Bitcoin Forum

I thought once SeqWit nodes above 75% , it will be activated. Is this true?

https://coin.dance/nodes

Core has over 80 percent. BU is delaying code release ...

You got it wrong, we should watch the hashpower and not the nodes: https://coin.dance/blocks

SegWit need 95% signalling while BU is the one that needs 75%.

Why not a even play field? I don't mind lower threshhold to 55 percent and get it over with.
Although I may prefer core, but I am just a tiny fish

SegWit activation is designed on amount of hashpower not the numbers of fullnodes, I think the was based on the assumption that the miners would be reasonable but they out their selfish interest over the general interest this is what you get in a near monolise market

That's already slightly wrong, BU have already stated they will use 51% if they feel they need to.


And Segwit activation is probably going to change too. It will just activate, period, between October 1st and November 15th, according to the new BIP149

October 1st is a long time away. Hope we don't have a fork before that just because people are impatient. BU activation at 51% could happen because of some rogue miner who produces a block of over 1 MB, I don't think that is BU's strategy.

dynamic implementations know 51% is the out right minimum hashrate. but they know the node count more is crucial. thats why they are waiting for consensus and not rocking the boat with deadlines/threats. only core have mentioned the ban hammer tools of blackmail. (lowered bip9 bans threashold, UASF and mining algo changes) no one else.

dynamic implementations have just plodded along waiting to let the community naturally decide. no harm no foul no desire to split away from the peer network, or they would have done so over the last 2 years.

segwit bypassed the peer node count (for many centralist TIER reasons) intentionally giving the pools the only vote, st deadlines, made threats.

segwit should be asking the 74% no/abstainers why they are saying no/abstaining and tweak segwit to accommodate the wishes of the majority. not get all emotional with blaming pools for not kissing ass or segwit threaten the pools.

---

it is funny how segwit said they went soft to avoid a 5% node splitting risk as their excuse for not giving nodes a vote in their TIER network concept.

but now willing to throw the blackmailing ban hammers and mining change algos guaranteeing a worse split if the pools dont kiss segwit ass..

for entertainment purposes only: (enjoy the chuckle)
with all the ban hammer talk, the lightning and thunder talk, the wanting to be bitcoin gods. they should rename themselves THOR and call their sidechains, the 'byfrost' because they seem to be playing by some script.. so they might aswell use a script that already exists

This date is sane and wise

Within half a year many things could happen, new bugs can be found (and hopefully fixed), so there shouldn't be hurry with such things. Personally, I am in favor of the fastest BU activation (and consequently, Bitcoin hard fork) , since the sooner we get done with this project and get rid of of the dudes behind it, the better it will be for Bitcoin in the long run. They pretend to be superior? No problem with that, let them plough their own furrow and prove in practice that they really are what they claim to be

I do hope that segwit can bring good results to the bitcoin network. But I am worried that since BU will be separated from BTC will the hashpower of segwit miners be enough to solve the problems such as slow confirmation of transaction and high miner fees. But as I have heard segwit will be implementing a huge miner fees which is not good for the community.

You worries are mostly unfounded

In regard to both slow confirmation times and higher transaction fees, more specifically. First, if we assume that there are too many transactions for the given size of the Bitcoin block, then, with the split coming about, we should inevitably assume that this number should go down since BU will make a dent in the number of transactions coming from folks that chose to leave Bitcoin Core. Further, the fees are determined by the competition between users but since the number of these users should decline (because some of them are going to switch to BU), the fees should go down too. But all this will make sense only if BU takes off for real, which still remains to be seen, though

BUcoin can never take off because:

1) It has buggy software and incompetent devs that lech off Core devs and still manage to fuck up with the 0.0001% of code they add

2) It's based on a flawed concept (Emergent Consensus) that doesn't work as peer-reviewed by every expert on the field

3) It has no node support and people will not switch because people don't gamble their money with buggy software with a team that may release closed source patches.

Segwit needs 95%, and BU needs 75%, that's accurate information. However, it can vary according to the decisions of the heads. In the future, many things can happen, we can not affirm anything, however, we have the right to make predictions, we should analyze the situation thoroughly and give the sound decision. Because it has a huge effect on what you have. At present, bitcoin is gradually weakening, its value has dropped below $ 1000. This is really bad, BU decision is an unwise option.

No it can't. Miner's that signal BU support would currently reject it as invalid.

They designed it with some good features. They signal support of larger blocks but they don't accept larger blocks until either manually turned on or X of last Y blocks are bigger.

Bitcoin can continue to slowly spiral down

And personally, I wouldn't mind if it went down as low as 700 dollars per coin (not without minor rebounds, of course). However low it might flash crash though, there will be more and more long holders accumulating, so there should necessarily come a time when they start to prevail and there will be no more bitcoins to drive prices down any further. Besides that, if the BU folks finally fork away, they will render Bitcoin a great service at the end of the day since this fork will reveal everything by taking the varnish off of it. With BU folks limping on their own, there will more room for choice and fruitful development of Bitcoin itself

proof that if a miner tries blocks over 1mb, WITHOUT consensus... its rejected and trashed in 3 seconds

so that debunks everyones scripted FUD rhetoric of how dynamic miners have control..
3 seconds gone.

P.S dynamic implementations need NODE AND POOL CONSENSUS.
segwit are the ones that bypassed NODE consensus. and segwits Bip9 can drop its pool thrshold below 95%. oh and core can UASF ban hammer and change mining algo to get that threshold even lower..
its core with the deadlines and threats..

all while other open and diverse implementations have just run for the last 2 years with no deadlines no ACTUAL threats and just ltting the community have a free open choice.. take it or leave it

No wonder BU has so many supporters, with this attitude even SegWit supporters will hate you.

???

Thanks for all friends pointing out my error. I guess I am just a casual btc user with tiny amount