SegWit yay or nay? come vote here.

[franky1]

Almost 70% support to SegWit.
Franky's conspiracy theories doesn't work.
We are doomed  

/Satoshi:0.13.1/   1466 (25.95%)
/Satoshi:0.13.2/   1228 (21.73%)
/Satoshi:0.13.99/   118 (2%)

49.68 = ~50 of nodes implicitly.. but far lower explicitly.
also nodes dont get a vote..

pools 23%


so neither pools or nodes are at 70%.
plus if you take away the pools count from the node count. less than 50% nodecount.
yep pools were already counted as part of the ~50%
yep if you excluded pools multiple nodes the count goes down. (so dont imply missing 23% hashrate can add on 20% nodecount. as thats not how the measures work. they are independent of each other and measuring different things(my assumption of how you may have come to your wrong 70% figure))

[1714734143]

1714734143

[1714734143]

1714734143

[1714734143]

1714734143

[1714734143]

1714734143

[franky1]

I think that is overly exaggerated. If my node is currently connected to several old nodes, I don't expect that to change post-Segwit activation. However, I know that I may be wrong. I have not looked into it.

Connection behavior is the same pre and post segwit activation.  Having the network topology change all at once would be an unnecessary risk.

the topology change has already occured.
matt corallo's Fibre as the green gatekeepers (aka gmaxwells upstreamers) in relation to the left side image of (few pages back post) the network visualised in a simple representation

the diversity recognition and acceptance behaviour can be white/blacklisted pre or post activation (nice bit of sweeping under the carpet word play from gmaxwell).. as jetcash has already proved by banning them already.. does not prove or disprove that it cant happen after segwit release

but topology vs diversity are different things
the diversity post segwit still to be determined after activation, once (cores own words) white listing old nodes (gmaxwells downstreamers) becames a more apparent thing.

i do laugh how gmaxwell makes half a statement to hide the full context

i find it funny how he isnt even commenting about
https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/10/27/segwit-upgrade-guide/


because he knows the topology is already in the format i mentioned on the left side pic of (few pages back post) the network visualised in a simple representation, and the image in previous sentance of this post

[doc12]

Dont feed the troll 

[Gimpeline]

Almost 70% support to SegWit.
Franky's conspiracy theories doesn't work.
We are doomed  

/Satoshi:0.13.1/   1466 (25.95%)
/Satoshi:0.13.2/   1228 (21.73%)
/Satoshi:0.13.2/   118 (2%)

49.68 = ~50 of nodes implicitly.. but far lower explicitly.
also nodes dont get a vote..

pools 23%


so neither pools or nodes are at 70%.
plus if you take away the pools count from the node count. less than 50% nodecount.
yep pools were already counted as part of the ~50%
yep if you excluded pools multiple nodes the count goes down. (so dont imply missing 23% hashrate can add on 20% nodecount. as thats not how the measures work. they are independent of each other and measuring different things(my assumption of how you may have come to your wrong 70% figure))

I looked at the poll... 67% at the moment

[franky1]

/Satoshi:0.13.1/   1466 (25.95%)
/Satoshi:0.13.2/   1228 (21.73%)
/Satoshi:0.13.99/   118 (2%)

I looked at the poll... 67% at the moment

/Satoshi:0.13.1/   1441 (25.26%)
/Satoshi:0.13.2/   1316 (23.07%)
 /Satoshi:0.13.99/ (117) (2%)

still around 50% im laughing at where your getting your 70% from

[Gimpeline]

/Satoshi:0.13.1/   1466 (25.95%)
/Satoshi:0.13.2/   1228 (21.73%)
/Satoshi:0.13.99/   118 (2%)

I looked at the poll... 67% at the moment

/Satoshi:0.13.1/   1441 (25.26%)
/Satoshi:0.13.2/   1316 (23.07%)
 /Satoshi:0.13.99/ (117) (2%)

still around 50% im laughing at wher your getting your 70% from

also i noticed 0.13.1 dropped  25 nodes and 0.13.2 gained 88..

lets see if there are ~63 new 0.13.2 nodes using AWS..

I try again. Slowly.
This is a poll thred.
Its shows 67%
6..7..%

[franky1]

still around 50% im laughing at wher your getting your 70% from

I try again. Slowly.
This is a poll thred.
Its shows 67%
6..7..%

you think that trolls that dont even run a full node and have been advertised to spam a poll.. has more meaning that the actual NODE count

now you see why im laughing.
you dont even realise the context of the stats.

[Gimpeline]

I just pointed out that the poll is 67%. Nothing more (and yes some "trolls", like me, run a full node)

[Lauda]

you think that trolls that dont even run a full node and have been advertised to spam a poll.. has more meaning that the actual NODE count

now you see why im laughing

Nobody was advertised to spam this poll, otherwise it would have a much higher rating. So you're talking about node count as support, and you're laughing? Let me show you something:


My reaction:

[doc12]

you think that trolls that dont even run a full node and have been advertised to spam a poll.. has more meaning that the actual NODE count

now you see why im laughing

Nobody was advertised to spam this poll, otherwise it would have a much higher rating. So you're talking about node count as support, and you're laughing? Let me show you something:


My reaction:

And 200 of them prob. run by Ver himself ....

I guess the Hashrate is also fake, they are running core and signaling for BU ...   No sane person, who invested millions in mining would rely on untested node software.

[franky1]

you think that trolls that dont even run a full node and have been advertised to spam a poll.. has more meaning that the actual NODE count

now you see why im laughing

Nobody was advertised to spam this poll,

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5pb2sd/vote_on_bitcointalk_segwit_yay_or_nay/

[Owl_Fintech]

It's easy to see that there are a number of arguments for and against SegWit. In fact it is difficult to know the best solution at the moment, especially for something that has never been tested.
I think the good thing about all this is that this improvement will be implemented in Litecoin, and this will allow us to know more clearly what is the best thing for Bitcoin.

[Lauda]

And 200 of them prob. run by Ver himself ....

I wouldn't go as far as saying that Ver is running them, but considering what happened with Bitcoin Classic it wouldn't surprise me to find out that a single entity is running a majority of those.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5pb2sd/vote_on_bitcointalk_segwit_yay_or_nay/

It has zero comments.

It's easy to see that there are a number of arguments for and against SegWit.

There are very few reasonable arguments against Segwit.

In fact it is difficult to know the best solution at the moment, especially for something that has never been tested.

1) There is no alternative solution.
2) Segwit has been extensively tested on the testnet. If Litecoin adopts it, then that will be the next step.

[BiTZeD]

I have to confess that I do not know. That is probably one of the most importants things that happened to Bitcoin yet and I can not choose my side. That is kinda a shame ...

[Gimpeline]

And 200 of them prob. run by Ver himself ....

I wouldn't go as far as saying that Ver is running them, but considering what happened with Bitcoin Classic it wouldn't surprise me to find out that a single entity is running a majority of those.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5pb2sd/vote_on_bitcointalk_segwit_yay_or_nay/

It has zero comments.

It's easy to see that there are a number of arguments for and against SegWit.

There are very few reasonable arguments against Segwit.

In fact it is difficult to know the best solution at the moment, especially for something that has never been tested.

1) There is no alternative solution.
2) Segwit has been extensively tested on the testnet. If Litecoin adopts it, then that will be the next step.

Well. there is always Frankys A-B-C-D-X theory that has been debunked to hell and back. I'm sure he will re-post it again shortly.

[doc12]

I have to confess that I do not know. That is probably one of the most importants things that happened to Bitcoin yet and I can not choose my side. That is kinda a shame ...

Well you know there is basicly no side to choose: There is a well tested software (Bitcoin Core 13.2) and on the other side some untested buggy something (BU 1.0.0) that could possibly fuck up bitcoin really bad (and almost forked the network two days ago).

I wouldnt consider the BU-"Team" a competitor to core. If core is so bad n shit, why BU is c'n'p all the new fixes from the core-client?

So the choise is stick to staus quo (13.0 ... which is fine aswell) or Bitcoin 13.2.

[pedrog]

Do it!

Just do it!

This has gone way too long, surrender, SegWit it is, lets scale this shit.

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

2) Segwit has been extensively tested on the testnet. If Litecoin adopts it, then that will be the next step.

Are LTC blocks full now?  What is the motivation for LTC users/nodes/miners to adopt LTCSegwit?  How will the LTC experience apply to BTC?

[franky1]

(and almost forked the network two days ago).

lol
it was a reject that was handled in 3 seconds..

2017-01-29 06:59:12 Requesting block 000000000000000000cf208f521de0424677f7a87f2f278a1042f38d159565f5
2017-01-29 06:59:15 ERROR: AcceptBlock: bad-blk-length, size limits failed (code 16)

core pools make rejects and orphans a few times a week that last more than 3 seconds
https://blockchain.info/orphaned-blocks

oh and if you were around in 2013 and remember the mega orphan chain due to the levelDB bug..
guess who caused it..
yep SIPA. the guy you trust to offer sgwit, and implement it without nodes being ready...
couldnt even sort out a database 4 years ago

by the way what would be a real mindblowing experience for you to try.
instead of thinking that bitcoin needs masters. think about consensus. where the bitcoin node network rules supreme
and devs and pools are merely helpers.. not controllers

[shapeshiftscam]

75% people voted "want SegWit", which is not a surprise at all. SegWit is the trend, after its implementation, bitcoin can be more faster and flexible, big block size with softfork means no big hazard to bitcoin, including no price dump. IMO SegWit will be implemented within 3 months.