Bitcoin Forum

All the resources I've referred to are pointless. Can anyone give a brief difference?

Segwit is alive, and S2X is dead.

Segwit2x was supposed to be a hardfork after segwit was implemented in Bitcoin. It would double the block size and bring down fees immediately after it was activated, but it failed due to low user support and lack of Bitcoin Core team support.

Both dead.

Neither had much support, hence both dead.

Segwit2x is running and X2B price today is $125
https://yobit.net/en/trade/B2X/USD

Bitcoin had a bit of an heart attack today and fell under $10,000 but it's still alive also
and just like B2X you can still buy BTC on the exchanges

You can buy Dogecoin. It's dead though.

Thanks, I'll check it out.

I think you mean B2X that is being sold as Segwit2x is dead but it's trading therefore is not dead but lets go back in time
and see if we can agree

Segwit was proposed, miners didn't like it so it got stopped and they were going to fork but didn't
Segwit2x from Bitcoin dev team was proposed, no one liked it so it got robbed by a new team and they forked (B2X)
Original Segwit then because excepted and has now been activated on 95% of nodes
Some one off wallets will now work with Segwit
No major wallet like Exodus has been converted to work with it
Segwit/BTC coins are not a sub-type of Bitcoins, it's one and the same thing

What seems strange is that Segwit changes the format of the block so did we have a
switch over date and if so on what date and which block because it seems to me that
hidden away we might now be operating with two types of blocks within the same
block-chain because they cannot be mixed on old nodes.

Segwit seems to require a new address format so will need changes to both wallets and exchanges
to work but surly old nodes cannot process any blocks if they contain Segwit addresses or read/write
"extended block" needed for segwit to work

See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3T-WTZMbNo

Maybe Segwit transactions are cached until a Segwit node can create a full block or something
since very few people are using it yet and the conversion needed for the address should be free
since it's not our cock-up that has lead to the move

Its very simple really. Segwit2x its bitcoin network with segwit protocol and blocksize 2mb, when segwit is meaning only segwit protocol with block size 1mb.
Segwit protocol gives increasing transaction numbers to 50% with excluding transaction sign from block's of bitcoin network to side store

I came across something like your saying here and it sounded like the signatures got removed from the block
and written to a separate file (blk001.dat, ext001.dat) and this put the equivalent block size using Segwit at
just under 4mb but then he went on to talk about how they calculate what size a byte is when coming up
with this 1mb block number which seemed like cooking the books to me.

See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzBAG2Jp4bg at about 2:11

Maybe if you explain why a conversion of a old transaction cannot be converted to a new segwit type transaction
in the nodes then the penny will drop for me. I think Segwit uses a new type of address but much of what hanging
around the internet is out of date and is inconsistent so it's not easy to see whats really is going on here.

As indicated by the SegWit2X code what might you appraise the prescribed charge set to would be if there is space for all the pending exchanges into the following piece. Bits of gossip said that SegWit2X doesn't have a similar rebate constrain as the first SegWit code, same gossipy tidbits suggesting that 'excavators' could spam the system to trap the Wallet to prescribe a higher expense regardless of whether it wasn't required!

Segwit  does not have a sidechain I.e lightning Network for channelling payment.
Meanwhile Segwit2x is delivered with a sidechain such as (LN).
Lightning Network always took place off-chain and can only be incorporated into the chain, the transactions between two people is not stored in a blockchain and not broadcasted to a third party the balances between the two parties involved In the transaction is modified and signed by both of them.

I read an article about Lightning Network. LN sort of opens a channel between two people for them to transact. And this channel is then broadcasted to the blockchain when the time expires. What I didn't understand is that how are transactions being monitored within the channel. Also, if they are being verified after the last transaction on the channel or when the time expires, the person has to go their entire history of transactions to find a false lead and report it to the blockchain. It's time consuming and not very accommodating. Am I missing something here?

S2X was exist but Segwit is currently ongoing.