Bitcoin Forum

https://coin.dance/blocks

more miners signaling for both segwit and BU...

last 144 blocks, BU over 50%...segwit 45%.

check it.

i dont think this is a joke

That's probably only because F2Pool decided to signal both ;)

Until now it seems a April Fools', but let's see what happens in the next hours.

Edit: In China it's already April 2, and F2pool still mining blocks signalling for both options. Maybe they like to confuse us. But with Litecoin they seem to go for Segwit seriously, and they have stated that after testing Segwit there, they probably would also signal it on BTC.

This is serious nothing to be related to the April fools. F2pool continue to signal both. At some point it will completely make itself over segwit. So this time the support will be gained by segwit as the growth and price sustainability is going in a perfect track.

As mentioned, considering that it's April 1st and there's a large opportunity for people to be pranking each other, I'm going to take it with a grain of salt and see what's happening tomorrow around this time. If they are still signaling everything, I'll treat it as legitimate and that there's a very high chance that the rest of the pools will start to choose something they intend on forking to.

Not sure if this is a good thing or not yet.

There are multiple implied messages in this April fool's prank.

1. That Bitcoin is a signaling mess, but Litecoin isn't.
2. That signaling on Bitcoin is a fool's errand, because Bitcoin will never fork (https://twitter.com/f2pool_wangchun/status/846266755391512577) because in finance the tail never wags the dog meaning that Satoshi cleverly designed the game theory such that Bitcoin can't fork (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1837136.msg18408976#msg18408976).
3. That smart money should profit the most on this wisdom, so our ecosystem isn't in the control of fools. SegWit on Litecoin is now at 58% and climbing roughly 1% per hour. Activation at 75%.

But at the same time, they happen to shift Bitcoin Unlimited support above the 50% mark ...

I don't know if this has any effects on other miners, though. As far as I know, the other pools have already stated to which group they belong.

Who ever mines BU will lose all the money they spent on mining it. So that 50% threshold means nothing. Any fork of Bitcoin will be attacked ruthlessly by those who have enough resources to destroy any miners foolish enough to try.

The large miners/pools know this. The April's fool joke is on anyone who believes that signaling means anything on Bitcoin. It doesn't.

add to all that bugged coin will be used and will be on exchanges then magic will start :D from dev side attack, miners can lost not only time but even more a mined BTU with some major fail can go to 0 in NO TIME... BU is for blocking segwit.
Without segwit Bitcoin will slowly loosing dev warfare over alts like ETH and many people will move to ETH till its implode...
If ETH won't implode it will move away from BTC then miners will be realy fucked :D once  you lose market and users tasted fast cheap currency expect problems.
BTC won't go on track without any improvments on way.
Increasing/unlocking blocksize its making BTC like alt coin tweek number and go...

Let's get April Fools out of the picture first and then reconsider.

I'll only be well and truly impressed when it's 95% signalling for both of them. Come on boys, I know you can all get it done.

Hope this start to stir things up a bit and force people to make a decision... The sooner this debate is over, the better. BTW, BU has just captured >50% block in the past 24 hours- effect of April fool?

It is already down to 39% for unlimited and 30% for segwit. There is no point in having less than 95% support to any of them, one must get 95% to get activated and i dont think anyone can have it in future. This block size debate will not over for decades  ;D

You can check the nodecounter.com- BU has just captured more than 51% of the block in the last 24hr (>40% in the last 7 days). Has BU confirmed to activate at 75%?

I was originally thinking ETH, but there is a new Sheriff in town as of 48 hours ago.

Bitcoin will not move higher in price, until Litecoin catches up (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1663070.msg18421588#msg18421588).

ETH will also compete with Raiden, but LTC is where the big time action is.

Hard Fork does not need to happen and it will not happen, it's the statement of a man who topped the world's second largest lake. That's the truth, the statement was made by him, so HF can not happen, Segwit and BU both do not exist, that's just false news, it's not true. Bitcoin core works normally and does not make any changes.


LTC need a much lower percentage of BTCs (75% vs 95%), so I believe it's possible to take them, and they're really serious about it, I agree with your opinion.

seriously BU is more than 50% now . It was just around 30% yesterday shit

The signalling is going to be 100% segwit soon I'm sure. Test them out, see which is best then switch. If it's done with Litecoins it'll be done with bitcoins.

Incorrect (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1837136.msg18422191#msg18422191). <--- the entire thread should be digested

There will be no forks on Bitcoin, other than non-contentious (especially emergency) bug fixes that all relevant economic players in the system agree on wholeheartedly.

Satoshi designed the game theory of Bitcoin's political-economics such that it's protocol can't be upgraded so that it can't be manipulated.

That's a hell of a joke, thought it was April fools day and you guys were up to some games but if it's indeed passed 50% then that's massive and I hope that's the solution we've all been waiting for.

F2pool is signalling many things including segwit and BU
They seem to be testing which code is best for their system. I personally think that there is no need for a fork what we need is to upgrade and secure the bitcoin protocol then how the blocks delay should be fix.

Not on Litecoin. F2Pool is only signaling SegWit on Litecoin.


That is what ignorant fools believe (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1850030.msg18422067#msg18422067).

The signaling on Bitcoin is a diversion designed to fool you (so they can laugh at Bitard maximalists who don't comprehend that Bitcoin will prosper only if Litecoin gets SegWit). The smart people are looking at Litecoin. Nothing will happen on Bitcoin. Nothing.

 ::)

( *FALSE SENSE OF URGENCY INTENSIFIES, IS STILL FALSE* )

How do you figure out that segwit will be taking over,how do you evaluate these things as i am not sure how to verify those,what i know is litecoin has already activated segwit in its testnet in January and i am glad to see the price of litecoin moving up atleast now ,do they run the segwit in testnet before activating,since i am not aware of these i would like to know about this. 

While some of you waste your time trying to figure out what all the irrelevant noise of signaling on Bitcoin doesn't mean, the reality is something that will require re-orienting your thinking.

Bitcoin will never scale without Litecoin. No significant protocol changes will ever be made to Bitcoin. Bitcoiners need to get this nailed into their thick skulls. Read the following:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1663070.msg18424568#msg18424568

Bitcoin will achieve maximum value by enabling SegWit on Litecoin. There is no other option going forward. The above linked post explains why in detail.

Bitcoin was designed by Satoshi such that the vested interests would be that no one can change the protocol. No change is ever coming to Bitcoin. The sooner you realize this, the sooner we can get unstuck from the mud. Those of you who continue to facilitate this illusion of change coming to Bitcoin's protocol are obstacles in the way of progress.

How would this be possible without some type of protocol change that allows stuff such as atomic swaps? Without that the chains are stuck as separate entities.

You apparently don't understand finance. The tail doesn't wag the dog.

You guys don't read all of my posts, thus you force me to post copies of my posts all over the place:


I explained why days ago. But y'all don't pay attention.

Any way, I don't mind providing you the link above.

Well, at some point, they need to leave the middle ground and make a decision. I think it will be better if this will made as soon as possible. People are getting tired because of these and it will not be healthy if they will drag this for so long. Or maybe, they are just playing with both BU and SegWit while at the end of the day, nothing will happen?  ::)

I've awoken from my inactivity period to take my part in this pursuit.
Although economically we all understand BU has and never shall have any standing, a fork is incumbent and it's outcome is still obscure.
Core hasn't been keeping the system updated, and their refusal of further updates and generally increasing the Block size is alarming and drives support away. The bitcoin unlimited bound failure doesn't lift any responsibility away from the core devs...
That said, I am here to pledge my computing power and spare time onto the complete disruption of the forked blockchain, transaction, nodes and miners. I will play my role, when the day comes I expect others to join me.

There will never be a middle ground.

Correct, nothing will ever change on Bitcoin. But Litecoin...


Entirely incorrect.

Bitcoin will never be updated and doesn't need to be updated.

Please read my posts in this thread and click the links do some extensive reading and thinking. You will learn about the absolute importance of Litecoin for Bitcoin's future.

Until you re-orient your thinking to the reality, you will be hopelessly confused.

No disrespect intended. I am trying to guide you to the truth, but you have to be willing to click and read a lot.


Waiting to be used on Litecoin. Never will be activated on Bitcoin. Satoshi designed the game theory of Bitcoin so that the vested interests would never be able to agree on modifying the protocol. Otherwise Bitcoin would have no value as power broker money. Please learn that the tail does not wag the dog in finance. Go read please.

There's a very steady stream of updates from Core. They've also provided the protocol change that they think is best. It's sitting there waiting to be used right now.

The scaling issue shouldn't be outright dismissed. I'm basing this conclusion on the huge amount of comment's I've read regarding this ordeal, which I know aren't the best resource but offer a wide scope and some times decently stated points. Furthermore what convinced me the most among my research is this video: https://youtu.be/rZi86_ovB3Y which basically outlines the fork as a mere attack on the network rather than an economically lucrative move.
As I see it, the more shaken the community and the market, the more their (The malignant Illuminaty's) goal is achieved.

I do comprehend to the extent I can, that forks comport a variety of issues and are technically, economically and socially inconceivable. Nevertheless the whole argument of "Satoshi's design" doesn't quite stand when stood in opposition of possible government or corporate interests. An investment in view of destabilizing the concept rather than anything else.

Just to add: I admit my superficial knowledge and ignorance of in depth implications. It will be my pleasure to do some more research especially in your quality posts.

My response to Anonymints claim where he says bitcoin is money and I say it's only a currency:

@r0ach was already referred to the relevant work of Nash and he is quite proficient at ignoring the reality:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1837136.msg18394149#msg18394149
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1837136.msg18422543#msg18422543

Because @r0ach is an obstinate fool who wears a tinfoil hat blindfold that prevents him from comprehending (and perhaps even reading) what Nash wrote, especially what Nash wrote about what makes gold valuable and why it is not as ideal as Bitcoin.

fiat paper funny money isn't a real commoddity either but yet the world calls it money

I wonder if BU is aware of the legal implications of a hard fork, forcing a community of investors to accept an incompatible change to the technology they invested in.

If BU succeeds, every Bitcoin holder can probably sue them for their losses.

so this was all a big joke by f2pool..haha very funny, more stalling, great...

cool story.

can i sue Blockstream if Bitcoin loses marketshare to Ethereum
due to the high fees they are promoting?

No, they are not changing the commodity, and they are open about what they are doing.

From what I hear, there could be legal implications to pool mining as well

changing bitcoin from p2p cash as envisioned by Satoshi into a settlement network, nah thats not changing it at all

This is not how Bitcoin works, miners are free to mine whatever they want, investors who just invested and holding can only choose when to sell, so no change for them. If it worked as you claim, Core could be sued for crippling the Bitcoin because many who own Bitcoin cannot use it anymore.

Just to side-step here, I am of the opinion this form has gone a bit nutty on this whole fork partisanship and ideology.

Pledging to commit basically crimes and exploits is a tad extreme for a mere cryptocurrency. Like most early adopters I feel my allegiance going towards this new concept, the anonymous decentralized peer to peer market and economy.

The meme has sprouted and the revolution begun. Advocating for the founder's "view" is almost laughable, satoshi would have never thought of such widespread adoption and implying so is absurd.
Conservationism in revolution is an oxymoron. As much as you can be emotionally attached with whatever made early adopters millionaires and gave you a platform for incredible and astonishing innovation, the technology is bound to become obsolete and if you don't simply move on you're in fault...

Please all bear in mind I am not stating this is the end, or idk giving technical opinions in evaluation of the bitcoin's intrinsic value, forks or whichever.
All I'm stating that as sacks of silver carried on your belt, bitcoin too will one day fade away in favor of something more efficient.

There are implications. If I invest in Euro, the fund manager can not convert the fund to Yen. That is not what I invested in, and that is not what I was promised in return for my investment.

If you hold private keys, nothing changes. If you have Bitcoin IOU on exchange and the exchange dont handle the situation well, you can try to sue the exchange. There is nothing like promised return for your investment in Bitcoin though, prices going up or down based on supply and demand only.

Both of you have what you think are good intentions, but you fail to recognize the most salient fact.

When you two are blind to the most salient fact, then all your other conclusions are unfortunately ignorant nonsense. Not be disrespectful, but you really need to pay attention.

If anyone can mutate the main blockchain, then the money is no longer immune to manipulation. And thus it is no longer a stable metric which achieves the absolutely critical goals of Nash's ideal money which is what gives crypto-currency is reason to exist in the first place.

I know this is very difficult for you to wrap your mind around, because you think adoption = success, but you are mathematically incorrect.

Read again very carefully the two posts I linked in the quote below. Click the links within those two post and click the links in the posts that you clicked to. In other words make sure you understand all the detailed reasoning.

In finance, the tail doesn't wag the dog, rather in finance it is always the stable value of the reserves which determines whether person who is providing the finance has an accurate mathematical estimate of the quality of the reserves and thus whether they are maximizing their ROI. And in finance, the most valuable set of reserves dominates any system with less value. Until you understand finance and understand how MPEx made his million "Buttcoins" by simply providing liquidity to the speculation power brokers, then you understand nothing about money.

So if you mutate Bitcoin, you remove all its value. Period. That is why the whales will never allow you to do so, and @dinofelis and I analyzed in great detail how small blocks enables the whales to destroy any miners who attempt to fork Bitcoin (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1837136.msg18343958#msg18343958). You can't mutate Bitcoin, because the tail doesn't wag the dog. Also small blocks keeps the riff-raff out of Bitcoin, because democracy is a manipulation given that the cost of voting (i.e. politics) is not free (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1837136.msg18408053#msg18408053). By allowing users to vote on Bitcoin's changes, it is the same as turning Bitcoin into a fiat system that will be manipulated into another hell. We've been there done that all over the world and totally fucked up our world with it. We can instead put that clusterfuck into Litecoin and then the discipline can be maintained with Bitcoin's financial dominance of Litecoin.

There is a way to get scaling and that is to mutate Litecoin. And approximating 9/10th of the value created by scaling Litecoin will end up back in Bitcoin (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1851296.msg18425425#msg18425425) (after Litecoin's price rises back to $100 since it is so highly undervalued given it is the only option for moving forward (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1663070.msg18421588#msg18421588)). So there is absolutely no justifiable reason for your idiocy and squabbling. It is pure ignorance, that's all. Please rectify your ignorance so we can move forward.

---