When SegWit And Lightning Network Will Be Implemented?

[franky1]

Let's hope that it's sooner than later. We NEED segwit in order to keep improving the system, not only to scale, but because all of the improvements it brings in order to properly allow for stuff like improved LN and sidechains.

Segwit only brings good things to bitcoin, anyone arguing otherwise is a troll.

are multisigs broke? nope
will spammers(quadratic attack) use segwit keys if their intention is to spam the network? nope
will spammers(respend per block) use LN if their intention is to spam the network? nope
will scammers(malle-attack) use segwit keys if their intention is to scam merchants? nope
will scammers(RBF-CPFP-CSV attack) stop if their intention is to scam merchants? nope

[1713978427]

1713978427

[1713978427]

1713978427

[1713978427]

1713978427

[1713978427]

1713978427

[1713978427]

1713978427

[1713978427]

1713978427

[MadGamer]

LN will be implemented after SegWit because LN needs SegWit in order to work. So this has nothing to do with "makes it easier". Your 4-5 months are just the outcome if we have 15% new support of mines per month, which seems not to realistic for me. So far we had a steady rise followed by a stagnation. This makes me assume that we will see the stagnation for a while and then a sudden jump or drop. But how long this stagnation will go on is beyond my or anybodys ability.

It's clearly mentioned on their blog post that SegWit is not a must in order to have Lightning network functioning but actually makes things better as stated before by another user. "lnd’s channel design currently utilizes the upcoming Bitcoin upgrade: segwit. Although alternative less-ideal channel constructions are possible without segwit"

[kiklo]

Let's hope that it's sooner than later. We NEED segwit in order to keep improving the system, not only to scale, but because all of the improvements it brings in order to properly allow for stuff like improved LN and sidechains.

Segwit only brings good things to bitcoin, anyone arguing otherwise is a troll.

Anyone arguing for seqwit is a Fool,  

Segwit & LN, will bring counterfeiting & fractional reserve banking into Crypto.
If you want segwit , just cash out of crypto and put your money in a bank, same thing.


 


FYI:
BTC less than 30% agreed to segwit
LTC less than   3% have agreed to segwit.

Maybe you asshats in favor of segwit , should get a clue the Miners are too smart to fall for segwit.

[franky1]

the only reason LTC is thinking about lightning network and sidchains is not due to the community or the random miners desires.. its because of
Charlie lee... who's brother is...... bobby lee (btcc)
BTCC is main promoting (loudmouth advocate) of the segwit supporting couple of pools. and unsurprisingly paid by... the same guys blockstream are paid by
DCG

[shinratensei_]

Segwit only brings good things to bitcoin, anyone arguing otherwise is a troll.

So, if I see the polling of SegWit is decrease and that's also a troll by me? 
https://coin.dance/blocks

[Senor.Bla]

LN will be implemented after SegWit because LN needs SegWit in order to work. So this has nothing to do with "makes it easier". Your 4-5 months are just the outcome if we have 15% new support of mines per month, which seems not to realistic for me. So far we had a steady rise followed by a stagnation. This makes me assume that we will see the stagnation for a while and then a sudden jump or drop. But how long this stagnation will go on is beyond my or anybodys ability.

It's clearly mentioned on their blog post that SegWit is not a must in order to have Lightning network functioning but actually makes things better as stated before by another user. "lnd’s channel design currently utilizes the upcoming Bitcoin upgrade: segwit. Although alternative less-ideal channel constructions are possible without segwit"

To be honest i did not research all the details, and it is true that LN does not need SegWit as such to be implemented, but it needs changes and fixes. These come already with SegWit and even add some useful things. I guess this counts as "makes it easier". My bad.

[pedrog]

Contentious soft forks should not be implemented, besides that, miners have no real incentive to implement such feature.

[Carlton Banks]

Contentious soft forks should not be implemented, besides that, miners have no real incentive to implement such feature.

Segwit would increase the value of Bitcoin, so unless they have no BTC assets or never intend to hold them, miners cannot benefit. But of course, acquiring and selling BTC literally is their business, so they have an overwhelmingly large incentive. When you actually think about it.

[kiklo]

Contentious soft forks should not be implemented, besides that, miners have no real incentive to implement such feature.

Segwit would increase the value of Bitcoin, so unless they have no BTC assets or never intend to hold them, miners cannot benefit. But of course, acquiring and selling BTC literally is their business, so they have an overwhelmingly large incentive. When you actually think about it.

Considering LN will mean the miners LOSE onchain transactions fees to LN's offchain transactions ,

we must have different definitions for the word incentive.  


 

[Decoded]

I doubt segwit or the lightning network will ever be implemented in their current state. It may not be these updates themselves, but the groundwork they lay for future patches and whatever Blockstream wants.

I personally don't care, blocksize increase or segwit, they're both solutions for the same problem and both have haters.

[Carlton Banks]

I personally don't care, blocksize increase or segwit, they're both solutions for the same problem and both have haters.

If a blocksize increase was implemented without Segwit, would you start caring all of a sudden when the new attack vectors against the Bitcoin network start to get used?

[kiklo]

I personally don't care, blocksize increase or segwit, they're both solutions for the same problem and both have haters.

If a blocksize increase was implemented without Segwit, would you start caring all of a sudden when the new attack vectors against the Bitcoin network start to get used?

Link to potential attack vectors , so we know you aren't just making stuff up.  


 

FYI:  Galvin Andresen thinks increasing Block Size will be perfectly fine.
(He is known for being the lead maintainer for the original bitcoin client.)

https://news.bitcoin.com/andresen-blocksize-limit-remove/

Blocksize Increase: ‘Nothing Bad Will Happen’

The comments were made in response to concerns about an increase to 2MB by longstanding r/btc subreddit user u/Pool30.

“I believe the network will eventually have so many problems, that an increase in blocksize will happen. But 2MB is not enough, lets push for 8MB or 20MB instead,” u/Pool30 wrote.

Andresen replied:

        Yes, let’s eliminate the limit.

        Nothing bad will happen if we do.

[franky1]

I personally don't care, blocksize increase or segwit, they're both solutions for the same problem and both have haters.

If a blocksize increase was implemented without Segwit, would you start caring all of a sudden when the new attack vectors against the Bitcoin network start to get used?

Link to potential attack vectors , so we know you aren't just making stuff up.  

what CB doesnt realise is that even with segwit. spammers and scammers can just simply not use segwit keys, and stick to standard keys. thus segwit does not cure anything

malleation will still happen after segwit activation
double spends will still happen after segwit activation
quadratic sigops spam will still happen after segwit activation

and
not everyone will use segwit keys so dont expect the top estimate of the one time boost maximum tx potential segwit supposedly meant to offer

[pedrog]

Contentious soft forks should not be implemented, besides that, miners have no real incentive to implement such feature.

Segwit would increase the value of Bitcoin, so unless they have no BTC assets or never intend to hold them, miners cannot benefit. But of course, acquiring and selling BTC literally is their business, so they have an overwhelmingly large incentive. When you actually think about it.

Considering LN will mean the miners LOSE onchain transactions fees to LN's offchain transactions ,

we must have different definitions for the word incentive.  


 

Precisely my point, network fees exist so the network can sustain itself with decrease and eventually the end of the subsidy, Lightning Networks will take away those fees from miners, unless miners also enter in the LN game they will be losing money to it.

[Carlton Banks]

network fees exist so the network can sustain itself with decrease and eventually the end of the subsidy, Lightning Networks will take away those fees from miners, unless miners also enter in the LN game they will be losing money to it.

Can the miners make more money processing transactions, or from selling BTC at a higher price? You seem to be ignoring the latter

[kiklo]

network fees exist so the network can sustain itself with decrease and eventually the end of the subsidy, Lightning Networks will take away those fees from miners, unless miners also enter in the LN game they will be losing money to it.

Can the miners make more money processing transactions, or from selling BTC at a higher price? You seem to be ignoring the latter

You do realize that BTC block reward will keep halving , until the miners receive ZERO Block Reward,
at that time they will only be able to survive off of the transfers fees, that you want then to give away to a competing service.
That's right , LN is not part of BTC , LN is a service that will directly compete with them.
What is funny is that all of the LN Shrills , think the PoW miners are stupid enough to fall for it.

As far as your fake promises of the BTC Price increasing forever,
you ignore 1 very important economic condition
price-out-of-the-market
(idiomatic) To charge an exorbitant price for a service or product so that no one will purchase it.
                He's pricing out of the market, asking for $100,000 for that shack!
BTC has already priced out of the micropayments , this latest Price & Fee increase is starting to Price BTC out of many foreign markets.