Am I missing something or is BTU at 45% of the network hash

[rdnkjdi]

http://xtnodes.com/#block_explorer


In the last 24 hours (144 blocks), Unlimited + Classic hashrate is ~1420 PH/s (45.1%) of the total Bitcoin network (3145 PH/s).

In the last 7 days   (1000 blocks), Unlimited + Classic hashrate is ~1214 PH/s (38.6%) of the total Bitcoin network (3145 PH/s).

Am I missing something?

[Senor.Bla]

This might very well be true, but keep in mind that there is some variance involved, the last 24 hours seem to be higher due to this. The trend is more BU though. 

[pinkflower]

No, youre not missing anything. Bitcoin will surely hardfork to Bitcoin Unlimited before this year ends. Its slowly gaining the numbers and its trending to > %50. When it reaches that stage it will not be a case of if anymore but when. Although Ive heard about an emergency POW algorithm upgrade that will put a stop to all this.

[kiklo]

One question is how much longer before BW Pools picks a side,
8mb block is not receiving any more votes.
They are wasting their voting % on 8mb.

They could tip BTU 5% closer to winning forever.  

   

[kiklo]

No, youre not missing anything. Bitcoin will surely hardfork to Bitcoin Unlimited before this year ends. Its slowly gaining the numbers and its trending to > %50. When it reaches that stage it will not be a case of if anymore but when. Although Ive heard about an emergency POW algorithm upgrade that will put a stop to all this.

Be Interesting to see who the Public Trust More
China with the ASICS
or
Hackers with their Botnets
(Because they have access to the most CPU power.)

 

[Carlton Banks]

There is a real risk that BU will start adding sybil nodes to the network, to push BU nodes up to 51% or more (it should be obvious now that an overwhelming majority of genuine Bitcoin users do not want BU).


Once they've done this, the BU shills can just turn the whole thing into a great big charade (and let's be honest, faking it is their speciality)



Then the attack on the BTC chain begins. They can use 51% nodes and 51% hashrate to make Bitcoin unusable, no transactions will confirm on the BTC chain if they attack with sufficient vigour (and the BU pushers in chief have already said that this is their intention, to "help avoid confusion" lol).

We're being forced into PoW change. The sooner everyone admits this, the sooner we can move on, and with Bitcoin as undamaged as possible, preferably.

[rawbert]

We're being forced into PoW change. The sooner everyone admits this, the sooner we can move on, and with Bitcoin as undamaged as possible, preferably.

Well if you do PoW change at least make it GPU friendly so CPU botnets won't take over.

[kiklo]

There is a real risk that BU will start adding sybil nodes to the network, to push BU nodes up to 51% or more (it should be obvious now that an overwhelming majority of genuine Bitcoin users do not want BU).


Once they've done this, the BU shills can just turn the whole thing into a great big charade (and let's be honest, faking it is their speciality)



Then the attack on the BTC chain begins. They can use 51% nodes and 51% hashrate to make Bitcoin unusable, no transactions will confirm on the BTC chain if they attack with sufficient vigour (and the BU pushers in chief have already said that this is their intention, to "help avoid confusion" lol).

We're being forced into PoW change. The sooner everyone admits this, the sooner we can move on, and with Bitcoin as undamaged as possible, preferably.

LOL,

They have no need to block transactions, once they can hold 51% for a few weeks, all they have to do it release One > 1 MB block,
 that forks the network , and then release a BTU update with a hard coded checkpoint forever more locking Core weak chain from theirs.
Which means core can then force segwit on the remaining users , with only ~60% of the now decreased hash rate (Still won't get 95%).
or update their core code to accept larger blocks and rejoin BTU as the one and only Bitcoin, their choice.

If Core changed the PoW , then they throw the ASICS miners that voted for them under the Bus.
No Loyalty among thieves.  

Those ASICS miners will have no choice but to support BTU or have all of their warehouses of ASICS become worthless overnight.
So then the entire 100% of ASICS Miners will be supporting BTU and your SEGPAL coin only supported by Hackers Botnets.  
Do you want to guess which coin is going to be the more secure , BTU Wins Easily.
DeadWIT has Lost.

 

[Carlton Banks]

We're being forced into PoW change. The sooner everyone admits this, the sooner we can move on, and with Bitcoin as undamaged as possible, preferably.

Well if you do PoW change at least make it GPU friendly so CPU botnets won't take over.

That's a topic for discussion, sure, and I entirely see your point. Bear in mind there is no perfect solution, the basic choices appear to be

• Do nothing. BU aggressively destroys the BTC chain with the various means they have at their disposal
• Change to CPU only PoW. As you say, infecting millions of machines could give attackers an advantage against such a move, it depends how many honest miners we can attract
• Change to a GPU capable PoW. This would means inviting FPGAs into the mix too, and that could suffer different centralisation issues (although not as significant as the problem with ASICs)

Join the change-to-PoW discussion here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1833391.0

[Xester]

There is a real risk that BU will start adding sybil nodes to the network, to push BU nodes up to 51% or more (it should be obvious now that an overwhelming majority of genuine Bitcoin users do not want BU).


Once they've done this, the BU shills can just turn the whole thing into a great big charade (and let's be honest, faking it is their speciality)



Then the attack on the BTC chain begins. They can use 51% nodes and 51% hashrate to make Bitcoin unusable, no transactions will confirm on the BTC chain if they attack with sufficient vigour (and the BU pushers in chief have already said that this is their intention, to "help avoid confusion" lol).

We're being forced into PoW change. The sooner everyone admits this, the sooner we can move on, and with Bitcoin as undamaged as possible, preferably.

If we allow BU to take over the bitcoin network or let them monopolize the bitcoin mining sector then in the end bitcoin will be corrupted with bugs and many problems. The bitcoin unlimited has made the bitcoin community to somehow weaken their trust to bitcoin. If bitcoin unlimited will be successful then almost everyone who invested on bitcoin will leave and shift to ethereum.

[rdnkjdi]

There is a real risk that BU will start adding sybil nodes to the network, to push BU nodes up to 51% or more (it should be obvious now that an overwhelming majority of genuine Bitcoin users do not want BU).


Once they've done this, the BU shills can just turn the whole thing into a great big charade (and let's be honest, faking it is their speciality)



Then the attack on the BTC chain begins. They can use 51% nodes and 51% hashrate to make Bitcoin unusable, no transactions will confirm on the BTC chain if they attack with sufficient vigour (and the BU pushers in chief have already said that this is their intention, to "help avoid confusion" lol).

We're being forced into PoW change. The sooner everyone admits this, the sooner we can move on, and with Bitcoin as undamaged as possible, preferably.

I don't intend to sound contrarian.  Over time I've moved to hoping core wins in spite of their many missteps as they're obviously the more qualified candidates.

But we aren't being "forced" into anything.  Anymore than the big blockers yelling about how they were being "forced into high fees by greedy miners" a year ago.  The governance we've chosen is governing. 

If we don't like it, the only way to move is with our usage & money.  I've watched this entire thing go on since Bitcoin XT.  It began as a whisper, grew louder and louder.  I left for a year and came back with 40% of the hashpower directed at BTCU.  In addition to the btc reddit being almost as active as the bitcoin reddit (thank you censorship).  This is hardly some weird loudmouthed faction.  It has steadily grown into almost a consensus over a few years.

There is plenty of blame to go around in this entire debacle.  Both sides are so busy screaming it's almost impossible to figure out what's really going on.

[zimmah]

It's probably around 41%~43% or so.

It's hard to tell how much hashrate they have exactly because of variance, but it probably a bit above 40%.

[Carlton Banks]

I don't intend to sound contrarian.  Over time I've moved to hoping core wins in spite of their many missteps as they're obviously the more qualified candidates.

But we aren't being "forced" into anything.  Anymore than the big blockers yelling about how they were being "forced into high fees by greedy miners" a year ago.  The governance we've chosen is governing. 

You don't get it

BU can be used like a weapon against the BTC chain. There will be no BTC to govern in that circumstance, and the BU chief scientpropagandist has literally stated that their intention is to prevent the BTC chain from being able to continue, once they hard fork.


So, yes, we are being forced to change the PoW. Because that's literally the only way to stop this class of attacks, QED

[European Central Bank]

save judgement for stretches of 2016 blocks before anything else.

yesterday segwit was on the rise. tomorrow it may be again or nowhere.

[jonald_fyookball]

There is a real risk that BU will start adding sybil nodes to the network, to push BU nodes up to 51% or more (it should be obvious now that an overwhelming majority of genuine Bitcoin users do not want BU).


Once they've done this, the BU shills can just turn the whole thing into a great big charade (and let's be honest, faking it is their speciality)



Then the attack on the BTC chain begins. They can use 51% nodes and 51% hashrate to make Bitcoin unusable, no transactions will confirm on the BTC chain if they attack with sufficient vigour (and the BU pushers in chief have already said that this is their intention, to "help avoid confusion" lol).

We're being forced into PoW change. The sooner everyone admits this, the sooner we can move on, and with Bitcoin as undamaged as possible, preferably.

If we allow BU to take over the bitcoin network or let them monopolize the bitcoin mining sector then in the end bitcoin will be corrupted with bugs and many problems. The bitcoin unlimited has made the bitcoin community to somehow weaken their trust to bitcoin. If bitcoin unlimited will be successful then almost everyone who invested on bitcoin will leave and shift to ethereum.

Plenty of room for Core, Classic, XT, BU, whatever... BU is just a catalyst to bigger blocks since the Core team has tried to rule with an iron fist and the miner's ain't having it... They are SAVING us from people leaving to ethereum because there will actually be allowed to grow again.  Blockstream wants bitcoin to grow... but only on their terms.

[Oznog]

The miners rules (fully influenced by the market price).
The miners will deploy the nodes themselves if necessary.
The miners will hit the table.

Markets will have no choice but to accept the chain with more proof-of-work.

Developers will have to provide better simple and good on-chain solutions, respecting the path of Satoshi.
"Paid communicators" will be unmasked over time.

Those who have believed themselves smarter than Satoshi will bite the dust.

Those surprised should read the following document that may be of interest:
https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

[Carlton Banks]

They are SAVING us from people leaving to ethereum because there will actually be allowed to grow again.  Blockstream wants bitcoin to grow... but only on their terms.

So how come your Chief propagandist Peter Rizun has stated he wants the miners to use BU against the BTC chain, to prevent the BTC chain from operating?


If this was really about free-market competition, Peter Rizun wouldn't be promoting the use of force against legitimate competitors, using the lame excuse "to stop people becoming confused about the fork"

[uchalkql]

There is a real risk that BU will start adding sybil nodes to the network, to push BU nodes up to 51% or more (it should be obvious now that an overwhelming majority of genuine Bitcoin users do not want BU).

Many new users download the first google result, and many take a lot of time to update software.
So it's FAR from true that many users don't want BU.

I am running core 0.14, but because of core don't care about users and don't update to 2(m3gaByt3s) and because of c3ns0rsh1p in this forum, I will download and use B1tcoin Unl1mit3d today.

[Carlton Banks]

Many new users download the first google result, and many take a lot of time to update software.
So it's FAR from true that many users don't want BU.

There are only 10% BU nodes today. And it's already been demonstrated that a majority of those are run by 1 person from the same cloud hosting service.

I am running core 0.14, but because of core don't care about users and don't update to 2(m3gaByt3s) and because of c3ns0rsh1p in this forum, I will download and use B1tcoin Unl1mit3d today.

Users have had the opportunity to switch to a 2MB blocksize client, twice. Users rejected it, twice.

[Oznog]

There are only 10% BU nodes today. And it's already been demonstrated that a majority of those are run by 1 person from the same cloud hosting service.

I'm sorry to have to correct you, but I have a Bitcoin Unlimited node with symmetrical 200mbps, 41ms and 24/7.
So at least we are two people.

Users have had the opportunity to switch to a 2MB blocksize client, twice. Users rejected it, twice.

Users, nodes and developers do not have any special authority on Bitcoin.