New SegWit stats?

[afbitcoins]

I found this http://segwit.co/

Can someone explain this in easy terms? If you run a bitcoin node to are supposed to signal segwit support? how do you do that?

edit: Why would you not support or not support it? I thought it was a no brainer. Increased capacity more efficient etc. What am I missing?

Only the miners can signal segwit through the mined blocks, your node will be counted only as a segwit node (0.13.1 bitcoin-core).

Just had a look at that link, still a way to go it seems

[Killerpotleaf]

20% of hashing power currently supports segwit.
i would imagine that potential support for segwit (like this week) tops out at 30-50% ( way to many mixed feelings about segwit )
but who is this 20% hashing power supporting segwit
looking at the graph
it would seem like its two pools one of ~5% hashing power
and a monstrous pool of ~15%
http://bitcoin.sipa.be/ver9-2k.png

who are these poeple?

[harrymmmm]

So ... bitfury finally started signalling segwit correctly (rather than just in the coinbase string).
That should add about 8% to the segwit hash fraction, bringing it up to something like 28%.

Check it out here: https://btc.com/stats/pool/BitFury

[quake313]

So ... bitfury finally started signalling segwit correctly (rather than just in the coinbase string).
That should add about 8% to the segwit hash fraction, bringing it up to something like 28%.

Check it out here: https://btc.com/stats/pool/BitFury

Don't think it will matter much, it only takes one Chinese farm to stop Segwit.

[Paashaas]

So ... bitfury finally started signalling segwit correctly (rather than just in the coinbase string).
That should add about 8% to the segwit hash fraction, bringing it up to something like 28%.

Check it out here: https://btc.com/stats/pool/BitFury

Don't think it will matter much, it only takes one Chinese farm to stop Segwit.

I dont think so, ViaBTC will be forced to support Segwit when they are the last one, ore they will run out of business.

[Killerpotleaf]

So ... bitfury finally started signalling segwit correctly (rather than just in the coinbase string).
That should add about 8% to the segwit hash fraction, bringing it up to something like 28%.

Check it out here: https://btc.com/stats/pool/BitFury

Don't think it will matter much, it only takes one Chinese farm to stop Segwit.

I dont think so, ViaBTC will be forced to support Segwit when they are the last one, ore they will run out of business.

if ViaBTC is the last miner to update to 13.1, yes i agree they will yield

[CoinCidental]

So ... bitfury finally started signalling segwit correctly (rather than just in the coinbase string).
That should add about 8% to the segwit hash fraction, bringing it up to something like 28%.

Check it out here: https://btc.com/stats/pool/BitFury

Don't think it will matter much, it only takes one Chinese farm to stop Segwit.

I dont think so, ViaBTC will be forced to support Segwit when they are the last one, ore they will run out of business.

if ViaBTC is the last miner to update to 13.1, yes i agree they will yield

They won't have to yield
Segwit will be cancelled for another solution
 in  less than a year

If miners wanted it they would have taken it the hour it was released

[Lauda]

If miners wanted it they would have taken it the hour it was released

This is completely and utterly false based considering the reality that we live in. Remind me again how long it took for the last Soft fork to active (that miners obviously wanted, since it's active). 1 hour?  
Do you participate on r/btc by any chance?

[d@nte]

I still don't understand why there are some people opposed to the SegWit implementation. Isn't it something that will make the Bitcoin ecosystem better? What are the arguments against this? Could it take more than a month for the consensus to be reached?

[CoinCidental]

I still don't understand why there are some people opposed to the SegWit implementation. Isn't it something that will make the Bitcoin ecosystem better? What are the arguments against this? Could it take more than a month for the consensus to be reached?

segwit is like an unwanted cock in the ass that doesnt allow users to use the main chain by making it prohibitively expensive
the blocks need to be larger .the solution is that simple ........

[harrymmmm]

I still don't understand why there are some people opposed to the SegWit implementation. Isn't it something that will make the Bitcoin ecosystem better? What are the arguments against this? Could it take more than a month for the consensus to be reached?

Go into r/btc and actually experience these guys first hand.
It's like walking unaware into a room full of staunch feminists and SJW's. Every word you say is taken negatively. Every word you MIGHT say is defended against by a preemptive attack.
Quite funny.
So, after several coup attempts over a couple of years now, they have redefined english, new ways to think, etc. Like 1984.

Deep diving into all that (shudder) and translating back to normal english reveals a basic issue, I think.
They sincerely believe that segwit locks in a future where only layer 2 solutions to scaling are permitted.
So they think blocking it is a good thing.

But that premise is incorrect. Segwit only opens up new options, scales some, fixes bugs, etc.
It's just obvious, but I can understand the confusion coming out of that place.

[CoinCidental]

I still don't understand why there are some people opposed to the SegWit implementation. Isn't it something that will make the Bitcoin ecosystem better? What are the arguments against this? Could it take more than a month for the consensus to be reached?

Go into r/btc and actually experience these guys first hand.
It's like walking unaware into a room full of staunch feminists and SJW's. Every word you say is taken negatively. Every word you MIGHT say is defended against by a preemptive attack.
Quite funny.
So, after several coup attempts over a couple of years now, they have redefined english, new ways to think, etc. Like 1984.

Deep diving into all that (shudder) and translating back to normal english reveals a basic issue, I think.
They sincerely believe that segwit locks in a future where only layer 2 solutions to scaling are permitted.
So they think blocking it is a good thing.

But that premise is incorrect. Segwit only opens up new options, scales some, fixes bugs, etc.
It's just obvious, but I can understand the confusion coming out of that place.

The blockchain is not anyones private property so obviously we  have a vested interest in making it impossible or prohibitively expensive to use, you may agree with that or not but L2 solutions are not an alternative to removing the anti spam cap

[quake313]

I still don't understand why there are some people opposed to the SegWit implementation. Isn't it something that will make the Bitcoin ecosystem better? What are the arguments against this? Could it take more than a month for the consensus to be reached?

Let me try to explain it the way I see it. The problem the Chinese have with Segwit, is not so much with Segwit itself but with what will happen after Segwit. The Chinese are afraid that the side-chains the core devs are working on will take money out of their pockets by reducing the number of potential transaction fees in the future. So by blocking Segwit, they are blocking side-chains like lightning network. The Chinese want bigger blocks to collect more money in fees in the future. At least this is what I think, maybe I am wrong or maybe someone can explain it better.

[jbreher]

The problem the Chinese have with Segwit, ...

Looking at the recent translations, it does not appear that there is any single monolithic entity 'the Chinese'. Rather it seems to me that there is a spectrum of attitudes amongst the Chinese miners. That said, your statement seems a reasonable representation of the concerns of some subset of the class 'Chinese miner'.

[Meuh6879]

ViaBTC is not problem ... when global POWER of Bitcoin network rise at regulary rate.

https://bitcoinwisdom.com/bitcoin/difficulty and http://bitcoin.sipa.be/


They already loose the race against adoption.
Like all old miner on BIP66.
They will be exclude by force by the miners.

Because miner want a reward ... after all.
That's why miners don't control nodes.

[Killerpotleaf]

blocking   ~33%  =  ViaBTC~6% + HaoBTC~6%  + F2Pool~14% + GBMiners~3% + Bitcoin.com~2% + Slush Pool~2%BU  

undecided ~36%=  AntPool~19% +  BTC.com~5% + BW Pool~10%  + Kano CK Pool~2%

pro          ~25%  =   BTCC~11% + BitFury~7% + Bitclub Network~3% + Slush Pool~4%segwit  

there's a 6% margin of error due to really bad rounding

read all about this : http://www.nasdaq.com/article/where-bitcoin-mining-pools-stand-on-segregated-witness-cm713991

i expect to see lots of action next week. i think segwit will probably gain >50%, will they wait for the other >40% to join them tho... they dont technically have too, all it would take is 0.13.2 ...

[Wind_FURY]

The growing support still looks good for now but I would expect this to plateau at some point and may start going down the longer Segwit stays inactivated. So what would be the next step for Bitcoin as a whole if it is not activated? Will we see some developers of Core leaving in disappointment? That is over a year of their work that might go to waste.

[Killerpotleaf]

The growing support still looks good for now but I would expect this to plateau at some point and may start going down the longer Segwit stays inactivated. So what would be the next step for Bitcoin as a whole if it is not activated? Will we see some developers of Core leaving in disappointment? That is over a year of their work that might go to waste.

it won't go to waste...
we will have segwit in one form or another, at some point in time.... its unavoidable.
in anycase, all core really has to do is push out a 2MB HF ( and let miners vote on this BIP -_- ) and they win.
but let take it one step at a time, first we deadlock.

[DaRude]

I still don't understand why there are some people opposed to the SegWit implementation. Isn't it something that will make the Bitcoin ecosystem better? What are the arguments against this? Could it take more than a month for the consensus to be reached?

Let me try to explain it the way I see it. The problem the Chinese have with Segwit, is not so much with Segwit itself but with what will happen after Segwit. The Chinese are afraid that the side-chains the core devs are working on will take money out of their pockets by reducing the number of potential transaction fees in the future. So by blocking Segwit, they are blocking side-chains like lightning network. The Chinese want bigger blocks to collect more money in fees in the future. At least this is what I think, maybe I am wrong or maybe someone can explain it better.

Yes that times a million. Its a business which they've literally invested millions into. If the block size is limited = their profits are limited. Thats why they want unlimited blocks 
i'm yet to hear a single good reason against SegWit

[DaRude]

https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_adoption/ is showing ~30%

Also interesting read https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/where-bitcoin-mining-pools-stand-on-segregated-witness-1480086424