SegWit yay or nay? come vote here.

[franky1]

i was also with dynamic block but i've heard there are some problems, first of all is if an attacker is abusing the network by flooding it and increase the dynamic block momentarily, this will lead to some sort of centralization toward strong node

the other thing is to follow the monero project with its dynamic block, but it will change a bit the fundamental economy of bitcoin, making it inflate for a small amount like monero did

there are many ways to have a dynamic protocol

put short nodes FIRST have to accept a certain size for the network to happily accept without much/any orphan drama
next pools need to be rest assured that if pools made blocks bigger then current consensus it wont cause much/any orphan drama.

it is not as simple /silly as pools make bigger blocks if the mempool is overfilled due to an abuser flooding it..

firstly node need to flag their acceptance they can cope with Xmb.. then pools flag their intent to make anything upto xmb to give a prompt for the laggers to adjust to xmb or be left unsynced when pools deem it safe to move forward.

then when it meets a certain safe majority level pools dip their toe in the water.
EG imagine majority nodes flagged 2mb was ok.. pools then flagged a majority ok to make 2mb base blocks..
at a certain point pools 'test the water' by making a 1.001mb block to see the orphan risk, then the next block maybe 1.002mb and so on safely incrementing up, naturally with demand until whenever blocks get to be 2mb full due to demand.

its not going to be a 2 mb or a 1gigabyt by mindnight thing. nodes and pools will do it safely.

after all.. did pools and nodes jump from 0mb to 1mb overnight in 2009-2015.. nope.
after all.. did pools and nodes jump from 0.5mb to 1mb overnight in 2013-2015(after the sipa caused db fork event).. nope

it was natural and safe and orphan mitigating low risk movements.

[1714734943]

1714734943

[1714734943]

1714734943

[1714734943]

1714734943

[1714734943]

1714734943

[Redrose]

I would be tempted to say yes, as I have to this day never seen any convincing explication about why this is a bad idea. For this reason, and since I would like that we get out of this eternal drama about the blocksize, I start about a yes basis, that might change if anyone ever prove me this is a bad idea.

[NeuroticFish]

Now back to the original discussion:
1. If 100% dynamic block is an issue, then fix the issue or limit it (even if limiting it makes it work like now), but at least limit it to something a couple of levels higher than what we have now (much higher than 2MB).
2. Such move may need a fork and then SegWit can be even forced "in the same package"

You can't just take and change some variable (or constant) in the code

In fact, you can but your blocks (if you are a miner) will be considered as invalid by other miners and thus discarded by the network, so you will be losing the mining reward every time you find a block and don't follow the "rules". That seems to be one of the reasons if not the primary one why changes, even vital changes are so hard to make in Bitcoin. On the one hand, this is good since it preserves Bitcoin from attempts at malicious changes, but on the other, in the times of change it will backfire and drag Bitcoin backward

I was almost sure that this means a fork.
And it has to be supported by the majority, else we can end up like Ethereum.
I guess that this is the reason the devs do only changes that don't risk to trigger the Ethereum fiasco.

And then SegWit is the best we can get for now.

[chrisvl]

put in another option.

"yes but only with real consensus onchain scaling beyond the one time boost"

I think i'll keep it simple as is. and for YES i mean, the current proposal anything other than that means you vote NO and can explain here in the comments.
shared on reddit too.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5pb2sd/vote_on_bitcointalk_segwit_yay_or_nay/?ref=share&ref_source=link

its shared on r/btc ?

[franky1]

its shared on r/btc ?

nah, r/bitcoin trolls want to sybil attack a opinion poll by getting the blockstream trolls to all vote in favour of segwit even when the majority of thos voting dont even run a node or do mining.

polls like this are just keeping the civil war alive and avoiding "consensus" by only having 2 options and worded to make it sound like the options can only oppose each other.. rather than a mutual (consensus) agreement.

i stated this poll needed a third option of 'yes if both were included' (not verbatim) near the start of the topic. but the OP refused to be rational

[doc12]

@franky1  Lol you are really fudding full force. Your keyboard ist burning     Meanwile Segwit-Node Adoption is rising ...

[franky1]

@franky1  Lol you are really fudding full force. Your keyboard ist burning 

lol wow, your reply including so much proof, so much rational explanation, such much logical and rational reasoning to come to your assumption..

.. oh wait it didnt

[doc12]

@franky1  Lol you are really fudding full force. Your keyboard ist burning 

lol wow, your reply including so much proof, so much rational explanation, such much logical and rational reasoning to come to your assumption..

.. oh wait it didnt

Yeah im basicly fighting with /r/btc weapons ... Trump style, seems like its effective these days 

[doc12]

its shared on r/btc ?

nah, r/bitcoin trolls want to sybil attack a opinion poll by getting the blockstream trolls ...

This sentence only disqualifies you from any serious discussion ... so dont talk shit about rational explanation,  logical and rational reasoning . You are a troll aswell.

[franky1]

we all know that only gmaxwell and those in r/bitcoin want the community divided.
they call anything not core an altcoin. they try to get anything not core to split off (bilateral fork)
funny part is that all the other 70 differ versions (dozen different brands) are all running on bitcoins mainnet now, and for a long time and not causing issues.
yep nodes with 8mb block buffer are running right now and are accepting blocks and not orphaning anything and not autobanning or black listing opposing buffer setting nodes.
not rejecting transactions not becoming gate keepers not doing any harm..

yep nodes with dynamic block buffer are running right now and are accepting blocks and not orphaning anything and not autobanning or black listing opposing buffer setting nodes.
not rejecting transactions not becoming gate keepers not doing any harm..

unlike core features

those in r/bitcoin point the finger in the other direction when saying a proposal they want.. to make them look like the victim and gain sympathy.
they are the ones playing the psychology games. they are the ones that want dominance not everyone on the same equal playing field.
they are the ones desiring centralised commercial services.

i feel sorry for those in r/bitcoin being handed scripts to follow and handed the same scripts by dozens of people to make it seem like its real because more then one person is saying it to them.

if only those at r/bitcoin didnt just play follow the leader games and instead actually read the code and looked passed all the buzzword games that are thrown at them by the script writers.

please if there is anything you can ever be advised to do, it would be... research.

research consensus
research the code
research the context
research scenarios of how rational and researched context plays out

dont copy and paste summaries scripted to you
dont throw boring repeated stuff that has been made a moot point years ago
dont just play the victim card that someone mentioned someones name. and instead look for why and what was said about them

seems more people are screaming im fud because i mention gmaxwells name. rather than about why or what im actually saying about his plans and desires.

atleast research bitcoin and understand it. otherwise all your doing is attacking a pseudonym, not the proposals or features of bitcoin

[Wind_FURY]

Segwit will not be activated in Bitcoin so the big blockers have nothing to be afraid of. One interesting development is in Litecoin. It might be a big possibility that Segwit will be activated there and soon they will have their own version of the Lightning Network. Can one now say that Litecoin is more advanced than Bitcoin if Segwit is activated and they have their LN operational? Will Bitcoin see the light and follow their example?

[ArticMine]

...

i was also with dynamic block but i've heard there are some problems, first of all is if an attacker is abusing the network by flooding it and increase the dynamic block momentarily, this will lead to some sort of centralization toward strong node

the other thing is to follow the monero project with its dynamic block, but it will change a bit the fundamental economy of bitcoin, making it inflate for a small amount like monero did

The issue with a dynamic blocksize, following a model similar to that of Monero, in Bitcoin is that there is eventually no incentive for the miners as the base reward falls. The reason the dynamic blocksize works in Monero is that Monero has a minimum base reward of 0.6 XMR per block. A rough equivalent in Bitcoin would be 3 XBT per block in perpetuity. Fees have little or no impact on mining security in Monero. They are actually there to control the blocksize increase and deter spam attacks. So unless one is prepared to violate the 21 million XBT maximum limit, I am afraid there may be little that the Monero project may be able to offer Bitcoin on blocksize scaling.

What I must strongly caution against is taking elements of Monero's dynamic blocksize, with critical security components removed, and expecting them to work in Bitcoin. This I am afraid can easily lead to disaster.

Edit: The total fees per block in Monero are actually set to be proportional to the block reward. Think about this when combined with a block reward that falls to zero over time.

[saturnalia]

we all know that only gmaxwell and those in r/bitcoin want the community divided.

"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." <Eleanor Roosevelt>
Discuss the merits of SegWit, not who the lead developer's baby momma's sister had a beef with last weekend. Technical merits, not gossiping about people.

...
funny part is that all the other 70 differ versions (dozen different brands) are all running on bitcoins mainnet now, and for a long time and not causing issues.

85% of nodes are Core (https://coin.dance/nodes). The biggest alternative has only 7%.

...
those in r/bitcoin point the finger in the other direction when saying a proposal they want.. to make them look like the victim and gain sympathy.
they are the ones playing the psychology games. they are the ones that want dominance not everyone on the same equal playing field.
they are the ones desiring centralised commercial services.

95% of /r/bitcoin posts have nothing to do with scaling. They're about "Oo look I started selling cookies for Bitcoin" and occasionally news about ETF's and regulations pertaining to cryptocurrencies being passed.

i feel sorry for those in r/bitcoin being handed scripts to follow and handed the same scripts by dozens of people to make it seem like its real because more then one person is saying it to them.

if only those at r/bitcoin didnt just play follow the leader games and instead actually read the code and looked passed all the buzzword games that are thrown at them by the script writers.

seems more people are screaming im fud because i mention gmaxwells name. rather than about why or what im actually saying about his plans and desires.

gmaxwell puts code on the internet. You can accept it or reject it, your choice. Nobody's putting a gun to your head and forcing you to run Bitcoin Core (yet 85% choose to do this, the vast majority apparently).


tl;dr - 85% of Bitcoin users voluntarily have chosen to use Bitcoin Core over alternatives. Most of those people don't give a fuck about who gmaxwell is or what he says.

[deisik]

Segwit will not be activated in Bitcoin so the big blockers have nothing to be afraid of. One interesting development is in Litecoin. It might be a big possibility that Segwit will be activated there and soon they will have their own version of the Lightning Network. Can one now say that Litecoin is more advanced than Bitcoin if Segwit is activated and they have their LN operational? Will Bitcoin see the light and follow their example?

That would be utterly pathetic

I guess if Litecoin adopts SegWit (and LN soon thereafter), it will be hard for Bitcoin to follow its lead since that would show in the open that it has no panties how corrupt and backward Bitcoin itself is, after so many disputes, debates, and quarrels. On the other hand, it will be more interesting to see how these updates will eventually affect the adoption and price of Litecoin. If everything is okay with updating Litecoin to SW and LN, this can't possibly have a negative effect but how much it could boost the price remains to be seen, though. So we should just watch Litecoin closely as it reacts on the news linked to the actual implementation of these proposals

[franky1]

What I must strongly caution against is taking elements of Monero's dynamic blocksize, with critical security components removed, and expecting them to work in Bitcoin. This I am afraid can easily lead to disaster.

Edit: The total fees per block in Monero are actually set to be proportional to the block reward. Think about this when combined with a block reward that falls to zero over time.

mhm.. yea core are stupidly going for the most foolish 'dynamic' method they can, as a way to turn people away from wanting it.

its like going up to a starving man with food you know he wants.. then rubbing the food between your a*scrack and handing it to him. and when he refuses to eat it, because you have only offered uneatable food .. you can scream to the world that starving people are not starving. because they refused your food.

they are desperate to keep onchain scaling halted, so are suggesting a dynamic method with market cap penalising code just to scare people away from wanting it. (people are smart enough to stick away from such stupid methods like this)

then claim "people dont want it", rather than offering a clean straight forward natural, non penalising dynamic method which people do want.
 

85% of nodes are Core (https://coin.dance/nodes). The biggest alternative has only 7%.

/Satoshi:0.13.1/   1512 (26.84%)
/Satoshi:0.13.2/   1165 (20.68%)
/Satoshi:0.13.99/   116 (2%)

~50% are segwit supporting whether they realise it or not.. yep 50% implicitly, but an unknown number below 50% explicitly.
the difference between implicit and explicit terms is that some people upgrade just because they see something new and shiny but dont understand whats 'under the hood'. so its not ~50% full knowledge explicit desire. it's less
the other 35% you are mentioning above ~50% are undecided. yep even if they love core. they have not decided yet or they oppose segwit. by not upgrading
(try understanding the context of stats)

we all know that only gmaxwell and those in r/bitcoin want the community divided.

"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." <Eleanor Roosevelt>
Discuss the merits of SegWit, not who the lead developer's baby momma's sister had a beef with last weekend. Technical merits, not gossiping about people.

kind of funny, i have actually in many topics highlighted the tech, explained it in laymans ELI-5 and shown the finer details that others sweep under the rug or word twisted with buzzwords to hide its importance or meaning. but as soon as i mention a persons name... its treated as attacking their king and thus they must defend bad implementation to protect the king. even if they dont understand the implementation.

gotta love blockstream fans playing the victim card, especially after poking the bear first

[Xester]

Im not very sure about agreeing to segwit or not. What I know that if segwit is approved it will boost the bitcoin blockchain capacity compared to the current blockchain capacity. This will signal much bigger blocksize and much faster bitcoin transaction speed. But the problem lies on the votation of miners since it need to get at least 95% of the miners population to officially launched this network. So lastly I will not say yes or no but observed as of this moment.

[Red-Apple]

-snip-
its shared on r/btc ?

no, because i do not like that place much. i don't like /r/bitcoin much either but it is a lot better than the other one.

but feel free to share, or even open up a new Poll here or on some other source like strawpoll or google polls if you think this is not good enough.

[doc12]

85% of nodes are Core (https://coin.dance/nodes). The biggest alternative has only 7%.

/Satoshi:0.13.1/   1512 (26.84%)
/Satoshi:0.13.2/   1165 (20.68%)
/Satoshi:0.13.99/   1165 (2%)

~50% are segwit supporting whether they realise it or not.. yep 50% implicitly, but an unknown number below 50% explicitly.
the difference between implicit and explicit terms is that some people upgrade just because they see something new and shiny but dont understand whats 'under the hood'. so its not ~50% full knowledge explicit desire. it's less
the other 35% you are mentioning above ~50% are undecided. yep even if they love core. they have not decided yet or they oppose segwit. by not upgrading

~7% are BU supporting whether they realise it or not.. yep 7% implicitly, but an unknown number below 7% explicitly.
the difference between implicit and explicit terms is that some people upgrade just because they see something new and shiny but dont understand whats 'under the hood'. so its not ~7% full knowledge explicit desire. it's less...

[franky1]

Also, someone needs to explain about SegWit for regular users to prevent misunderstanding.

i have actually tried being unbiased.. and done such

ok imagine this is a ~450bye tx
*********************************************

input
signature
output

each star represents 10bytes for easy display

if you done the same tx but using segwit p2wpkh keys, the transaction looks like this
*********************************************

one thing that will blow your mind. the blue and red stars(bytes) are still transmitted physically. but at code interpretation level they are not 'counted' as going towards what goes into the base block.

but because at code level an opcode is used to flag old nodes to ignore data after purple. making it look like an anyonecanspend

the other stars (blue, red) are only looked at by new nodes.
  old nodes see:*********************************************  grey is ignored
new nodes see:*********************************************

while unconfirmed
old nodes wont morally relay or add a segwit tx and instead drop it. however a malicious actor can tweak their code to relay/force it into a oldblock. (hence why wpkh wallet key generation is not released pre activation to avoid malicious attacks)

after feature activation,
because only purple stars are counted (yet more stars are actually transmitted). this trick can allow more transactions into the base block
because they have room for 100,000stars (1mb)

so where say 2222tx's was 100k(1mb) stars. if everyone used segwit keys. becomes ~50k stars(~50%), giving ~50k(~50%) spare room in the block for more transactions
but remember the blue and red is still real data but just not 'counted' by the baseblock

this allows ~5000tx's(depending on ins and out and how many people use segwit keys) into the baseblock but the reality is the actual data transmitted is 2mb even with the baseblock still limited to 1mb

P.S whats said above should be interpretted by the concept. i used rough numbers for demo purposes. dont get knitpicky about the numbers. just learn then concept of HOW the switch around is used and HOW things are 'counted' or 'ignored' by nodes.. and HOW it differs to actual data transmitted

then look at the extra bytes added later when extra features are added.. and have a nice day

highlighting the fact that old nodes drop/ignore uncomfirmd transactions.

BUT before confirmation because it appears as signatureless tx (anyonecanspend) old nodes can cause issues.

Pre-segwit nodes know they don't understand segwit transactions so they simply do not relay or mine them.
 They don't cause any issues.

you literally said it in the same reply.. they do not relay them.. meaning its an issue..
if a segwit node connected to a old node and then the old node connects to a pool... the pool wont get the tx.. because the old node drops it.

segwit node-old node- pool

so this is where segwit has to mess with what it connects to, to ensure its tx's get relayed to a pool
old node-segwit node- pool

or to get past your padantic sidestepping.. segwit by default looks to find segwits first and then after activation it will have to white list old nodes
edit: old nodes(downstream) of the segwit node(upstream/gatekeeper)

and the fact that there are full(Segwit) and stripped(old) block versions of the same block data..

if someone wants a stripped block they get a stripped block. But every node creates stripped blocks for non-segwit peers that want them,

the network connections of nodes is affected to ensure less issues (this is swept under the carpet). so i done this.

concentrating on left side below.. the red pool at the centre. going outwards

EDIT:gmaxwell buzzwords
downstream(old) <-> upstream(segwit) <-> pool

upstream(segwit) <-> pool<-> downstream(old)

however not many people will manually want to white list those old nodes and will think 'the pool or someone else can do it', which obviously will be the pools because of them being a segwit node, is able to whitelist some old nodes
and so
the image on the right is more so what the network would look like by adding in some context of human psychy .. bar maybe a couple purple lines that might go between the segwit nodes and the old nodes from some people who may make the extra effort


all because sending a segwit transaction unconfirmed to old nodes and pools not segwit ready has issues.
like i said they have not even got intention to release a wallet with segwit keys (p2wpkh p2wsh). and wont release it until the pools are ready and they have some segwit nodes to act as the gate keepers and translate the data to old nodes(in the left utopia)

please note
the not 100% node utility and not 100% whitelisting old nodes, change how the network dymanics look.
and
about transaction count
not 100% segwit key use, changes how much expectation/achievement of the actual one time boost of transaction count is actually reached.

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

Posting this here so a bunch of people with paid signatures can answer with short meaningless replies.