Bitcoin Forum

Hi Guys,

We are close to the UASF of 1 August 2017 that is the intention to create another fork of the Blockchain if UASF is actually activated, dividing the chain of Bitcoin in two.

Currently, one of these proposals, known as the User Activated Soft Fork (UASF) is scheduled to go live on 1 August, 2017. Another group of miners has stated their intention to create another fork of the Blockchain if UASF is indeed activated, splitting the Bitcoin chain into two.
When a Cryptocurrency forks, it results in duplication. Any transactions, and coins that were present prior to the fork are valid on all subsequent chains. It is in your best interest to control your coins in a manner that gives you the flexibility to transact on both chains. A well-known previous example of this is the Ethereum and Ethereum Classic.

Atenção pessoal! O que esta acontecendo no mercado é "especulação" então para não perder DINHEIRO não venda seus Bitcoins, isso mesmo não vendam seus Bitcoins, pois ira se arrepender depois, em breve, muito em breve o Bitcoin estará valendo 3~3,5K USD.

The value of Bitcoin is dropping very much at this point for the reason that many users are moving their online service reserves to local ewallets and offline storage media/paper, which is the right thing to do at this time.

What do you think is going to happen from the next few days? Leave your opinion and your own adopted to go through this turbulence.

If Bitcoin splits, then we will be left with equal amounts of both the coins. And I still believe that in the end, the combined market cap of these coins are going to be higher than the market cap of Bitcoin before the split.

so there would be two balances of old and new bitcoin with the same value? Would there be some difference with their usage or since if there we re to be two balances, would that mean that the price will go down? I'm not quite sure about this whole split situation.

I don't have many informations about this event but should someone holding an amount inside an exchanges or an online wallet, transfers it to a cold storage? Or both storage are the same regarding the fork?


Thanks Theymos

I think that BIP148 will most likely fail (ie. ~everyone will abandon it right away). And the "segwit2x" hardfork is 100x less likely to succeed than even that. So I see a continuation of the status quo for at least 6 months, probably 9-14 months.

The market might crash somewhat before Aug 1 ("OMG the sky is going to fall") or somewhat after Aug 1 ("OMG Bitcoin's technological advancement is seriously stalled"), but IMO it'll return to the longer-term trend after a while.


See my article here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/wiki/faq_handling_splits

Even if the hardfork fails. The Segwit part of Segwit2x will most likely get activated.

So you have what Core wanted in the first place ;)

I very much doubt it. That requires 80% miner support, but BitMain has much more than 20%, and they'll never willingly cause SegWit to activate because it destroys asicboost. The current signalling percentages are a result of BitMain trying to get people to think as you do, in order to hurt BIP148's chances. (I think that BIP148 was doomed regardless, but it doesn't help when people are thinking that "segwit2x" will activate SegWit around the same time anyway.)

So the stalemate will continue

With high fees and slow confirmation times, which is good for altcoins, especially Litecoin with SW and LN already activated. The bottom line is that Bitcoin will likely continue to slowly bleed with its prices stagnating and people looking for alternatives elsewhere. In other words, instead of spectacular crash we will see the same boring faces sending curses as before. That would be kind of meh. Jihan will likely abandon his Jihancoin too, at least for the time being

It will go down because of uncertainty for short time.
Then it will go up, maybe even higher than current price. Just wait and see.

I scared about SegWit2x and Bitmain, they not want SegWit2x success, after UASF, they will launch UAHF and creating new Bitcoin ABC for against BIP148.
They said BIP148 will easy for attack 51% in system Bitcoin, but UAHF from them not have that, they will accept small profit in first time to waiting investor interesting with product from UAHF - Bitcoin ABC

This is turning out to be a real dampener. All these days, I was checking the SegWit2x support levels. It was hovering at around 86% for the past 2-3 weeks, and I was finally hoping that the scaling problems will be solved for ever. Seems like the issue is going to get even worse.

Close ... ?

https://seanja.com/secret/countdown/gif.php?time=2017-08-01

Could you share where we can see the current segwit support level info?  Thanks.

People have been using  this cite:

https://coin.dance/blocks

Thanks.  Only 46.5% for BIP141.   :o

There is no doubt that bitcoin will prevail eventually after some time but importantly it's about how much time is needed? because if my investment is about to go down in value slowly given no block size increase then why would I stay idle while I could conveniently convert them into altcoins?

Wouldn't you say as an investor: why would I stick with this system when the governors (miners) of it themselves refuse to improve further advancement or advance further improvement :D  they don't want to help themselves why would I keep my money idle for another year or so?

Isn't it better if I simply cash out and start working with that money and come back when they fixed (improved) the network?
Good luck with your asicboost adventure little Wu and enjoy watching your millions turn into thousands.

By 1 August the bitcoin can be $ 1200.

Yeah... there are various ups and downs in these numbers, and I suppose that at various points, coin.dance is going to update what is going on in terms of signaling versus intention and maybe we will be able to add up the significance of BIP91 and/or BIP 148?

Too many things going on makes my head spin.

For example, I am not sure whether a chart like the below one is helpful in considering the various implementations and the timeline and the games that seem to be ongoing.

https://fs.bitcoinmagazine.com/img/images/segwit-timeline.width-800.jpg

Do you know the maximum transactions per second that Litecoin can process with the LN?  I searched online, but cannot find the answer.  Ethereum is about 20 and Bitcoin is about 3.

By the way, it seems like the price of altcoins is highly correlated with the price of Bitcoin except more volatile.  If Bitcoins sunk, majority of altcoins might sink with it.  Ethereum also seems to have that influence too - when its price dropped, others, including Bitcoin dropped as well.  At least this is what I am observing for the last several weeks.  One would think that they are substitutes.  It is similar to the stock market - stocks in an industry tend to move together even though many of them are competitors.

Not a big deal, who cares if it does hit $1200? anyone bought at any price will dump before it's too late for them and that's the exact reason why the price drops to that level in the first place. one thing miners should keep in mind, there are not many big investors as themselves, only a few have big investments directly buying from exchanges they are the ones who'd dump with the first signs of a drop and the majority are small investors and they can't afford high fees simple. if they think someone will invest $5B in a decentralized currency they're wrong.
Bitcoin is standing to date only because of the same small traders and if it continues to stay the same system without any upgrade then I promise you they will abandon bitcoin just because it won't be profitable for them any more. time to wake up you are not the only currency generator in town.

I will be really pissed if thing goes wrong because of the miners are not corporating.  Like you said, It will hurt them more. 

Everyone screams that it will go down to nothing, so obviously, it will go up. After all of those people panic sell between now and then. When there are no sellers left on Aug 1, the buyers will push the price significantly.

The asicboost were not issued on all bitmain asics. Only few ones for personal use, less than 20%.

I guess this number is virtually unlimited

That's likely the reason why you couldn't find any relevant info. Basically, any blockchain is conceptually centralized in respect to processing transactions, i.e. the majority of nodes should accept the mined block to make this transaction valid (read confirmed). This is not the case with LN, since you don't need blocks to send transactions via payment channels, and this basically means that it is meaningless to talk about processing capacity of LN network in terms of transactions per second. Transactions are processed as soon as they reach the receiving end of the payment channel, i.e. they are real time and they are independent of each other as well as blocks found

It's very annoying, but there's no reason to get depressed about it. BIP148 will fail because it was poorly-designed. BIP149 is similar, but well-designed (and therefore slower): it'll finally get the job done in about a year, and the sky won't fall between now and then.


I don't believe it. All of Bitmain's behavior is in-line with them desperately doing everything possible to preserve asicboost. No other theory explains their behavior nearly so well.

With the UASF coming up on August 1 i really do think that the price will go up but there is a chance that the price might go down and it is a high possibility that people would sell of their coin because of this uncertainty.

For Bitcoin, a LN would require a hard fork, correct?  Is it in Bitcoin's roadmap somewhere?

Apparently Lightning network could be currently run on bitcoin; however, if segwit is implemented, then LN becomes easier to run.. that is why lots of folks are equating LN with Segwit (even though on a technical level segwit does not seem to be absolutely necessary for LN). 

So the answer is that no hardfork is required for LN.

I don't really know

If it requires all clients to upgrade (i.e. old clients won't be able to accept new blocks), then yes, it would require a hard fork (since this is what a hard fork is essentially about). Regarding Bitcoin's roadmap, I guess we should first
activate SegWit simply because LN is a completely new technology which effectively makes Bitcoin into another coin (well, to a certain extent), while SW is just an upgrade which (somewhat) solves current issues (e.g. makes blocks more accommodative)