SegWit must be stopped!

[franky1]

Sure seem people in the space might not give a damn about Bitcoin ending like a Paypal 2.0.
But I do!And many other here as well.
I'm in for SegWit as this lays the ground for second layer implementations!

you do know "second layer implementations" are paypal2.0.. right

LN is going to be pushing us away from permissionless peer-to-peer and into permissioned hubs with fee's, penalties, settlement delays, and chargebacks

permissioned: LN= dual signed multisig ...buzzword: 'bidirectional channels' managed by hubs
fee's: open channel onchain fee, LN swap fee, multihop fee, hub management fee, close channel onchain fee
penalties: not signing in acceptable time fee, denying payment fee
settlement delays: coin maturity after confirmation onchain (CLTV)
chargeback: output revoke codes (CSV)

atleast learn why CSV and CLTV are going to be used.
do you really want to close a channel (like closing a paypal account) and see the funds arrive (onchain confirm). but then it not showing as available balance for days/weeks (CLTV maturity lock similar principles to blockreward coinbase maturity lock)
where even after the close session is confirmed onchain. that unavailable balance (maturity lock) allows time for the paypal(LN HUB) to chargeback(invoke their CSV code) and make the funds theirs

oh i must add LN are conceiving to add 'demurrage' concepts to LN  (minus interest rates)

[1715212261]

1715212261

[1715212261]

1715212261

[1715212261]

1715212261

[Ayers]

as i see it segwit is only an alternative way to have 2mb, so in the end it will be like we have 4 MB when 2MB will enter in play isn't this good? why yuou say an altcoin, when it's still need to be activated anf require a certain consensus to do so?

[franky1]

as i see it segwit is only an alternative way to have 2mb, so in the end it will be like we have 4 MB when 2MB will enter in play isn't this good? why yuou say an altcoin, when it's still need to be activated anf require a certain consensus to do so?

the person calling it an outright altcoin is saying it i presume. for the same reason core devotee's are calling anything not core an altcoin.
even when other implementations have been running on bitcoins mainnet for atleast a year.

the base of segwits code (the concept) did not begin in 2009 from satoshi's vision. segwit began separately as an altcoin as part of blockstreams elements and then tweaked into being bitcoin compatible version

it changes alot of things 'under the hood'
how data is stored on peoples computers, how its relayed between nodes, even how the transactions and blocks are formed.
though its bitcoin compatible. its alot different to the original vision.

many say if certain things change in bitcoin. like if stupidly its suggested to change bitcoins coin cap and difficulty retarget patterns to emulate say litecoin. then bitcoin is no longer bitcoin.. even if the 7 year historic data still continues growing and all nodes are connected to that same chain of data that goes back to satoshis genesis block.

so although its not an "altcoin" in the traditional sense (separate network) the direction its taking us in is far different than imagined in say 2009-2014

(thats about as unbiased as i can word it)

[Gimpeline]

as i see it segwit is only an alternative way to have 2mb, so in the end it will be like we have 4 MB when 2MB will enter in play isn't this good? why yuou say an altcoin, when it's still need to be activated anf require a certain consensus to do so?

the person calling it an outright altcoin is saying it i presume. for the same reason core devotee's are calling anything not core an altcoin.
even when other implementations have been running on bitcoins mainnet for atleast a year.

the base of segwits code (the concept) did not begin in 2009 from satoshi's vision. segwit began separately as an altcoin as part of blockstreams elements and then tweaked into bing bitcoin compatible version

it changes alot of things 'under the hood'
how data is stored on peoples computers, how its relayed between nodes, even how the transactions and blocks are formed.
though its bitcoin compatible. its alot different to the original vision.

many say if certain things change in bitcoin. like is stupidly its suggested to change bitcoins coin cap and difficulty retarget patterns to emulate say litecoin. then bitcoin is no longer bitcoin.. even if the 7 year historic data still continues growing and all nodes are connected to that same chain of data that goes back to satoshis genesis block.

so although its not an "altcoin" the direction its taking us in is far different than imagined in say 2009-2014

(thats about as unbiased as i can word it)

The world is moving forward and so is Bitcoin. Back in 2009 segwit wasn't on the table because there was no need for it.
Just because Ford didn't think of putting seat belts in his car when he designed it doesn't mean that Fords with seat belts isn't Ford.

[franky1]

The world is moving forward and so is Bitcoin. Back in 2009 segwit wasn't on the table because there was no need for it.
Just because Ford didn't think of putting seat belts in his car when he designed it doesn't mean that Fords with seat belts isn't Ford.

but segwit is not an adjustable seatbelt.
segwit is putting 4 wheels on a motorcycle to emulate a car, but get special permisson to use the bike lane.. to then advertise 2 wheel motorcycles in the future that require the passenger on the back to charg you for his time to let you use the carpool/bike lane simply because 2wheeled bikes are faster.

[Tyrantt]

Ok, I've been reading the topic since I've never heard of SegWit and after finishing, I still have no, fucking, clue what segwit is. I saw someone said that segwit is an bitcoin upgrade? like a software upgrade or the code upgrade? Can someone explain?  

[achow101]

Ok, I've been reading the topic since I've never heard of SegWit and after finishing, I still have no, fucking, clue what segwit is. I saw someone said that segwit is an bitcoin upgrade? like a software upgrade or the code upgrade? Can someone explain?  

It is a change to the consensus rules (which implies a major code change and thus software upgrade). You should read https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/ and https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/10/28/segwit-costs/ to learn more about segwit and what it does for Bitcoin.

[Gimpeline]

The world is moving forward and so is Bitcoin. Back in 2009 segwit wasn't on the table because there was no need for it.
Just because Ford didn't think of putting seat belts in his car when he designed it doesn't mean that Fords with seat belts isn't Ford.

but segwit is not an adjustable seatbelt.
segwit is putting 4 wheels on a motorcycle to emulate a car, but get special permisson to use the bike lane.. to then advertise 2 wheel motorcycles in the future that require the passenger on the back to charg you for his time to let you use the carpool/bike lane simply because 2wheeled bikes are faster.

You know that is bs. Read the whitepaper without making up stuff like the pay pal 2.0 that people have been saying to you is wrong over and over and over  and you still don't look up the facts.
Is Bitcoin BU really that bad that you have to make up stuff to make it happen?

[Tyrantt]

Ok, I've been reading the topic since I've never heard of SegWit and after finishing, I still have no, fucking, clue what segwit is. I saw someone said that segwit is an bitcoin upgrade? like a software upgrade or the code upgrade? Can someone explain?  

It is a change to the consensus rules (which implies a major code change and thus software upgrade). You should read https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/ and https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/10/28/segwit-costs/ to learn more about segwit and what it does for Bitcoin.

so the original purpose of Segwit was to fix transaction malleability and to fit more transactions into a block reducing the transaction time, right?

[achow101]

Ok, I've been reading the topic since I've never heard of SegWit and after finishing, I still have no, fucking, clue what segwit is. I saw someone said that segwit is an bitcoin upgrade? like a software upgrade or the code upgrade? Can someone explain?  

It is a change to the consensus rules (which implies a major code change and thus software upgrade). You should read https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/ and https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/10/28/segwit-costs/ to learn more about segwit and what it does for Bitcoin.

so the original purpose of Segwit was to fix transaction malleability and to fit more transactions into a block reducing the transaction time, right?

Basically. It increases transaction capacity so more transactions can be included in a block, not really reducing transaction time.

[Tyrantt]

Ok, I've been reading the topic since I've never heard of SegWit and after finishing, I still have no, fucking, clue what segwit is. I saw someone said that segwit is an bitcoin upgrade? like a software upgrade or the code upgrade? Can someone explain?  

It is a change to the consensus rules (which implies a major code change and thus software upgrade). You should read https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/ and https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/10/28/segwit-costs/ to learn more about segwit and what it does for Bitcoin.

so the original purpose of Segwit was to fix transaction malleability and to fit more transactions into a block reducing the transaction time, right?

Basically. It increases transaction capacity so more transactions can be included in a block, not really reducing transaction time.

oh, ok, also as much as I understand miners are the biggest problem for implementing and starting SegWit since all of the miners have to use the segwit compatible software? besides that I don't see what's all the fuss about SegWith that much.. maybe I just don't understand it fully...

EDIT: nevermind, I've found a good explanation of SegWit on youtube.

[franky1]

You know that is bs. Read the whitepaper without making up stuff like the pay pal 2.0 that people have been saying to you is wrong over and over and over  and you still don't look up the facts.
Is Bitcoin BU really that bad that you have to make up stuff to make it happen?

lol white paper??
blockstream stopped following satoshis whitepaper in 2013-2014.. even just a few months ago they actually wanted to edit it to suit their new rhetoric
https://news.bitcoin.com/revising-satoshi-white-paper/

I have seen people promote toxic and crazy ideas, and then cite parts of the paper in an effort to justify it.

https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/issues/1325

its only toxic to the banker paid devs that want to change bitcoin for the worse.. not toxic for citizens of the world that want some something that remains open and border/controll less.


as for the LN white paper.. that has been outdated too. the current concept does have penalties, spend-ability after confirm delays and revoke funding (chargeback) facilities..

but you just have to learn what CSV and CLTV do to see it plain as day.
think about the reality of end user experience of the 'service' they receive with CSV and CLTV included.

forget the shady buzzwords. actually think of real world utility and real world experience of using them.

[jbreher]

so the original purpose of Segwit was to fix transaction malleability and to fit more transactions into a block reducing the transaction time, right?

Basically. It increases transaction capacity so more transactions can be included in a block, not really reducing transaction time.

Well, not quite. Segregated witness itself just segregates the witness data from the remainder of the transaction data. This allows making the remainder of the transaction data determinate, which fixes the malleability issue. However, it does not fit more transactions into a block. Indeed, as each transaction must be correlated with the corresponding witness, the data needed to maintain this correlation actually decreases the amount of complete transactions including witness that will fit in a given number of bytes (e.g., a 1MB block).

The so-called 'block size increase' enabled by The SegWit Omnibus Changeset is really accounting legerdemain. The data occupied by the witness is given a 'discount' in size calculation, when determining block size. This discount is yet another magic number invented for this purpose. In this manner, a '1MB' block can contain more transactions , but that '1MB' block may actually be up to 4MB in actual size, as measured by the amount of data required to flow over the wire and/or be stored by a fully-validating node.

Make no mistake, while part of The SegWit Omnibus Changeset, this accounting trickery is not part of segregated witness itself, nor is it required for the resolution of the malleability issue.

[mayax]

BTC will die if it won't be updated

[CraigWrightBTC]

BTC will die if it won't be updated

Maybe you are right you are right,but if SegWit be actived something will be happening with bitcoins
1. SegWit and lightening network would freeze onchain scaling.
2. Lighting Network will cause centralization in offchain payment nodes, then the government could easily apply regulation.
Must use other ways except Segwit for updating and the miners won't be support for segwit.

[kiklo]

Isn't it all ironic how they cry out for on-chain scaling and yet completely attempt to block such improvements to it? For those that are reading, increasing the block size limit is not a solution of any kind.

@Lauda

Told You So.


http://www.newsbtc.com/2016/12/04/bitcoin-core-developers-work-new-2-mb-hardfork-proposal/
Bitcoin Core Developers Work On A New 2 MB Hardfork Proposal

 




FYI:
By the Way , Guess who called it First. 
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1704658.msg17086859#msg17086859

[mayax]

BTC will die if it won't be updated

Maybe you are right you are right,but if SegWit be actived something will be happening with bitcoins
1. SegWit and lightening network would freeze onchain scaling.
2. Lighting Network will cause centralization in offchain payment nodes, then the government could easily apply regulation.
Must use other ways except Segwit for updating and the miners won't be support for segwit.

there is already a BTC centralization  and regulation too.

[franky1]

segwit is not a solution. its just pushing the same stone down the road. while devs work on hyperledger (LN/sidechains)

back in 2009-2013 the community knew about the 7tx/s possibility of bitcoin. yep 4500tx back then.

and now if segwit activates and everyone uses it.. yep everyone.. the expectation... 4500tx 7tx/s
like i said it's not a solution. its just pushing the same stone down the road.

[canah17]

We must put an end to SegWit.  SegWit is an altcoin.  Protect Bitcoin by stopping SegWit. 

Well we can't really do anything about it because other people don't really believe that SegWit will take over bitcoin then as i thought about that SegWit its not closest to bitcoin recently but its a process but they have a long way to go if they end bitcoin and well bitcoin is well protected from the creators or the users all we need to do is to use bitcoin in our entire life because that's how we help bitcoin and we must not go in to altcoins but if you wish too just go but for me i am a full bitcoin user so i helped the bitcoin company to get more and more stronger until they will reach the top and no one will ever reach them as that altcoin so just chill and use bitcoin ^_^ have a nice day to you

[TKeenan]

segwit is not a solution. its just pushing the same stone down the road. while devs work on hyperledger (LN/sidechains)

back in 2009-2013 the community knew about the 7tx/s possibility of bitcoin. yep 4500tx back then.

and now if segwit activates and everyone uses it.. yep everyone.. the expectation... 4500tx 7tx/s
like i said it's not a solution. its just pushing the same stone down the road.

Let's face it, SegWit has very little to do with tx throughput improvement and everything to do with Blockstream enabling their private lightning network.  Suckers are going to let SegWit into the Bitcoin protocol and then Blockstream will be able to offer their congestion solution for a fee.