Bitcoin Forum

I also hear a news that after segwit bitcoin will be 2 Coin, that is btc and bto. Is it true?

No bad comment,  Just want to know from my curiosity

No this is not because of segwit but because of possible hardfork by some miners who are against segwit and they want to come up with their own coin.

It will be BTC and BCC (bitcoincash) or more than these two on august 1st.

If you store your bitcoin in addresses whose private key is with you before blockchain snap shot on august 1 than you will get coins in all of these possible chains/coins after split.

I wanna know too. I really cant understand a thing on the sites I've been after reading articles about this segwit or split or whatsoever. Please inform us, newbies here in this forum. Thank you.

bcc?

Ow nice.

Thanks all for your personal opinion.

I'm not too worried BTC gets split, being 2 or 3. BTC remains strong because BTC is king. Relax and see what happens next. BTC

I do trust BTC more than the rest of the alts. But a hardfork coming our way is not a good thing. Although a hardfork is always a possibility in any coin. This is not just the first time BTC is threatened with a hardfork. I think this time, it might happen finally. The price will be affected for sure after the hardfork happens.

Will not segwit end on 1st of august? I do not understand the difference segwit with hardfork, there is someone who will explain me

In a very compact nutshell:
Segwit is a protocol that removes what the creators consider as un-needed data from the transactions, which in turn frees up space.
A hard fork is essentially people not agreeing and going there separate ways, so up until the date of the hardfork they are identical, however after that date they will have their own unique data and transactions.

When a hardware wallet signs a transaction, it can easily verify the total amount being spent, but can only safely determine the fee by having a full copy of all the input transactions being spent, and must hash each of those to ensure it is not being fed false data. Since individual transactions can be up to 1MB in size, this is not necessarily a cheap operation, even if the transaction being signed is itself quite small.

Segwit resolves this by explicitly hashing the input value. This means that a hardware wallet can simply be given the transaction hash, index, and value (and told what public key was used), and can safely sign the spending transaction, no matter how large or complicated the transaction being spent was.
Segwit improves the situation here by making signature data, which does not impact the UTXO set size, cost 75% less than data that does impact the UTXO set size. This is expected to encourage users to favour the use of transactions that minimise impact on the UTXO set in order to minimise fees, and to encourage developers to design smart contracts and new features in a way that will also minimise the impact on the UTXO set,Because segwit is a soft-forking change and does not increase the base blocksize, the worst case growth rate of the UTXO set stays the same.