BU hashpower is over 50% the last 24 hours. SegWit is dead on bitcoin which means its dead for litecoin too. I hope all you Blockstream trolls bought some lube with your AXA money...  I am nobody's troll. People can disagree with you on their own without being bought. The success or failure of SegWit on Bitcoin has nothing to do with Litecoin. Oh, but it does. Litecoin is mostly just copying Bitcoin development. If SegWit is killed for Bitcoin, which it is, you can kiss it goodbye for litecoin too. And odds are, you ARE someone's troll. Everyone knows that SegWit has a Blockstream-funded troll army pushing for it. |
|
|
|
BU hashpower is over 50% the last 24 hours. SegWit is dead on bitcoin which means its dead for litecoin too. I hope all you Blockstream trolls bought some lube with your AXA money... |
|
|
|
|
BU is up over 50% hashpower today. Sorry bankster trolls, but your precious SegWit is dead.
Actually, I'm not sorry. I'm laughing all the way to at the bank.
|
|
|
|
From what I see SegWit is gaining more and more %.
95% in next 7 month is just impossible. 95% in any amount of time is impossible. They will never get past the amount of hash power that is for bigger blocks. BU will pick up hashing power once it is firmly over 40% that will send it over 50%. Then things will probably go quickly as the rest of miners will be pressured to also accept big blocks. |
|
|
|
I'm already running a BU node and an XT node. They work just fine..
I know, just wait untill BU gets open again. Fingers crossed. "Gets open"? What are you talking about? BU isn't "closed" |
|
|
|
SegWit is like letting Facebook adjust the Bitcoin's protocol "a bit" so that they could open their own payment channel of facebook money on the Bitcoin network. Yes, it's that bad, and so many brainwashed obedient sheeple just don't see it. It's just sad. We have one great thing that truly empowers personal freedom and belongs to the people and we're going to let the same old same old banksters infiltrate and corrupt it. With the same old techniques.
Let them do their bitcoin-based Paypal system. Here's what will happen. Blockstream is going to stick to their guns and Bitcoin will fork. Both sides will make money as the sum of the forks will be a price increase. After the fork, regular users will see that they can't get any transactions done on the SegWit chain because of only having half (or less) of the hash rate and only 1MB blocks. Then people will start selling off their SegWit coins for 'big block' coins, and we'll eventually be back to one bitcoin again. I'm for forking to big blocks right now, but I can understand why miners want to wait. That's good reasoning. I also think that ethereum classic is the one that eventually gets more popular. so even if in the beginning segwitcoin generates more media and might even trade on pretty decent prices it is the losing fork in the long run. and then all those whiners who are still butthurt for not buying bitcoin "when it was cheap" miss the train again by not buying into the big blocks bitcoin when it was cheap. When the fork happens, it might become hard to withdraw or exchange the SW/Core-Bitcoin because the TX times/fees will be ridiculous. I would switch them out right away. That will not happen, the switch will add a decent hit in price and hash power but after 10 min BU miners will flow back ore they go bankrupt. The users are still secured enough during the process. I wonder, do you really trust BU software and nodes? well, i dont anymore they had there shot and blew it. Segwitt might not be 'perfect' but it is still the best possible update Bitcoin can have. You need to make consessions i strongly advice to pick SW. I'm already running a BU node and an XT node. They work just fine.. |
|
|
|
SegWit is like letting Facebook adjust the Bitcoin's protocol "a bit" so that they could open their own payment channel of facebook money on the Bitcoin network. Yes, it's that bad, and so many brainwashed obedient sheeple just don't see it. It's just sad. We have one great thing that truly empowers personal freedom and belongs to the people and we're going to let the same old same old banksters infiltrate and corrupt it. With the same old techniques.
Let them do their bitcoin-based Paypal system. Here's what will happen. Blockstream is going to stick to their guns and Bitcoin will fork. Both sides will make money as the sum of the forks will be a price increase. After the fork, regular users will see that they can't get any transactions done on the SegWit chain because of only having half (or less) of the hash rate and only 1MB blocks. Then people will start selling off their SegWit coins for 'big block' coins, and we'll eventually be back to one bitcoin again. I'm for forking to big blocks right now, but I can understand why miners want to wait. That's good reasoning. I also think that ethereum classic is the one that eventually gets more popular. so even if in the beginning segwitcoin generates more media and might even trade on pretty decent prices it is the losing fork in the long run. and then all those whiners who are still butthurt for not buying bitcoin "when it was cheap" miss the train again by not buying into the big blocks bitcoin when it was cheap. When the fork happens, it might become hard to withdraw or exchange the SW/Core-Bitcoin because the TX times/fees will be ridiculous. I would switch them out right away. |
|
|
|
SegWit is DEAD  |
|
|
|
SegWit is like letting Facebook adjust the Bitcoin's protocol "a bit" so that they could open their own payment channel of facebook money on the Bitcoin network. Yes, it's that bad, and so many brainwashed obedient sheeple just don't see it. It's just sad. We have one great thing that truly empowers personal freedom and belongs to the people and we're going to let the same old same old banksters infiltrate and corrupt it. With the same old techniques.
Let them do their bitcoin-based Paypal system. Here's what will happen. Blockstream is going to stick to their guns and Bitcoin will fork. Both sides will make money as the sum of the forks will be a price increase. After the fork, regular users will see that they can't get any transactions done on the SegWit chain because of only having half (or less) of the hash rate and only 1MB blocks. Then people will start selling off their SegWit coins for 'big block' coins, and we'll eventually be back to one bitcoin again. I'm for forking to big blocks right now, but I can understand why miners want to wait. |
|
|
|
Why not just use Paypal?
They fucked me over once in their early days, (around 2002?) My plan is to put them out of business. Bitcoin/LN seems like a good way. but somehow, a Blockstream(AXA)-controlled and 'regulated' side chain is going to be sooooo much better. |
|
|
|
I'm confused as to what segwit is. Could someone possibly explain it to me? Thanks guy you are all amazing  Bloated software scrapped together a big $75 million budget from AXA/Bilderberg. They want to limit your ability to send funds directly on the blockchain so you'll be forced to use their controlled side chain, which will presumably be another PayPal. |
|
|
|
|
Hey SegWit trolls, do ya hear the fat lady singing?
|
|
|
|
Why can't we have both larger blocks as well as SegWit? Is it not possible for miners to signal both?
I've said it before and I'll say it again: I don't really care how, I just know something has to happen to allow scaling. Bitcoin can't grow without more users, and it can't have more users if it can't handle more transactions.
Because SegWit is unnecessary and frankly, shitty software. |
|
|
|
|
Don't like the miner fees? Support bigger blocks.
|
|
|
|
I always wondered why we still have (beside SegWit, bitcoin unlimited and undecided miners) another option signaled: 8 MB blocks.
What BW Pool is thinking? This option is totally, not going to work, it is condemned to fail. They know it, we know it. Then Why?
I accept 16MB blocks, so why wouldn't it work? If they generated an 8MB block, my home PC would validate it in seconds, in the background while I'm gaming. |
|
|
|
What they should've done is stuck to that mythical 2mb + Segwit agreement that wasn't an agreement or whatever it was. Things would be rosier than a rosy thing by now.
That may have been an option, but for a reason I don't know they labelled this approach "unsafe", from what I know (afaik they labelled all >1MB approaches unsafe). Why would they? Their hubris was counted on to doom them from the beginning. If they had just raised the blocksize a little they may have gotten SegWit, but now that opportunity is gone forever. Ha Ha!
I don't understand why you are so happy. BU is losing percents every day that passes. Of course, not enough to ever help SegWit, but this means BU is (also) doomed... Did you diversify into alts? BU isn't losing anything. They've been sitting around 38% and haven't gone down. None of this was unexpected. When I first read about bitcoin in 2011, I figured the day would come when the banking elite would start buying up bitcoin infrastructure (mining) in order to control it, thus skyrocketing the price. AXA/Bilderberg funded Blockstream and their affiliates are largely responsible for the popularity and market cap of bitcoin and many alts. Thank them for making us all money. What they failed to realize is that even if they had succeeded with taking over Bitcoin, they would just have to do the same thing over again with the next coin, making us all more money. They're fighting a losing battle, all because they know they are worthless without control over the money supply and they are scared to death of losing that control. |
|
|
|
|
Ha Ha, more sour grapes from AXA/Bilderberg funded Blockstream.
|
|
|
|
rather than listening to everyone and programming something that the community want..
Although I don't agree with you on BU matter (I think that we need something better than just increase the block size), you are right on this. Somehow they should be more receptive to what the community wants. What they should've done is stuck to that mythical 2mb + Segwit agreement that wasn't an agreement or whatever it was. Things would be rosier than a rosy thing by now. Why would they? Their hubris was counted on to doom them from the beginning. If they had just raised the blocksize a little they may have gotten SegWit, but now that opportunity is gone forever. Ha Ha! |
|
|
|
SegWit can never succeed because there will always be miners who are against it, and SegWit will never survive a BTC fork. It's a waste of time to debate. The only question is how long until we start mining bigger blocks. Bitcoin, since I learned about it 6 years ago, has shown just how incompetent the powers of the world have become - dependent on their monopoly on money creation. I spend way too much time enjoying the nonstop-worthless-shilling on behalf of AXA/Bilderberg funded Blockstream that displays how mindless their followers have become and how desperate and ignorant 'our rulers' have become in their ivory castles. In a nutshell, its so fun watching you people lose P.S.: Hey Henri de Castries, how about spending another $75 million? Definitely helps my portfolio. Ha Ha, Greg failed you. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
