Segwit will not have an impact until a lot of wallets include the segwit format addresses. Right now I know that Bitcoin Core 0.15 will have the segwit format addresses so you can easily send segwit transactions. Currently only advanced users can do that, so it's still limited to using the console. Once it's on the GUI i predict segwit transactions will be used a lot.

Until then you can wait for the weekend to make transactions really cheap.

Sorry for so many question, but I got additional ones:

-I see that bech32 addresses have bc1 at the beginning, is this the part that will always repeat to recognize the segwit transactions?

-I also noticed that there isn't a single character with capital letters. How come there are no caps at all? Im used the classic format and seeing it all in small characters is pretty weird. Im not even sure of legacy format being caps sensitive, but I think it was easier to recognize the shape of the address if there are caps on and off or maybe that is how my brain works.

About caps sensitive.. what would happen if instead of 12sziC91z7hwfpVDNw7UbsisaapBwFtW7t you send BTC to 12szic91z7hwfpvdnw7ubsisaapbwftw7t ?

-In the case of a split into a fork of BTC that doesn't support the segwit format... how would you receive your share?

For example if the BCH fork happened after segwit got activated and you were holding 1 BTC in address bc1qzjw3jywhf2r7k24y3gqj0fs4apddg03pujsjzx, how are you supposed to receive your 1 BCH on the other chain?

In my country, Uber is being attacked constantly by the taxi drivers because they hate the competition that Uber is giving them. I never understood why taxi drivers must be approved by the state. Why not let a market develop? if you need an ID to drive, that is enough safety. You ask the Uber driver for his personal ID and also his driving license and that is enough information to confirm that he isn't a scammer with stolen information.

It is similar to bitcoin competing against state approved only money.

Running a full node is the only way to run the real bitcoin, if you are letting someone else do the transaction validation for you, then you are not using the real bitcoin. I like to validate my own transactions and it's very easy to run a full Bitcoin Core node, just run it once a day for 10 minutes or so and you are synced.

And how is BCH bulkier? They may have 8mb max capacity, but their blockchain should be smaller, since they can't even fill 1MB blocks worth of transactions, but for some reason its so damn slow to sync.

I've been triyng to sync the Bitcoin ABC full node client for a week, and im running out of patience. Im at 90% with increases of 0.10% per hour, im just tired of waiting to no end. Can anyone tell me why is it taking so long? By the time I have fully synced the node and I can finally access BCH, the price of BCH will most likely have dropped to the ground...

I was going to use ElectronCash, but I don't like the idea of exporting private keys from one wallet to another.

It's just a rumor with no proof, i've been hearing about it for the past few hours. As far as I know, we have satoshi's coins well traced, I would be surprised if any of these belong to the real satoshi. Apparently the coins are dated somewhere in 2010. In 2010 we already had more people that satoshi doing transactions and mining, so it could have been any of these early adopters. I would only believe coins belong to satoshi if the genesis block coins are moved, anything else is just the usual "im satoshi" nonsense, when at best you would be an early adopter.

He is either moving it to test SW, or to dump some BCH for free BTC.

That sounds good, I hope that the GUI is user friendly when managing the different wallets. How many wallet.dat files can you manage at the same time? I would like to have a "savings one", "spending one", another one for segwit addresses.. etc.



What is the difference between using the native segwit format (that begins with b) from the one that begins with 3?
Is it just a temporal way to use segwit until the ones that begin with b are available or there are any pros and cons?

I see... but isn't that a bit of a mess? If I want to run a full node, now I need to run 2 different folders with 2 different software with 2 different clients just to go between formats?

Wouldn't it be better to have it all inside the same software and be able to select what you want or maybe that would make newbies too confused and it's better that newbies use segwit by default (since they don't know anything about this anyway and sometimes excess of options make newbies stressed)? But then again, advanced users like myself would suffer from having to run 2 softwares..

But how will it work? Will there be 3 buttons?

Like,

Button 1 = Generate new legacy address
Button 2 = Generate new bech32 address
Button 3 = Generate new P2SH nested address

How do we keep this user friendly?

I also hope that you tidy up the addresses list so you can keep everything in better order. I would like to see a way to order by date of creation, and also by address format, otherwise it will be even more of a mess than it is now when sometimes you need to reach for older addresses in your ever-growing list.

I see. So how are we supposed to get people using segwit format transactions if there isn't an easy way to create them? Does any wallet support segwit transactions yet without having to resort to unfriendly command lines?

I just hope it gets added easily at GUI level AND it is clearly separated from legacy transactions for the people that want to keep using the classic format. For example I want to be able to use the classic format for long term cold storage because it's the most timetested format. I don't care to temporarily use it if needed for small LN transactions or whatever.

Yeah but like i said, how do I know if I create a legacy address or a segwit address?

Im using Bitcoin Core 0.14.2 and there is no "create segwit address" button, it's just the same good ol interface, so there's no separation between legacy and segwit, that is what is making me confused. There's not a clear way to do this in the GUI.

I would like to send and recieve coins only in the legacy format (1xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx type) and not the segwit format. How do I guarantee that none of my coins will be sitting on segwit coinbases? (I think its called coinbase, I mean in a segwit format transaction, you know what I mean right?)

I have nothing against segwit, I think its safe, but im the most paranoid man alive in the bitcoin game, so please let me know how to stay in the time-tested legacy format, because I dont see "create segwit format address" or anything that differentiates between legacy and segwit format so its strange.

I have never bought byteball, read again... I have only gotten byteball thanks to me owning BTC and getting it on the distribution periods.

But you never know when this thing can skyrocket. If Bitcoin gets destroyed thanks to Jeff Garzik and the rest of big blockers trying to fork BTC into a bunch of coins, coins like Byteball will skyrocket once investors know that Byteball will never suffer from the constant drama of having to hardfork everytime idiots complain about fees being higher than $1.

There's no technical problem when it comes to limit the blocksize to 1MB. The fees would just weed out the transactions that aren't worth mining. Now this obviously poses the problem of limiting the bitcoin economy, so it's not like Core wants 1MB forever.. it's all about doing it the right way. And make no mistake, Jeff Garzik's btc1 is NOT the way to go about increasing the blocksize. Don't get fooled by opportunists. If we want BTC to stay solid we need things to be done the right way. You can't risk the whole project like this just because some guys spam the blockchain to make the fees higher.

Anyone defending segwit2x is shooting themselves in their own feet in the long term.

Well BTC parity is probably delusional, but can you mention a better altcoin?

And are you saying #4 is deserved by Ripple? Or Bitcoin Cash deserves #3?

Marketcap means nothing. It is highly manipulated. Anyone can create their own shitcoin and premine it and out of nowhere, an huge marketcap will appear.

https://medium.com/bitcoinfoundation/the-bitcoin-dominance-indicator-fallacy-2b11093869d4

If you take out all the speculative money on shitcoins and look at the tech, Byteball offers much more than all of these coins combined.

But we don't really need marketing right now... we benefit from lack of marketing during distribution. The more under the radar a coin goes during the beginning the better for early adopters. Also the technology is still very early on to invest a lot in advertising it. Let it rest and lets test it more first.

I don't know how much early investors get in terms of benefits compared to the later on investors since it's not clear how the coin will be distributed along the way but at least the sooner you get the more % you will get on your held BTC during each distribution.

wallet.dat can be of a ton of coins. Litecoin also uses wallet.dat. I once found a wallet.dat file lying around some DVD, I thought "great, a lost BTC wallet", but then I was confused because it didn't work. Well it turned out that it was a Litecoin wallet.dat file.

I don't know if there is a way to know of what coin the wallet.dat file is from, that would be handy to know, because right now I can do nothing but randomly try around with all the altcoins that I ever held.

We are having another all time high peak on the mempool size:

https://blockchain.info/en/charts/mempool-size?timespan=all

At this point, it's very safe to assume spam attacks are going on every now and them in the blockchain.
I suspect there will be a ton of spam come October in order to push the Jeff Garzik btc/segwit2x agenda.
Realize that BCash benefits from the chaos that segwit2x will cause, so expect higher fees by then. Hopefully segwit makes a positive impact.

Oh you are right, I always confuse these 2 names. There are now about 1000+ altcoins... it's hard to keep track of all of them.

Something that I criticized in the past about Byteball was that the linking process of the addresses is a total mess, but I was wrong. You can generate individual Byteball addresses and link to individual BTC addresses and keep your privacy intact by verifying them with each other.

There are really no downfalls in doing this. Anyone holding BTC not getting their free Byteball is insane. This coin will be worth a lot someday, maybe more than BTC.

No other coin comes anywhere near close to what Byteball offers. All of the other altcoins are too much of a derivative of Bitcoin. Byteball offers a new perspective with the DAG technology. It scales with no blocksize and miner drama and it has a feature to make anonymous transactions. Honestly you must be insane to not be holding any GBYTE by now, specially if you got BTC to get some on the airdrops.

Once the inflation pressure lowers, it's obvious that this coin is going to be worth 0.5 BTC at least. There's no way Bitcoin Trash is more valuable than GBYTE.