Colorblind (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 392
Merit: 41
This text is irrelevant
|
|
January 14, 2018, 03:49:16 PM |
|
Looking at this graph I'm getting a little confused: https://blockchain.info/ru/charts/bip-9-segwitdoes that means miners not signaling segwit anymore? It seems I have wrong understanding of what segwit signaling is.I thought every miner support segwit blocks and even though only ~10% of all tx are segwit all segwit transactins can end up in a valid block because all miners support them.
|
|
|
|
piotr_n
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2053
Merit: 1356
aka tonikt
|
|
January 14, 2018, 03:55:16 PM |
|
since segwit got activated, signalling for it has became irrelevant
|
Check out gocoin - my original project of full bitcoin node & cold wallet written in Go.PGP fingerprint: AB9E A551 E262 A87A 13BB 9059 1BE7 B545 CDF3 FD0E
|
|
|
ennafa
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 15
Merit: 1
|
|
January 14, 2018, 03:55:47 PM Merited by Colorblind (1) |
|
As far as I know, Coinbase is not using SegWit. Wouldn't SegWit allow em to spend less on transaction fees?
|
|
|
|
Xynerise
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 322
Merit: 363
39twH4PSYgDSzU7sLnRoDfthR6gWYrrPoD
|
|
January 14, 2018, 03:55:58 PM |
|
That is old info. Some BCash miners are still signalling segwit support
It doesn't mean anything now. It was relevant before segwit was activated, that was how you knew which miners supported it.
Segwit transactions can fit in the same block as legacy transactions. There is no... discrimination (for lack of a better word) between them.
|
|
|
|
cellard
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1252
|
|
January 14, 2018, 06:20:01 PM |
|
As far as I know, Coinbase is not using SegWit. Wouldn't SegWit allow em to spend less on transaction fees?
Coinbase has been delaying segwit for ages now. I have seen Brian Armstrong support BCash also known as Bitcoin Cash, and I have seen him saying how "It's likely Ethereum takes over Bitcoin soon", I have seen him talk a lot of shit basically. Now, I think I may give him the benefit of the doubt on delaying segwit until at least May, because Bitcoin Core 0.16 does not come out until May and this will be the version that supports bech32, so they may be waiting until then, im myself waiting until then to use segwit at all.
|
|
|
|
Anti-Cen
Member
Offline
Activity: 210
Merit: 26
High fees = low BTC price
|
|
January 14, 2018, 11:41:31 PM |
|
since segwit got activated, signalling for it has became irrelevant
The miners will vote for anything that makes them more money and so developers pretend that miners won't like Lightning Network but they will love it with it's mini banks the development team likes to call hubs "That will charge a small fee" because I still remember read a white paper that said "Virtually free transaction fess" so that one won't wash again. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpfvhiqFw7A and jump towards the end
|
Mining is CPU-wars and Intel, AMD like it nearly as much as big oil likes miners wasting electricity. Is this what mankind has come too.
|
|
|
alani123
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2450
Merit: 1454
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
|
|
January 14, 2018, 11:44:35 PM |
|
since segwit got activated, signalling for it has became irrelevant
Signalling is nothing more than an indication of potential support too so I would say that it it irrelevant too in general. Signalling doesn't act as an obligation, just as way for miners to broadcast preference but no indication that they would deliver on the promise.
|
..Stake.com.. | | | ▄████████████████████████████████████▄ ██ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ██ ▄████▄ ██ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██████████ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██ ██████ ██ ██████████ ██ ██ ██████████ ██ ▀██▀ ██ ██ ██ ██████ ██ ██ ██ ██ ██ ██ ██████ ██ █████ ███ ██████ ██ ████▄ ██ ██ █████ ███ ████ ████ █████ ███ ████████ ██ ████ ████ ██████████ ████ ████ ████▀ ██ ██████████ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ██████████ ██ ██ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██ ▀█████████▀ ▄████████████▄ ▀█████████▀ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███ ██ ██ ███▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ██████████████████████████████████████████ | | | | | | ▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄ █ ▄▀▄ █▀▀█▀▄▄ █ █▀█ █ ▐ ▐▌ █ ▄██▄ █ ▌ █ █ ▄██████▄ █ ▌ ▐▌ █ ██████████ █ ▐ █ █ ▐██████████▌ █ ▐ ▐▌ █ ▀▀██████▀▀ █ ▌ █ █ ▄▄▄██▄▄▄ █ ▌▐▌ █ █▐ █ █ █▐▐▌ █ █▐█ ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀█ | | | | | | ▄▄█████████▄▄ ▄██▀▀▀▀█████▀▀▀▀██▄ ▄█▀ ▐█▌ ▀█▄ ██ ▐█▌ ██ ████▄ ▄█████▄ ▄████ ████████▄███████████▄████████ ███▀ █████████████ ▀███ ██ ███████████ ██ ▀█▄ █████████ ▄█▀ ▀█▄ ▄██▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██▄ ▄▄▄█▀ ▀███████ ███████▀ ▀█████▄ ▄█████▀ ▀▀▀███▄▄▄███▀▀▀ | | | ..PLAY NOW.. |
|
|
|
Anti-Cen
Member
Offline
Activity: 210
Merit: 26
High fees = low BTC price
|
|
January 14, 2018, 11:49:30 PM |
|
Now, I think I may give him the benefit of the doubt on delaying segwit until at least May, because Bitcoin Core 0.16 does not come out until May and this will be the version that supports bech32, so they may be waiting until then, im myself waiting until then to use segwit at all.
I won't change my wallet because the development team has not got it act sorted out in dealing with fees and if they don't fix it before May then it might not be a problem anymore because BTC could well crash so the transaction rate will be near zero like our fees use to be. Also I like all my data on the block-chain so forget Lighting with its "Off-Block" banks they want to Hubs that charge fees on top of the miners $25 transaction costs.
|
Mining is CPU-wars and Intel, AMD like it nearly as much as big oil likes miners wasting electricity. Is this what mankind has come too.
|
|
|
Carlton Banks
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3430
Merit: 3075
|
|
January 15, 2018, 11:31:07 AM |
|
As far as I know, Coinbase is not using SegWit. Wouldn't SegWit allow em to spend less on transaction fees?
Coinbase has been delaying segwit for ages now. There are alternatives to Coinbase, they'll lose customers to those eventually Now, I think I may give him the benefit of the doubt on delaying segwit until at least May, because Bitcoin Core 0.16 does not come out until May and this will be the version that supports bech32, so they may be waiting until then, im myself waiting until then to use segwit at all.
Should be far earlier than May. Some features have been moved to 17.0 so that 16.0 can be centered around Segwit wallet and bech32. I would guess March is more likely the release date for 16.0
|
Vires in numeris
|
|
|
Colorblind (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 392
Merit: 41
This text is irrelevant
|
|
January 15, 2018, 11:45:49 AM |
|
since segwit got activated, signalling for it has became irrelevant
Signalling is nothing more than an indication of potential support too so I would say that it it irrelevant too in general. Signalling doesn't act as an obligation, just as way for miners to broadcast preference but no indication that they would deliver on the promise. So this means 100% blocks mined in BTC are Segwit blocks ATM?
|
|
|
|
TheQuin
|
|
January 15, 2018, 12:18:28 PM |
|
So this means 100% blocks mined in BTC are Segwit blocks ATM?
Segwit is activated on the network so yes. The signalling was voting for it to be implemented and now that it has been there is no need to vote anymore.
|
|
|
|
Carlton Banks
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3430
Merit: 3075
|
|
January 15, 2018, 12:43:06 PM |
|
So this means 100% blocks mined in BTC are Segwit blocks ATM?
Segwit is activated on the network so yes. The signalling was voting for it to be implemented and now that it has been there is no need to vote anymore. Well, not quite. There's a tiny percentage of blocks mined that are using the pre-segwit block type. Activation means that Segwit blocks cannot be rejected, not all blocks must be capable of including Segwit transactions.
|
Vires in numeris
|
|
|
TheQuin
|
|
January 15, 2018, 12:47:04 PM |
|
I knew it was still possible to mine a non-Segwit block but I just cannot remember the last time I saw one. I thought that everyone mining had switched over now. I guess there could still be some small solo miners out there.
|
|
|
|
Carlton Banks
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3430
Merit: 3075
|
|
January 15, 2018, 12:58:22 PM |
|
I knew it was still possible to mine a non-Segwit block but I just cannot remember the last time I saw one. I thought that everyone mining had switched over now. I guess there could still be some small solo miners out there.
It's pretty rare, that's true. But there are still maybe < 20 every week.
|
Vires in numeris
|
|
|
Colorblind (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 392
Merit: 41
This text is irrelevant
|
|
January 16, 2018, 06:16:15 AM |
|
I knew it was still possible to mine a non-Segwit block but I just cannot remember the last time I saw one. I thought that everyone mining had switched over now. I guess there could still be some small solo miners out there.
It's pretty rare, that's true. But there are still maybe < 20 every week. Are segwit blocks de-facto larger then normal blocks (or rather they contain both classic 1mb block filled with transactions and witness appendix with signatures piled in it)?
|
|
|
|
TheQuin
|
|
January 16, 2018, 06:37:57 AM |
|
Are segwit blocks de-facto larger then normal blocks (or rather they contain both classic 1mb block filled with transactions and witness appendix with signatures piled in it)?
Segwit replaces the 1Mb block size limit with a 4000 weighted unit limit. Each normal byte in each transaction receives a weight of 4 except in a Segwit transaction the witness data only receives a weight of 1. This is what results in larger blocks. Segwit transactions are not actually smaller it is just that they have less weight and therefore have lower fees. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Block_weight
|
|
|
|
|