SegWit is cancelled ?

[Zarathustra]

-snip-
Update: No.

Either you are, or you misinterpreted my initial words. What I initially said "< 2 months", i.e. my statement had nothing to do with Segwit, but the release of the HF code as per HK agreement. Aside from that, I'm not particularly interested in "I won't do X, until you do Y" games nor the correlation between the releases.

And I just helpfully demonstrated to you how the two are intimately and inextricably linked together. You apparently just want to just stick your fingers in your ears and say “lalalalalalamycat”…

I will leave the decision up to you, gentle reader, if you wish to do the same.

That Lauda Girl is a joke.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4k8rsa/maxwell_the_vandal_calls_adam_luke_and_peter_todd/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4k74cr/maaku7_i_dont_know_anyone_who_is_actually_working/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4khh07/hello_china_hello_chinese_miners_what_are_you/
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4kipvu/samsung_mow_austinhill_blockstream_now_its_time/

[franky1]

are people even listening to lauda..

he doesnt even know C++,

Whoever I've asked previously (as I don't do C++ myself) said that the complexity is overblown by a 'certain group'.

proof he has to seek guidance from his blockstreamer buddies


he even thought bitcoin-core was coded in java...

January 17th 2016 20:24    
Lauda:    Bitcoin does not use Java right?

meaning he cant even recognise java to know core is not java.
he has no coding experience nor personally used segwit testnet.. all he has done was got info from blockstreamers about how many unicorns it can handle flying through the clouds

he is just a blockstream PR guy, on the side of theymos..

[rizzlarolla]

are people even listening to lauda..

he doesnt even know C++,

Whoever I've asked previously (as I don't do C++ myself) said that the complexity is overblown by a 'certain group'.

proof he has to seek guidance from his blockstreamer buddies


he even thought bitcoin-core was coded in java...

January 17th 2016 20:24    
Lauda:    Bitcoin does not use Java right?

meaning he cant even recognise java to know core is not java.
he has no coding experience nor personally used segwit testnet.. all he has done was got info from blockstreamers about how many unicorns it can handle flying through the clouds

he is just a blockstream PR guy, on the side of theymos..

I suspect that reflects the bias of the site owner to employ such people.

No definitive, or even defined explanation on segwit here.
or anywhere.

Remember though, Carlton says,
" If you're unaware of the [core segwit] scaling plans and their level of progress/acceptance, you only have yourself to blame."

slightly edited.

[franky1]

Remember though, Carlton says,
" If you're unaware of the [core segwit] scaling plans and their level of progress/acceptance, you only have yourself to blame."

lol carlton. lol another PR guy that cant quote stats or realistic information and tries the word twisting game.

but in the fluffy clouds of testnet, segwit is perfect...... carlton and lauda will tell you segwit is perfect, without them even personally knowing a single line of code.

not only did lauda fail at coding but carlton could not even explain the basics of uninstalling a program in linux..
so when i see them two mouth pieces talk.. all i see is the words "blockstream PR department word of the day"

its truly funny how blockstream are dead against 2mb of block data using traditional transactions along with linear signature validation..
but blindly think that 2.85mb of segwit+confidential payment codes+other features is acceptable.. while only allowing the same amount of transaction capacity as 2mb of traditional transactions.

and also funny that their roadmap allows for 5.7mb blocks when blockstream decide its ok for the hard fork.. yet they cant explain what network bandwidth restrictions are currently preventing 2mb now but weirdly and suddenly not an issue for 5.7mb next year...

if i was to type blockstreamers mindset into a program.. id get endless logic errors

[rizzlarolla]

Remember though, Carlton says,
" If you're unaware of the [core segwit] scaling plans and their level of progress/acceptance, you only have yourself to blame."

lol carlton. lol another PR guy that cant quote states and tries the word twisting game.

but in the fluffy clouds of testnet segwit is perfect...... carlton and lauda will tell you segwit is perfect, without them even personally knowing a single line of code.

not only did lauda fail at coding but carlton could not even explain the basics of uninstalling a program in linux..
so when i see them two mouth pieces talk.. all i see is the words "blockstream PR department rambles"

What do you estimate the best case for segwit to have any effect on tx backlog, tx's that I presume are supposed to keep growing.
(remember bitcoin adoption?)

Anyway, 6 months minimum before segwit has any effect on tx backlog, probably, most likely longer.
Then, even worse, segwit will be rushed and effectively released untested.

Who has access to this segwit/presegwit testnet?

[franky1]

What do you estimate the best case for segwit to have any effect on tx backlog, tx's that I presume are supposed to keep growing.
(remember bitcoin adoption?)
Anyway, 6 months minimum before segwit has any effect on tx backlog, probably, most likely longer.

(a)IF segwit was active in 2016 (before LN, before CPC is a thing) then segwit possibly could handle 1.8x current block capacity..(for 1.8mb real data)
(b)IF segwit was active in 2017 due to the request to include the 2mb hard fork aswell (making the 5.7mb total bloat with CPC or 3.6mb without CPC) then the capacity would be ~3x current capacity

now for the backlog question..

no one knows how many people will transact in the future..

imagining lets say only 2500tx average are let in a block currently[1] .. but where 5000 people doing individual transactions every 10 minutes (backlog example)
[1] estimate based on block 412946 & block 412945 being recent and offering around 2500tx for 998kb

segwit in 2016 would still not quite allow all them transactions in.. (average allowance increases to 4500tx)
segwit+HF 2017 would (as the capacity is about 7600tx per block) as long as popularity stayed below 7600 people making tx per 10 minute(average).

Then, even worse, segwit will be rushed and effectively released untested.

Who has access to this segwit/presegwit testnet?

its available for anyone to download the testnet release on github.

[rizzlarolla]

so no segwit benefit for ages yet?, if ever.
(you lost me a bit there, need more time to compute)

But can anyone test such theories as (i think yours) a miner including a segwit block, pre segwit, to then activate later?
Or would that be off scope/unpredictable to achieve in test mode.

[Quantus]

I nominate Lauda to be the official spokes person for core. :p

[beastmodeBiscuitGravy]

I nominate Lauda to be the official spokes person for core. :p

Agreed.

[franky1]

so no segwit benefit for ages yet?, if ever.
(you lost me a bit there, need more time to compute)

But can anyone test such theories as (i think yours) a miner including a segwit block, pre segwit, to then activate later?

my first scenario(2016) was under the guise of pools processing segwit in 2016 like the original promise was (plan pre-roundtable)
.. after all many thought that all this soft fork promises meant that people could see segwit blocks on mainnet this summer...
.. remember those funny days when blockstreamers said softforks didnt need network consensus as they were 100% compatible and perfect..
..
my second scenario(2017) was under the guise of pools processing segwit only when a HF is also active (plan post round table)

[hv_]

What do you estimate the best case for segwit to have any effect on tx backlog, tx's that I presume are supposed to keep growing.
(remember bitcoin adoption?)
Anyway, 6 months minimum before segwit has any effect on tx backlog, probably, most likely longer.

(a)IF segwit was active in 2016 (before LN, before CPC is a thing) then segwit possibly could handle 1.8x current block capacity..(for 1.8mb real data)
(b)IF segwit was active in 2017 due to the request to include the 2mb hard fork aswell (making the 5.7mb total bloat with CPC or 3.6mb without CPC) then the capacity would be ~3x current capacity

now for the backlog question..

no one knows how many people will transact in the future..

imagining lets say only 2500tx average are let in a block currently[1] .. but where 5000 people doing individual transactions every 10 minutes (backlog example)
[1] estimate based on block 412946 & block 412945 being recent and offering around 2500tx for 998kb

segwit in 2016 would still not quite allow all them transactions in.. (average allowance increases to 4500tx)
segwit+HF 2017 would (as the capacity is about 7600tx per block) as long as popularity stayed below 7600 people making tx per 10 minute(average).

Then, even worse, segwit will be rushed and effectively released untested.

Who has access to this segwit/presegwit testnet?

its available for anyone to download the testnet release on github.

Thanks for those facts.

I really dont get the logic - how could a HF be in the roadmap  and is soooo dangerous right now? How will this 'HF fear' be eased and selled in 2017?


BTW:  THE  HF  is already in the making.  The comunity is hard forked and btc forked  into eth ....

Fees are higher now, yes - but if peace & adoption & price would be higher, miners would be happier.

Happy days!

[hv_]

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/antpool-will-not-run-segwit-without-block-size-increase-hard-fork-1464028753

[Lauda]

I nominate Lauda to be the official spokes person for core. :p

That is definitely not a position that one would enjoy being in.

Thanks for those facts.

I wouldn't call them facts.

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/antpool-will-not-run-segwit-without-block-size-increase-hard-fork-1464028753

Welcome to Drama-Land, where instead of trying to push forward, we try to keep stalling. I'm now curious as to how this one is going to play out.

[hv_]

I nominate Lauda to be the official spokes person for core. :p

That is definitely not a position that one would enjoy being in.

Thanks for those facts.

I wouldn't call them facts.

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/antpool-will-not-run-segwit-without-block-size-increase-hard-fork-1464028753

Welcome to Drama-Land, where instead of trying to push forward, we try to keep stalling. I'm now curious as to how this one is going to play out.

Easy to fix. Majority wants the entire package incl HF, so it will be done w/o any real issues.

Leads to reunion and peace.

Happy days

[owm123]

I thought it should be out in April-May but I don't see anything about it yet so I was wondering if It got cancelled or they are planning to run it on June ?

You may still for it. NOt everyone wants SW as soft fork:
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/antpool-will-not-run-segwit-without-block-size-increase-hard-fork-1464028753

[Lauda]

Easy to fix. Majority wants the entire package incl HF, so it will be done w/o any real issues.

Leads to reunion and peace.

Happy days

Exactly how did you measure this "majority"? Please enlighten me.

[rizzlarolla]

Easy to fix. Majority wants the entire package incl HF, so it will be done w/o any real issues.

Leads to reunion and peace.

Happy days

Exactly how did you measure this "majority"? Please enlighten me.

Agreed,

Who the hell wants a delayed, buggy segwit at this stage.

[Lauda]

Agreed,
Who the hell wants a delayed, buggy segwit at this stage.

It isn't neither delayed nor 'buggy' at this point either. I don't recall anyone 'promising' a merge in April.

[Quickseller]

Easy to fix. Majority wants the entire package incl HF, so it will be done w/o any real issues.

Leads to reunion and peace.

Happy days

Exactly how did you measure this "majority"? Please enlighten me.

Unfortunately it is impossible (or nearly impossible) to measure the "majority" in bitcoinland. There is simply too diverse of a population of stakeholders to possibly be able to accurately be able to poll all of them, in addition to the fact that the various stakeholders of Bitcoin may have competing interests and may not be in line with the best interests of Bitcoin. Some stakeholders may not even own nor use Bitcoin currently.

I would personally opine that major economic companies (collectively, not individually) should be the ones who decide if a HF (or features for a potential HF) should be adopted, as they ultimately are the ones who give bitcoin it's value and they are the ones who can best measure the opinions of Bitcoin users (as if several large of their customers are in favor of, or opposed to a certain proposal they would know, and they would be able to easily filter out sockpuppet type opinions because they can easily measure by transaction volume). I would also say that the opinions of the miners should be given fairly strong weight due to the fact that (as of now) they have invested heavily in what is essentially the success of Bitcoin and their best interests are generally going to be in line with that of Bitcoin.

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/antpool-will-not-run-segwit-without-block-size-increase-hard-fork-1464028753

I would say that it looks like that they figured out that Blockstream et al. doesn't have any intention of actually delivering a HF that increases the maximum block size, and they want to be sure that they will not get tricked into giving Blockstream et al. what they wanted and not get what they bargained for in the end.

[beastmodeBiscuitGravy]

-snip-

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/antpool-will-not-run-segwit-without-block-size-increase-hard-fork-1464028753

I would say that it looks like that they figured out that Blockstream et al. doesn't have any intention of actually delivering a HF that increases the maximum block size, and they want to be sure that they will not get tricked into giving Blockstream et al. what they wanted and not get what they bargained for in the end.

Bingo