How dose the User activated soft fork work?

[Quantus]

Lots of talk about the UASF what do you guys think about it?

This is a rather new idea yeah? Because of all the shit going down in China I imagine.

I'm not sure if this should be an option of last resort or the obvious choice to proceed.

Anyone know what the Bitcoin core developers think about all this talk of a UASF? Their input would be helpful I'm sure.

I have never supported a contentious hardfork but I'm starting to think its the only way to move forward, even if its not accepted as the one true bitcoin.

As far as the code is concered all it dose it boot out the bad actors in China right? Preventing them from using destructive techniques to mine bitcoins. Like mining empty blocks and spamming the network with fake transactions.

I can't think of any better options to root these baster out.

[1715063329]

1715063329

[1715063329]

1715063329

[1715063329]

1715063329

[franky1]

its where non mining, but proper full network validation nodes upgrade to really enforce proper consensus. but....
(here is the twist and betrayal)
while this opportunity should be used to have features properly implemented like dynamic block and 1merkle segwit(and other things)..
what is only being forced into the network is the soft 2merkle segwit changes and nothing else.

stupid thing is
if bip9 doesnt get the 95%

if UASF doesnt get the 80%

blockstream wont give up.
they will waste another year

http://www.uasf.co/

Can BIP148 be cancelled?

Yes. In the event that the economic majority does not support BIP148, users should remove software that enforces BIP148. A flag day activation for SegWit would be the next logical steps and require coordination of the community, most likely towards the end of 2018.

purely to try getting segwit activated and nothing else.(facepalm)

[Quickseller]

It doesn't.

[Quantus]

Man you guys post 24/7 don't you.
Hey I'll turn to the dark side if you pay me enough. How much do you guys get paid? Send me a tell/pm/e-mail.
Do they tell you what to say like word for word or do they just give you a list of things to talk about for that day each day? Do shills have like a ranking system? Do you get paid more if your creative? It can't be as simple as just post count? right?
Is there like a website I can sign up at or did they just come to you?

[FiendCoin]

Man you guys post 24/7 don't you.
Hey I'll turn to the dark side if you pay me enough. How much do you guys get paid? Send me a tell/pm/e-mail.
Do they tell you what to say like word for word or do they just give you a list of things to talk about for that day each day? Do shills have like a ranking system? Do you get paid more if your creative? It can't be as simple as just post count? right?
Is there like a website I can sign up at or did they just come to you?

I would love to add to my income with a paid shill gig

[Quantus]

I'm not sure I would be a good shill, I imagine you need good grammar and stuff. Like you would need to be a good communicator and debater; right? I don't have any of those skills but I bet I could insult enough people to shut down conversations and derail threads that went agents the agenda of my... umm 'boss, operator? The guy in charge dose he teach you how to shill? Do they give you lessons? Is there like a training video or manual or something? Do you have a quota to fill each day?

What do you call the guy who pays you,the grand master Shill, The holly one. Bob? I have so many questions. Do all the shills get together on the weekends and go out for hotdogs and smoothies? Are there like secret shill chartrooms where you talk about tactics? Are there like board meetings?

Have you ever been paid to show up for a real life Bitcoin meeting? Like do you attend Bitcoin events?

Do you file a w2 tax return or what? Can I deduct the cost of my computer as a work expense!?

[franky1]

quantus

the funny thing is
you ask a question

i give you an answer thats actually has the link to what you asked..

here i quote the link itself

What is a UASF?

UASF stands for User Activated Soft Fork. It’s a mechanism where the activation time of a soft fork occurs on a specified date enforced by full nodes

meaning its an oppertunity core could have used to do a proper job seeing as they are now including full nodes

The August 1st date allows for the economic majority to successfully activate SegWit. Theoretically, if the hashpower drops by up to 85%, it might take up to 13 weeks to complete an activation period. In this scenario, SegWit will still activate for all BIP148 compliant nodes.

meaning if if only hit 80% the "might take upto 13 weeks to complete an activation period" will be longer than 13 weeks. meaning issues.

which i then proved with

A flag day activation for SegWit would be the next logical steps and require coordination of the community, most likely towards the end of 2018.

but hey if all you do is want to copy and paste "shill".. then maybe you need to check your glasses if you dont like the answers rather than realise that blockstream cant take no for an answer. or realise that blockstream are wasting YEARS (upto late 2018) just to do half a job that not everyone likes even when that oppertunity could have been used better

P.S the blocking of certain blocks after activation of segwit (either bip9 or uasf) is not about just 'empty block guys or fake tx guys.
its about any pools that have said no to segwit.

meaning blockstream are doing all they can to get their 2merkle half assed version of segwit in to create their tier network.
rather than using the opportunity to get a 1merkle segwit with dynamic blocks and other features that can only be done by a node upgrade.

but its all been wordplayed by saying "economic nodes" and "user activated soft" even though it is about nodes needing to upgrade which in reality and no wordplay is hard consensus

..
(soft=pools only)
consensus = majority accepted
contentious/controversial no clear majority

(hard=nodes and pools)
consensus = majority accepted
contentious/controversial no clear majority

meaning UASF (without word play) is actually a hard consensus (not hard contentious/controversial).

[BillyBobZorton]

We need USAF because 2 miners can't dictate the fate of bitcoin. Simple inequation explains it:

count(user) >> count(miner) …

Time to kick miner's ass.

[AngryDwarf]

We need USAF because 2 miners can't dictate the fate of bitcoin. Simple inequation explains it:

count(user) >> count(miner) …

Time to kick miner's ass.

Miners include your transactions. Without them, you have no running system. You can kick their big butt all your like, but their big fat asses will just soak up the pressure.

Code:

if ( numMiners == 0 ) { numConfirmations = 0; }

So perhaps people should stop alienating them. From the white paper, miners operate on incentive, and vote on changes using their processing power. So if you want to get a consensus change implemented, you have to incentivise them to do so.
If you disagree with the way the system works, create a new system (altcoin).

[franky1]

We need USAF because 2 miners can't dictate the fate of bitcoin. Simple inequation explains it:

count(user) >> count(miner) …

Time to kick miner's ass.

they are not dictating anything

blockstream decided pool only vote.

if blockstream cant accept the result of a pool only vote. you dont nuke the objectors, you either accept the no vote or you try again with full community..

if the full community say no. then you give up.

EG
other implementations have not set deadlines or threatened they just plodded along for 2 years.
they accept whatver consensus decide.

blockstream need to man up and do the same.
full consensus vote OR redo segwit properly and include the extra's the community are asking for
non of this 2merkle tier network control with mining nuke bullcrap

[Carlton Banks]

We need USAF because 2 miners can't dictate the fate of bitcoin. Simple inequation explains it:

count(user) >> count(miner) …

Time to kick miner's ass.

Miners include your transactions. Without them, you have no running system. You can kick their big butt all your like, but their big fat asses will just soak up the pressure.

Code:

if ( numMiners == 0 ) { numConfirmations = 0; }

How about these....

Code:

if ( numUsers == 0 ) { pricePerBlock = 0; }

&&

Code:

if ( numUsers == BitcoinUsers ) { pricePerBlock = BitcoinPrice; }

I think that should make the picture a little clearer, wouldn't you say

[AngryDwarf]

How about these....

Code:

if ( numUsers == 0 ) { pricePerBlock = 0; }

agreed

Code:

if ( numUsers == BitcoinUsers ) { pricePerBlock = BitcoinPrice; }

I think you need to explain the logic a bit more on this one. I would need to understand what numUsers and BitcoinUsers represent, because if they are not equal the function does nothing!

How about this one:

Code:

if ( txDemand > txCapacity ) { userStatus = UNHAPPY; } else { userStatus = HAPPY; }

[deisik]

We need USAF because 2 miners can't dictate the fate of bitcoin. Simple inequation explains it:

count(user) >> count(miner) …

Time to kick miner's ass.

Miners include your transactions. Without them, you have no running system. You can kick their big butt all your like, but their big fat asses will just soak up the pressure.

Code:

if ( numMiners == 0 ) { numConfirmations = 0; }

So perhaps people should stop alienating them. From the white paper, miners operate on incentive, and vote on changes using their processing power. So if you want to get a consensus change implemented, you have to incentivise them to do so.
If you disagree with the way the system works, create a new system (altcoin)

Folks are not alienating miners

They themselves get heavily alienated by the current system which is used for transaction confirmations. As Cus D'Amato used to say, whatever a man does in the end is what he intended to do all along. It is basically the same with complex systems as well. We just finally got where we went all along with mining. The issue is not with miners as such, it is with their numbers which this system is set to taper off over the long run (sort of "there can be only one"). This is why this system is corrupt and why it should get replaced until it is too late

[AngryDwarf]

Folks are not alienating miners

They themselves get heavily alienated by the current system which is used for transaction confirmations. As Cus D'Amato used to say, whatever a man does in the end is what he intended to do all along. It is basically the same with complex systems as well. We just finally got where we went all along with mining. The issue is not with miners as such, it is with their numbers which this system is set to taper off over the long run (sort of "there can be only one"). This is why this system is corrupt and why it should get replaced until it is too late

The number of mining pools is much healthier than it has been in the past, and is probably at about the level at which variance is reasonable within the difficulty adjustment timeframe. The issue of the number asic manufacturers is more of a problem at the moment, which is probably just a tad better than software node distribution!

[deisik]

Folks are not alienating miners

They themselves get heavily alienated by the current system which is used for transaction confirmations. As Cus D'Amato used to say, whatever a man does in the end is what he intended to do all along. It is basically the same with complex systems as well. We just finally got where we went all along with mining. The issue is not with miners as such, it is with their numbers which this system is set to taper off over the long run (sort of "there can be only one"). This is why this system is corrupt and why it should get replaced until it is too late

The number of mining pools is much healthier than it has been in the past, and is probably at about the level at which variance is reasonable within the difficulty adjustment timeframe. The issue of the number asic manufacturers is more of a problem at the moment, which is probably just a tad better than software node distribution!

This is likely what you are made to believe

The number of pools in this case becomes utterly inconsequential if they are not independent, i.e. the majority of them might well be controlled by the same individual (and we all know his name). For the sake of simplicity, you can consider all mining pools from China as just one huge pool. Ultimately, Jihan himself might only be a strawman for the Chinese authorities (e.g. PBoC), i.e. he is doing what he is being told by the guys who don't want to reveal themselves. China is corrupt all throughout

[franky1]

This is likely what you are made to believe

The number of pools in this case becomes utterly inconsequential if they are not independent, i.e. the majority of them might well be controlled by the same individual (and we all know his name). For the sake of simplicity, you can consider all mining pools from China as just one huge pool. Ultimately, Jihan himself might only be a strawman for the Chinese authorities (e.g. PBoC), i.e. he is doing what he is being told by the guys who don't want to reveal themselves. China is corrupt all throughout

blah blah blah 2011-2013
less than 10 pools and al using just 2 manufacturers of hardware
ATI and GeForce
over 50 % was in america

now over 20 pools
more than 2 manufacturers of hardware
less than 50% in china (yep i said it)(go check out the stats of the so called "chinese")

but did we ever blame ATI for openCL
did we accuse ati for attacking bitcoin

PBoC corrupt??
wait.. was it chinese banks that made people homeless in 2008
was it chinese banks that bailed out the rich
yes governments are corrupt and banks are.. but thinking china is worse than america lol thats a laugh

i do love the whole reddit scripts of fox new's "bomb them bomb them bomb them".. but can you shows your REAL sources