Segwit on Bitcoin has Failed , BTC Core has Lost , The Miners have Won

[Quickseller]

Roger Ver and ViaBTC have signalled that they will support segwit if the majority does. They don't want to be the hold up. So all it takes are F2Pool and Antpool. F2Pool already said that they will support it but not any time soon.

You are essentially saying that it will only take 'everyone' to support SegWit. Also F2Pool and AntPool collectively have about a third of the network hashrate, and if you add that to the roughly 23% support rate for SegWit currently, you will only get ~50%.

Pool.bitcoin.com and ViaBTC will likely be the last to signal SegWit, they are not actively supporting SegWit.

BTW: No one wins if segwit fails.

That is debatable.

1 - If the decision to implement SegWit was that clear cut, then it would be implemented already.

2 - SegWit will pave the way for LN, which will radically change how Bitcoin is used (if this is a good thing or not is an entirely different topic of conversation), and LN as currently developed is not possible without SegWit (although it is claimed to be possible without SegWit).

3 - A very simple solution to scaling is to do a "clean" max block size increase to at least kick the can down the road a little bit so to speak. Another option would be to implement a BIP101-style max blocksize increase (although not necessarily on the same schedule).

[1715223028]

1715223028

[1715223028]

1715223028

[1715223028]

1715223028

[mezzomix]

Segwit is DEAD!

You are right, with current settings about consensus, SegWit has (unfortunately?) no chance to come to life.

The system will continue to work with the current rules fine. There is currently no show stopper bug that makes changes mandatory.

I feel like the devs should have somehow enforced this (with the risk of ETH fiasco, I know).

No. If you don't like what some miners are doing, don't relay their new blocks. It's up to you, not the developers!

[Amph]

Do you realise that segwit has until Nov to activate ?  i think you are a little premature.  

And I think many of you can't do math.

8 MB Blocks                   7.5% =>   100%- 7.5% =  92.5%   SEGWIT FAIL
or
Bitcoin Unlimited          18.3% =>   100%-18.3% =  81.7%   SEGWIT FAIL

Combined                    25.8%  =>   100%-25.8% = 74.2%   SEGWIT FAIL


Segwit has failed, Game Over it will never reach 95%.


 

still segwit is holding the biggest %, the other options will not see the light ever, the only thing that miners might want to do if they abandon segwit is 2MB hardofrk i can't see anythign else, unless a new way to fix the scalability appear

i still think that the current 1MB can keep it up until $10k per coin, without having much trouble with slow transaction besides spam to try to force it...

[digaran]

Well last time I checked miners are the only winners, afaik every one is trying to take over the network with a hostile approach since mining is a tight competition. but the failure of any proposal good or bad just shows how decentralized the network is. to be honest I have no idea what exactly is segwit? all I see is full blocks and higher fees every day but I don't know why wouldn't they increase the 1MB limit like 50% because I'm sure all we need(as users and not miners and not agents of money masters) is 500KB more block size.
For those thinking there are actually spam attacks I should say you are just uninformed, they are not spam but since mining bitcoin is processing transactions miners create those transactions themselves .

[Jet Cash]

SegWit seems to have so many advantages, that I don't see why so many people object to it. Why don't you adopt it, and lets get on with getting Bitcoin accepted for the payment for virtual assets .

[kiklo]

SegWit seems to have so many advantages, that I don't see why so many people object to it. Why don't you adopt it, and lets get on with getting Bitcoin accepted for the payment for virtual assets .

Advantage
 #1 : Allowing the LN devs to steal transactions fees directly from the miners.
(And expecting the miners to agree to it.)  

Say if your really feel that way, PM me your BTC private keys & address, so I can take your money away from you.  
(That is what you are asking the miners to do.)


 


FYI:
When you don't give me your money , why do you expect the miners to give away theirs? 

[mezzomix]

SegWit seems to have so many advantages, that I don't see why so many people object to it. Why don't you adopt it, and lets get on with getting Bitcoin accepted for the payment for virtual assets .

Advantage
 #1 : Allowing the LN devs to steal transactions fees directly from the miners.
(And expecting the miners to agree to it.)  

Say if your really feel that way, PM me your BTC private keys & address, so I can take your money away from you.  
(That is what you are asking the miners to do.)

You say the miners have the right to receive a fee for every transaction, even if it is not included in a block found by them?! Never! The day the miners act as a central bank / owner of the Bitcoin system is the day we need to get rid of those miners!

This means the number 1 priority for the next hard-fork is changing the mining algorithm!

[kiklo]

SegWit seems to have so many advantages, that I don't see why so many people object to it. Why don't you adopt it, and lets get on with getting Bitcoin accepted for the payment for virtual assets .

Advantage
 #1 : Allowing the LN devs to steal transactions fees directly from the miners.
(And expecting the miners to agree to it.)  

Say if your really feel that way, PM me your BTC private keys & address, so I can take your money away from you.  
(That is what you are asking the miners to do.)

You say the miners have the right to receive a fee for every transaction, even if it is not included in a block found by them?! Never! The day the miners act as a central bank / owner of the Bitcoin system is the day we need to get rid of those miners!

This means the number 1 priority for the next hard-fork is changing the mining algorithm!

OK, you are confused. 
Miners only receive transaction fees for the individual blocks they include transactions in.


 

[NeuroticFish]

Segwit is DEAD!

You are right, with current settings about consensus, SegWit has (unfortunately?) no chance to come to life.

The system will continue to work with the current rules fine. There is currently no show stopper bug that makes changes mandatory.

I don't agree. When 40MB mempool is usual, when people come here each other day asking why their transaction (made with perfectly valid wallets) are not processed, then it's not normal.

I feel like the devs should have somehow enforced this (with the risk of ETH fiasco, I know).

No. If you don't like what some miners are doing, don't relay their new blocks. It's up to you, not the developers!

So only the miners and the nodes have the power to do anything.
And the rest, the ones paying for the service, (me included) can just go to h***, right?
No. There has to be another way.

[mezzomix]

Miners only receive transaction fees for the individual blocks they include transactions in.

Right. So Off-Chain Transaktions, selling Casascius Coins and other transactions outside of the blocks will not steal transaction fees from miners!

So only the miners and the nodes have the power to do anything.
And the rest, the ones paying for the service, (me included) can just go to h***, right?

Wrong. The others have to carefully select their (paid) payment provider. Bitcoin is your money. This means YOU are responsible - so act accordingly!

[Xester]

Segwit needs 95% to activate.

Current Numbers
https://coin.dance/blocks

Explicit Mining Pool Support by Proposal
SegWit                        24.6%
Bitcoin Unlimited          18.3%
8 MB Blocks                   7.5%

If the current Voters for Bitcoin Unlimited and 8 MB Blocks do not change their votes, (either alone is enough to block segwit)
Segwit will NEVER ATTAIN the 95% needed.

Segwit is DEAD!

Suggest BTC core start working on a blocksize increase solution ASAP, because no matter what else happens Segwit is Dead on Arrival. 


 

In my opinion this is a great news,being segwit out of the way btc core has no choice but to adopt 8 mb blocks as an alternative solution. If segwit is out of the picture and bitcoin unlimited is not a good choice then the last choice for bitcoin core was to bid on 8mb blocksize. Finally the end of slow transactions will come to be realized but let us observe what will be the next move of btc core as it will affect the future mining situation.

[Slark]

Segwit needs 95% to activate.

Current Numbers
https://coin.dance/blocks

Explicit Mining Pool Support by Proposal
SegWit                        24.6%
Bitcoin Unlimited          18.3%
8 MB Blocks                   7.5%

If the current Voters for Bitcoin Unlimited and 8 MB Blocks do not change their votes, (either alone is enough to block segwit)
Segwit will NEVER ATTAIN the 95% needed.

Segwit is DEAD!

Suggest BTC core start working on a blocksize increase solution ASAP, because no matter what else happens Segwit is Dead on Arrival.  


 

In my opinion this is a great news,being segwit out of the way btc core has no choice but to adopt 8 mb blocks as an alternative solution. If segwit is out of the picture and bitcoin unlimited is not a good choice then the last choice for bitcoin core was to bid on 8mb blocksize. Finally the end of slow transactions will come to be realized but let us observe what will be the next move of btc core as it will affect the future mining situation.

Have you seen the stats? You said that SegWit is dead, so lets embrace 8MB blocksize increase instead. But as you can see 8MB Blocks are supported only by 7.5% hash power.
It is far worse that SegWit's or BU support, do you think that miners who supported BU and SegWIt will now happy chose the least popular solution?

At this moment I think that every kind of super consensus requiring more than 80% majority to be accepted is impossible. Bitcoin community is too divided.

[smoothie]

Do you realise that segwit has until Nov to activate ?  i think you are a little premature.   

And I think many of you can't do math.

8 MB Blocks                   7.5% =>   100%- 7.5% =  92.5%   SEGWIT FAIL
or
Bitcoin Unlimited          18.3% =>   100%-18.3% =  81.7%   SEGWIT FAIL

Combined                    25.8%  =>   100%-25.8% = 74.2%   SEGWIT FAIL


Segwit has failed, Game Over it will never reach 95%.


 

Math today != Math tomorrow

Be patient grasshoppah

[franky1]

At this moment I think that every kind of super consensus requiring more than 80% majority to be accepted is impossible. Bitcoin community is too divided.

the failure is that atleast 60% are UNDECIDED
the failure is that its been done as an A OR B. not an A AND B
the failure is that NODES have NOT formed a secure consensus so pools wont risk orphans pushing something that nodes wont validate to high %.

segwit fails because people can continue to use native keytypes AFTER activation. so malleation/quadratic sigop spamming still can happen. thus no fix.

the solution
NODES have BOTH (meaning core has dynamic block solution (but without cores stupid reward/fee penalty drawback(facepalm))
get node user acceptance, to give the undecided pools confidence that the network can handle what pools create.

again pools wont create a block that NODES cant handle so the solution is to involve the nodes

[hv_]

Do you realise that segwit has until Nov to activate ?  i think you are a little premature.  

And I think many of you can't do math.

8 MB Blocks                   7.5% =>   100%- 7.5% =  92.5%   SEGWIT FAIL
or
Bitcoin Unlimited          18.3% =>   100%-18.3% =  81.7%   SEGWIT FAIL

Combined                    25.8%  =>   100%-25.8% = 74.2%   SEGWIT FAIL


Segwit has failed, Game Over it will never reach 95%.


 

Math today != Math tomorrow

Be patient grasshoppah

Yeah - be patient and smoothly hoppa over to Monethereum ....

[franky1]

guys your still arguing about just "activating" segwit..
but not accepting the hard truth

people wanting to malleate/quadratic sigop spam. will continue using native keys after segwit activation.. meaning segwit solves nothing
people wanting to bloat spam. will continue using native keys after segwit activation.. meaning segwit doesnt get its magical 2.1x predicted tx count boost

segwit has failed on its promised before even getting to be used. because its an empty promise/temporary gesture.. not a solution

[BillyBobZorton]

Segwit needs 95% to activate.

Current Numbers
https://coin.dance/blocks

Explicit Mining Pool Support by Proposal
SegWit                        24.6%
Bitcoin Unlimited          18.3%
8 MB Blocks                   7.5%

If the current Voters for Bitcoin Unlimited and 8 MB Blocks do not change their votes, (either alone is enough to block segwit)
Segwit will NEVER ATTAIN the 95% needed.

Segwit is DEAD!

Suggest BTC core start working on a blocksize increase solution ASAP, because no matter what else happens Segwit is Dead on Arrival. 


 

The solution is already worked: segwit. It's not core's fault that miners are too stupid to adopt it. Also miners will never adopt any blocksize increase because the fuckers want fees as high as possible to make more money so stop thinking it's segwit what the don't want, they dont want any increase of blocksize.

Looks like we are stuck with 1mb for life, so lets hope for LN.

[DooMAD]

guys your still arguing about just "activating" segwit..
but not accepting the hard truth

people wanting to malleate/quadratic sigop spam. will continue using native keys after segwit activation.. meaning segwit solves nothing
people wanting to bloat spam. will continue using native keys after segwit activation.. meaning segwit doesnt get its magical 2.1x predicted tx count boost

segwit has failed on its promised before even getting to be used. because its an empty promise/temporary gesture.. not a solution

Okay, but even if you're skeptical about the benefits, surely it would still be better to see it in action first.  Then, if it doesn't deliver on its promises, at least it's an undeniable fact and not just speculation.  

Think about it.  If it does fall flat on its face, you get to say "I told you so" to a few dozen people who just lost a whole bunch of credibility and you're in a much stronger position to push for a blocksize increase.  All the people who are still queuing for blocks will be pissed and feel betrayed by everyone who argued for it and the majority will be screaming in unison for an increase.

And if it works as claimed, at least it will ease the congestion for a little while before we start the whole sordid song and dance again.  So the question is, how confident are you that you're right?

[hv_]

guys your still arguing about just "activating" segwit..
but not accepting the hard truth

people wanting to malleate/quadratic sigop spam. will continue using native keys after segwit activation.. meaning segwit solves nothing
people wanting to bloat spam. will continue using native keys after segwit activation.. meaning segwit doesnt get its magical 2.1x predicted tx count boost

segwit has failed on its promised before even getting to be used. because its an empty promise/temporary gesture.. not a solution

Okay, but even if you're skeptical about the benefits, surely it would still be better to see it in action first.  Then, if it doesn't deliver on its promises, at least it's an undeniable fact and not just speculation.  

Think about it.  If it does fall flat on its face, you get to say "I told you so" to a few dozen people who just lost a whole bunch of credibility and you're in a much stronger position to push for a blocksize increase.  All the people who are still queuing for blocks will be pissed and feel betrayed by everyone who argued for it and the majority will be screaming in unison for an increase.

And if it works as claimed, at least it will ease the congestion for a little while before we start the whole sordid song and dance again.  So the question is, how confident are you that you're right?

-> Lightcoin ....

[franky1]

Okay, but even if you're skeptical about the benefits, surely it would still be better to see it in action first.  Then, if it doesn't deliver on its promises, at least it's an undeniable fact and not just speculation.  

Think about it.  If it does fall flat on its face, you get to say "I told you so" to a few dozen people who just lost a whole bunch of credibility and you're in a much stronger position to push for a blocksize increase.  All the people who are still queuing for blocks will be pissed and feel betrayed by everyone who argued for it and the majority will be screaming in unison for an increase.

And if it works as claimed, at least it will ease the congestion for a little while before we start the whole sordid song and dance again.  So the question is, how confident are you that you're right?

have you read the whole network topology changes.
have you read the whitelisting/node filtering.

segwit is not about the temporary gesture. its about putting segwit nodes at the top of the network so they can control the network participants.

the 'benefits' to users are empty. its al about putting segwit-core nodes at the top of the control pyramid and ignore non segwit pools simply because they are not blockstream friendly. (even if the data is moral, ethical and containing valid native bitcoin accepting tx's)


if segwit is so 'backward compatible' then blockstream should just get BTCC to add a segwit tx to a block. and show that native nodes have no issues when its filtered around.

show that pools/nodes dont miscommunicate with each other.

worse case. they use $13k of their $90m. as a thank you to btcc for the test