Bitcoin Forum

Bitfinex have stated that for practical reasons S2X won't be Bitcoin - https://www.bitfinex.com/posts/223

Coinbase have acknowledged there'll be two chains if it happens and it may take several days to access them - https://blog.coinbase.com/update-on-the-bitcoin-segwit2x-hard-fork-69426f14bc85

These are two of the biggest players and their actions have confirmed that the NYA thing will do exactly what it aimed to avoid.

I can see the Chinese miners being mindless enough to crack on until they realise it's worthless, but I don't see why anyone else is going to bother any more.

Is S2X in the bag or will it be yet another toothless boogeyman?

I'm afraid it's a bit early to predict the demise of S2X as there are still many industry proponents left. While I doubt that S2X will come out on top, there will likely be a lot of chaos during and after the fork, which might actually give S2X a fighting chance.

In the end miners will undoubtedly follow the money, which means it will largely depend on which fork manages to gain larger monetary support. However I'm not sure whether this time the result will be as clear cut as with BCH.

That is presupposing there actually will be any type of fork. The closer it gets the more ludicrous and unwanted an idea it appears to everyone, both signees and opponents. Its initial intentions are already comprehensive toast.

S2X is held together by shoestrings and a little hope. With all the practices they're already doing to stay afloat (blending in with Core nodes because of the lack of S2X nodes) I really don't see much going for it. Miners can afford a loss to fake preference towards S2X for a little while, but the userbase just won't be there for it. It's a project that was doomed from the beginning. For most of us it'll be free shitcoin like BCH was.

let's take closer look, though. bitfinex said this:


here's what coinbase said, leaving their options open:


so, we have an acknowledgment that there will be two blockchains. this is clear enough, and indeed, it's not what the NYA signatories set out to do. at the same time, no one seems to be backing down. in fact, clearly, coinbase is planning to move forward with the fork, and plans to offer full deposit/withdrawal support for both coins within a few days of the fork (compare to ETC or BCH).

no company of note has left the NYA. and all the miners are still signalling -- even f2pool. roger ver has gone off the deep end and is taking the opposite approach to bitfinex, saying that segwit2x will be the default bitcoin blockchain and BTC ticker.

in other words, i'd say that the fork is still likely to happen at this point. i think right out the gate and in the long term, there will be more demand for the legacy chain. however, it will be interesting to see what happens if 90% + (or even a simple majority) of the hashpower does indeed back the fork.

my advice is to trade wisely and do not make this ideological. the safest bet is to hodl both coins or to sell only a small portion of either. the best opportunity will probably play off hash power distribution. i believe the futures market is currently pricing in a fair chance that the fork doesn't happen, and that the miner support behind segwit2x will significantly drop as we approach the fork. i suspect the market may be wrong about both points, though.

bitmain is the wild card -- they could unleash a torrent of hashpower at fork time and they have an interest in the legacy chain being the weaker chain. don't underestimate that.

I think more than anything, the node spoofing measure was an emotional response to the 0.15 update auto-disconnect feature. The BTC1 guys know (or should know) that they need preferential peering to prevent network disruption when the fork occurs.

There's no precedent here, so I'm not too sure what will happen. Bitcoin Cash wasn't backed by services/ecosystem, so it doesn't provide any insight. What will happen if Segwit2x becomes the strongest chain regarding proof-of-work? That could have an effect on the market, and I'm not sure people are considering the magnitude of it. Bitcoin has always eclipsed all other cryptocurrencies in hash power. What happens if Segwit2x overtakes it in hash power and is also backed by most major Bitcoin services?

I kind of wonder how much depends on the ticker symbol. Bitcoin = BTC right? Not BCC or BCH or BTC1 or whatever else.

Bitcoin is BTC. Who decides this? Top exchanges. That is a lot of power resting there.

Exchanges have a lot of power. Most heavy miners send their coins straight to the exchanges so they ultimately end up being puppets to the exchanges. If an exchange decides to go one way then they alter their miners to ensure that they are making the most profit at the end of the day.
In a way it's kind of ironic/hypercritical. Bitcoin is meant to be decentralised but the lack of trust and power given to small exchanges means that the bigger exchanges are the ones calling the shots at the end of the day  :-\

Difficulty would simply drop on the main BTC chain and blocks would come at a regular rate of 1/10mins eventually with any sort of network disruption. With no userbase, and a price trend that will probably be downwards over an extended period of time, there is no reason for anyone to use S2X if the BCH situation is repeated. And for now, signalling is only intent. There is no guarantee that the signallers will switch to S2X.

I think the bigger question is, when are we going to see an end to attempts to support all these constant bogus forks?

I know it's putting unneeded stress on their businesses. Perhaps if companies like Coinbase and the exchanges get tired of having to deal with all the forking and providing means to the coins for their customers, they will finally put an end to all this nonsense by stating "Any and all future forks that are contentiously launched, we are flat out just not going to support. Period."

I'm guessing it'll only take another round of this shit or maybe two before they finally throw in the towel.

What wallet will you use to park your bitcoin durring the fork so you get both after the fork?

I really hope the S2x (BT2) price holds on finex: https://www.bitfinex.com/stats (https://www.bitfinex.com/stats)
1k per bitcoin is not so bad for an airdrop! Too crappy for miners to mine it, good for me to buy 0.25 BTC!

I guess short- to mid-term B2X is going to be the last meaningfully supported fork for a while, since forking off Bitcoin is already getting stale.

BCH caught most exchanges off guard. Bitcoin Gold seems to get mostly ignored. B2X has been more or less pre-scheduled for quite a while now, so not supporting it at all seems like a risky move from a PR point of view.



I personally use a Trezor. But in the end any desktop / hardware / mobile wallet should do.

I believe you'd be ok to use a mobile wallet even and retain control of both blockchains should there be a fork of any significance.  Last time Mycelium wallet was recommended and seems easy enough to control.

Sounds like Bitfinex is smart enough to account for all scenarios there, good to know because liquidity relies on able hands to not drop the ball in such times

These three scenarios are possible:

• Segwit2x get almost full consensus and executes perfectly by shifting to Segwit2x activated blockchain
• Segwit2x doesn't get the majority consensus and there is chain split with people supporting Segwit2x shifting to forked chain.
• Segwit2x fails miserably and there is no fork.

First and third scenarios can save the price. But second scenario can cause a serious disruption and we might see a chain splitting causing two variants of Bitcoin and there will be a division of price as well. Right now, concluding anything would be wrong.

CAUTION: Serious drama ahead!

Dead before arrival

more forks
more chains
more splits
more markets
more trades
more fees
=> more profit

why would these exchanges want anything else?! it is their dream come true.
for example bitcoin cash which doesn't even have any transactions on its blockchain anymore, has the 3rd highest trading volume of past 24 hours according to coinmarketcap.com
not to mention this was a lot bigger when it started and when it got pumped hard the first time (18-21 Aug).

No, we have an acknowledgment that there may be two blockchains.

Coinbase is just a service it can't move forward or backwards or stay the same with any fork!
they will do whatever is best for their business. and the difference between ETC/BCH with 2x is that 2x has a lot of hashrate (so far) supporting it.

technically nobody is signalling anything :)

hah. this was priceless.
if it is really true i would love a reference. because Roger was calling bitcoin cash "default bitcoin" now it is SegWit2x! LOL

i'm afraid 90%+ is equal to 100% because that 10% can not work on the previous chain with the difficulty and it may need a hard fork of its own and things will get very messy.

S2X will be another altcoin like Bitcoin Unlimited/cash or what ever. It will be speculated and then dumped like BCH, nothing else

it is never an easy thing to say. and it certainly is not determined by one person or group. a lot of different things should come to play to determine what we all call "BTC" or "Bitcoin".

hashrate and security of the chain for starters. whether we like it or not, miners are strongest when it comes to these things.
then it is nodes that are shaping the network.
then the merchants, businesses, different services,...
and finally the smallest is the social media "noise". :)

what all of these call bitcoin will become bitcoin.
if a "split" happens among these, things will go terrible wrong. lets say half and half or 60-40, everything will get complicated.

The problem for exchanges -- and particularly regulated/licensed exchanges like Coinbase and Bitflyer -- is that they have legal concerns with regard to custody. If they start giving people this new altcoin in place of bitcoins held in custody, for example, they would probably face a lot of lawsuits.

I don't think they can flex their muscles and simply decide which coin is "Bitcoin." That's up to the market. The safest thing for exchanges to do IMO is let the incumbent retain the title/ticker until the market has clearly decided otherwise.

I´m not sure where you got this information.

Most miners sell OTC and not on exchanges. OTC has obvious advantages if you sell large amounts - as the miners do - because
you avoid slippage and don´t scare the market by big sells. Besides, many miners hold certain parts of their mining rewards for
the long term instead of sending them "straight to the exchanges", because they can increase their profit substantially if the BTC price rises.

Roger and Jeff are sneaky snakes. What about those poor people buying his Bcash shit coin.

People can lose there money with 2x and they're promoting it...scumbags.

https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/916438756382535691
https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/issues/1835#issuecomment-334869248

i agree with parts of what you said not all of it. for instance you are correct that exchanges have a lot of power but this power has been diminishing as the total trade volume spreads among multiple exchanges instead of all of it being in one place.

and as other comment said above me, miners don't send their coins to exchanges. they do it off the market if they are big mining farms and smaller miners get paid small amounts that doesn't matter where they sell.

and finally bitcoin is decentralized not bitcoin price. it is a free market, the price will eventually be set based on supply and demand even if the short term is looking weird.

Thanks for referencing it! Unbelievable what these guys are doing to bitcoin. Next November is possibly the worst of times for Bitcoin history and I hope that is going to be the endgame for those people. I've seen many things since I first heard of Bitcoin in 2010 but this is too much

Haha, as I predicted it is already starting.  ;D

https://novaexchange.com/news/

There wont be an end until the central-bank/VC-funded DCG-portfolio of companies meet their demise. All the evil anti-bitcoin propoganda/agendas stem from their businesses that seem great at face value and first-glance, however underneath lays an operation to undermine bitcoin. (PSA: do not support Coinbase, Kraken, Coindesk, Bitpay).

Unless 2X adds some kind of EDA like bcash or the price on the futures rise significantly or the future markets are wrong, 2X is DOA.

You cant dump it without replay protection, that is a fact.

No it's not. Exchanges and wallet/service providers are actually tasked with implementing their own native replay protection. One method is to use coinbase tainting to make transactions invalid on the original chain. Another method involves using locktime and RBF.

Poloniex was one of the first to show that this was possible. When the ETH/ETC split occurred, there was no replay protection. They began splitting ETH deposits into ETH/ETC after the fork and crediting it to user accounts. It's totally possible as long as exchanges are methodical about it.

Some users will definitely lose money trying to split their coins, though.