if I could continue using the BU ppa and use the fork by setting a flag.

 

[AdrianX]

bit4 bit1 bip141 segwit segwit2x segwit2xminus2x

lol i dont even.....

LOL, it just got more complicated. here are the possibilities. Screw Coinbase if they are not going to keep Digital Cash for themselves.

 

[Bloomie]

https://forums.prohashing.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1687

Had to post the link to this nice article by ProHashing.

I tried searching for his username since I remember he was on here, but could not find it any longer.

It's @Steve Sokolowski

 

[adamstgbit]

I don't understand why Garzik agreed to make SW2X activation compatible to core.

doing so gave his proposal 90% acceptance overnight.
smashing success for Garzik, if you ask me.

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

Thanks for all these valuable posts!

Here's my take on SegWit2x: It was a political solution since the beginning. But it already failed politically. They just didn't stand it. Core made it a hell for them, just to activate SegWit. Which actually is, what Core cries for, but failed to get activated.

First they fall in fear of ridiculous UASF and hurry, to not let it happen. So Core can say, the UASF would have activated SegWit anyway, which makes SegWit2x nothing but a distraction. They missed the chance to make Core aware, they need them to get SegWit.

Second they didn't had the balls to say, whoever wants to use SegWit has to use our BIP. So they swallowed BIP91, which goes a complicated way to make every Core node instantly SegWit-compatible, a way which is essentially the same as the UASF. They missed the chance to make people use their software, when they want to use SegWit.

Third Maxwell trumps up with his failure scenario of BIP91, which was instantly double-debunked by TomTomTom, but Jeff Garzik charmes Greg and confirms the bug. They missed the chance to get out of this without saying thank you to Greg.

And all this, just to do Core the favor to activate that piece of software, Core terribly wants, but was totally unable to get activated? What do you think will happen when SegWit2x tries to get something done, Core terribly wants to NOT happen ...? No way this gets through in three month.

However, I think Jihan Wu and Stephen Pair are not willing to let Core go through with this. When Bitcoin Cash successfully forkes off, it could become a trump against Core, or, better, the new Bitcoin.

Everybody already has Bitcoin Cash. If the network is congested - it will be - and you can use the Bitcoins, you already have, as Bitcoin Cash, to pay or transact, it could slowly flipp.

The work of @freetrader deserves a lot of praise for enabling a safe chain-split with a hardfork. Thank you!

I'm particularly disappointed with Coinbase. BitcoinABC makes it so easy and safe to split the coins. That they refuse to do so, could cost customers millions, if not billions in the long term. I didn't notice that they have become hostile too.

 

[lunar]

https://nchain.com/en/media/nchain-announces-technical-support-bitcoin-unlimited-client-software/

London, United Kingdom – 19 July 2017 – Blockchain research and development pioneer nChain announces it will provide technical support to build on Bitcoin Unlimited’s client software, and explore further collaboration to help the bitcoin network scale.

 

[adamstgbit]

in 6 months... onces its all said, done, and long over.
i'll post " how do i pay you 2.5$ for a coffee using lighting"
and then.... price of bitcoin will hit a new ALL TIME LOW.

 

[AdrianX]

https://nchain.com/en/media/nchain-announces-technical-support-bitcoin-unlimited-client-software/

congratulations this is as bullish as hell, and a speshal thanks to @solex & @theZerg who I believe met with nChain after the the future of bitcoin conference.

 

[solex]

Information for BU members about the nChain announcement.

We have recently been in discussions with nChain about an initiative they have to create a Bitcoin enterprise company which will leverage Bitcoin for commercial solutions. They wish to use Bitcoin Unlimited's codebase as this version permits massive onchain scaling. Their viewpoint on the technical and economic aspects of Bitcoin are highly aligned with the viewpoints promulgated in this thread and other fora such as r/btc, i.e.that scaling should only be constrained by physical limits, that a growing user-base is the best way to grow node counts and ensure decentralization, that miners are custodians of the network, not adversaries, that all participants have an economic interest to collaborate, that fees should be wholly market-driven and not subject to the cancer of quota-rent.

The nChain Bitcoin enterprise will be analogous to RedHat and BU's software analogous to Linux in this future scenario. Hence, BU's software will benefit from testing, QA, technical feedback, and market-driven development.

There is no change suggested to the BU organization, and any financial expenditure on projects, and functional changes to the BU client will remain subject to membership approval or veto by BUIP.

There is a 2-day workshop in Vancouver, BC, this month, and we can provide more information about first steps after that event.

 

[adamstgbit]

live segwit dogma

 

[AdrianX]

FYI and posterity

 

[adamstgbit]

i asked karken if they would open a market for BTC/bitcoincash, when the fork comes, and solicited more info about how they would handle a fork.

they replied

Hi Adam,

I understand you wish to know Kraken's point of view on a possible chain split and Bitcoin's course of development in general. Unfortunately, at this point I cannot disclose any such information. The best way to get official announcements and up-to-date details regarding any changes or updates on Kraken is to read our e-mail newsletters, blog (available at http://blog.kraken.com ) and follow us on social media.

If there is anything else I can assist you with, please let me know. Have a great day!

Best regards,

Stu
Kraken Client Engagement

hopefully they make there position clear Soon!

 

[AdrianX]

@adamstgbit when you listen to this (not a fan of Trace - he has lost the plot) but this interview is great.

Kraken is all about alt coins user choice my gut is they will allow trading of BitcoinCash.

Kraken CEO Jesse Powell On Scalability | Bitcoin Knowledge Podcast – Learn about blockchain and fintech

 

[Dusty]

smashing success for Garzik, if you ask me.

Maybe, but for sure it's a smashing success for segwit, and a failure for 2MB fork. I don't care about the former, I care about the latter.

BitcoinABC makes it so easy and safe to split the coins

Can you please explain/point me to the way that's done? Thanks!