Jihan blocks segwit on LTC: price crashes

[RamBahadur.Gurung]

The LTC price increase was somehow very attractive and many have joined the flow only to find out that it is just a bubble. I lost a few dollars from investing in LTC only to find out that its value will go down. And all of those things will be attributed to the blocking of segwit in LTC. But life must go on and the best thing to do really is to stick with bitcoin to avoid those bubbles.

Even I lost a small amount of money after converting some of my mBTCs to LTC. I am not going to trust any of these altcoins ever again. All of them are just bubbles and we will only lose money if we invest in them.

[pedrog]

The LTC price increase was somehow very attractive and many have joined the flow only to find out that it is just a bubble. I lost a few dollars from investing in LTC only to find out that its value will go down. And all of those things will be attributed to the blocking of segwit in LTC. But life must go on and the best thing to do really is to stick with bitcoin to avoid those bubbles.

Daytrading is quite difficult, if you don't have the proper knowledge you will lose money, you cannot simple put $200 dollars into Poloniex and become a successful daytrader.

Anyway, Litecoin still +133% in the last 30 days and that's a lot.

[QuestionAuthority]

even if segwit was the most amazing scaling solution in the world, it wont help litecoin that much right now since litecoin barely has any merchants.  it was just a p&d.

I think Litecoiners themselves would be the first to admit they won't have a capacity problem for a very long time, if ever. It would shine a light on them and attract more quality developers though.

It would do more than that. All of the various side chain devs could look to litecoin instead of bitcoin. Litecoin could pass over bitcoin in short order if that happened. How would you like LN to go with litecoin instead?

i really doubt that, segwit is not that useful for litecoin, it's just about hype and maybe helping bitcoin adopting it, litecoin will not go any where near dreaming to suprass bitcoin ever

Oh, you're so right.

And blockchain technology has no chance of ever being adopted by huge corporations all over the world without including Bitcoin. I mean blockchain technology is part of Bitcoin and it was first, right?  LOL

[Quickseller]

I have not heard about this cross blockchain transactions via LN prior to your post, although, I guess it does make sense if transactions can move from LN hub to LN hub.

I would however point out that all BTC LN hubs may not be able/willing to exchange BTC for LTC, so you may need to have your transaction go through a higher than normal number of 'hops' in order to get to a LN hub that is willing to do this.

I would also point out that a BTC LN hub will likely want a commission to exchange BTC for LTC (similar to how shapeshift.io takes a spread/commission), so going between blockchains might not be as frictionless as you imply.

More info here:
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/atomic-swaps-how-the-lightning-network-extends-to-altcoins-1484157052/

Also Coblee's post about it:
https://segwit.org/my-vision-for-segwit-and-lightning-networks-on-litecoin-and-bitcoin-cf95a7ab656b

The way I understand it, it simply needs to be a hub that opens channels with Bitcoin and Litecoin users. Hubs will charge transaction fees, and they may decide to charge extra transaction fees for LTC users, but it is a free market, it's relatively easier to setup a LN hub than an altcoin exchange and there may be much less regulation, so there will be a lot of competition so it will likely be much cheaper than existing exchanges. LN will also take the best route. From an end users perspective, all they will have to do is type in a litecoin address and LN handles the rest. This is why BTC segwit addresses start with bc1, ltc will have a different prefix.

Very interesting.

You are right that it is a free market, however I would anticipate that the market would result in LTC LN hubs that are willing to exchange ltc for btc will have both btc and ltc on an exchange and will trade ltc for btc whenever someone wants to exchange btc for ltc and vice versa (and of course will charge a premium above the trading fees on the exchange.

[AngryDwarf]

Cheer up segwit as a soft fork supporters, Jihan is providing the perfect setting for a trial UASF.

[bettercrypto]

The LTC price increase was somehow very attractive and many have joined the flow only to find out that it is just a bubble. I lost a few dollars from investing in LTC only to find out that its value will go down. And all of those things will be attributed to the blocking of segwit in LTC. But life must go on and the best thing to do really is to stick with bitcoin to avoid those bubbles.

Even I lost a small amount of money after converting some of my mBTCs to LTC. I am not going to trust any of these altcoins ever again. All of them are just bubbles and we will only lose money if we invest in them.

Seems a bad experience for you, well, who said we trust them  , most of the trader are just in for profit.  They take advantage of the fluctuation to gain a profit.  Just don't be emotional, learn how trading market works, and believe me you do not need to trust any altcoins, all you need is to ride that P and D in order to book a profit.

[peter0425]

The LTC price increase was somehow very attractive and many have joined the flow only to find out that it is just a bubble. I lost a few dollars from investing in LTC only to find out that its value will go down. And all of those things will be attributed to the blocking of segwit in LTC. But life must go on and the best thing to do really is to stick with bitcoin to avoid those bubbles.

Even I lost a small amount of money after converting some of my mBTCs to LTC. I am not going to trust any of these altcoins ever again. All of them are just bubbles and we will only lose money if we invest in them.

Seems a bad experience for you, well, who said we trust them  , most of the trader are just in for profit.  They take advantage of the fluctuation to gain a profit.  Just don't be emotional, learn how trading market works, and believe me you do not need to trust any altcoins, all you need is to ride that P and D in order to book a profit.

Correct. They are just pump and dump coins and for profit only like the whales or professional traders out there. We know that this is a fraudulent practice among big investors and you are caught by them. Yeah. Don't be emotional and don't try to recover your lost investment.

[Kanine Awe]

I'm confused as to what segwit is. Could someone possibly explain it to me? Thanks guy you are all amazing

[QuestionAuthority]

I'm confused as to what segwit is. Could someone possibly explain it to me? Thanks guy you are all amazing

SegWit was originally created to fix transaction malleability (a bug allowing transactions you send to be invalidated) and not even designed as a block size fix. Stopping transaction malleability meant moving some data called witness data (signatures in a transaction) out of transactions and off the Blockchain.

This fix moves enough data to increase the block sizes by up to 4MB but most people think that the network is most likely to settle at about 2MB block sizes if SegWit is ever implemented. The other way SegWit could increase transaction capacity, sort of, is by allowing Lightning Network. Fixing transaction malleability makes the network secure enough to allow LN and other off-chain products to work by using the Bitcoin blockchain as just a reconciliation ledger to begin and finalize transactions. This could make transactions faster but they really wouldn't be Bitcoin transactions in the classic sense.

This is about as much as I can dumb it down and still have it mean something.

[cryptoanarchist]

Hey SegWit trolls, do ya hear the fat lady singing?

[cryptoanarchist]

I'm confused as to what segwit is. Could someone possibly explain it to me? Thanks guy you are all amazing

Bloated software scrapped together a big $75 million budget from AXA/Bilderberg. They want to limit your ability to send funds directly on the blockchain so you'll be forced to use their controlled side chain, which will presumably be another PayPal.

[franky1]

I'm confused as to what segwit is. Could someone possibly explain it to me? Thanks guy you are all amazing

SegWit was originally created to fix transaction malleability (a bug allowing transactions you send to be invalidated) and not even designed as a block size fix. Stopping transaction malleability meant moving some data called witness data (signatures in a transaction) out of transactions and off the Blockchain.

This fix moves enough data to increase the block sizes by up to 4MB but most people think that the network is most likely to settle at about 2MB block sizes if SegWit is ever implemented. The other way SegWit could increase transaction capacity, sort of, is by allowing Lightning Network. Fixing transaction malleability makes the network secure enough to allow LN and other off-chain products to work by using the Bitcoin blockchain as just a reconciliation ledger to begin and finalize transactions. This could make transactions faster but they really wouldn't be Bitcoin transactions in the classic sense.

This is about as much as I can dumb it down and still have it mean something.

to correct the above

SegWit was originally hoped to fix transaction malleability (a data manipulation bug allowing transactions you send to be invalidated) and not even designed as a block size fix. Stopping transaction malleability meant moving signatures out of the middle of a transaction and append to the end of a transaction. thus also enforcing how the transaction data was signed with less chance of manipulation.
but this requires people moving their funds to a new keypair type not ever used yet to achieve this, and only works for those specific users using the new keys to not be able to manipulate the transaction data of their own funds.

then a dev (luke JR) realised it could implement it using a backdoor trick in a way that can avoid a full node and pool consensus and just need pool recognition.

This trick moves the signature to a separate area outside of the block, which means the new keypairs can snip off the signature from the end and fool old nodes into not rejecting the no-signature transaction because of the backdoor method.

which means it saves a few bytes transactions would have had inside the block.. to allow more transactions into the main block
which would (for new nodes that keep the signatures of segwit tx key users) increase the overall and combined data in and outside the main block to be (upto 4mb, but in reality well under)
most people think that the network is most likely to settle at about 2MB combined data (for new nodes that keep the signatures of segwit tx key users) but only if SegWit is ever implemented AND only if users move their funds to segwit keys..(emphasis on the need to move funds to segwit keys to achieve anything).

The other thing SegWit could do is allow other soft backdoor changes in easier, things like even newer keypair types like schnorr, LN keys and other things at later dates.

there are many flaws and drawbacks of this though.

[QuestionAuthority]

Frankly that's just babbling bullshit filled with your personal bias. Can't you give the new guy an unbiased breakdown.

[franky1]

Frankly that's just babbling bullshit filled with your personal bias. Can't you give the new guy an unbiased breakdown.

it need people to move their funds to new keypairs not even active or available yet for only those users to be disarmed from performing maleability and for there to be any chance of making more room in the main block for more transactions..

though there are many drawbacks to it

short enough??

[Kanine Awe]

Awesome thanks everyone for helping me learn I really appreciate it a ton!

[edonkey]

Not to turn this into a SegWit tutorial thread, but while people are talking about drawbacks of SegWit, how about some positives that haven't been mentioned?

Currently 60% of the blockchain is signature data. Since SegWit moves the signatures out of the transactions, non validating clients can reduce storage and double their bandwidth.

Even fully validating nodes can take advantage of this by validating the signatures of historic transactions, then discarding the signature data rather than storing it locally.

An often mentioned concern about doing just a simple block size increase is that it would increase the resources needed to run a full node. The implication is that the little guys who can't afford to upgrade would be squeezed out.

SegWit can aliviate or offset the storage increase by allowing nodes to discard already validated signature data.

Why would anyone consider a block size increase without SegWit? The answer is that some people don't understand what SegWit does, or have something to gain by blocking it (like Jihan).

Of course there are some people that dislike SegWit for their own technical reasons. I just don't happen to be one of them.

[cryptoanarchist]

SegWit is DEAD 

[edonkey]

SegWit is DEAD 

So you keep saying...

And yet Litecoin is only 3.5% from activating it. Without the attack from Bitmain, SegWit would be a sure thing on Litecoin this period.

Bitmain can't keep this up forever. It's just a matter of time before SegWit activates on Litecoin.

After that things will get really interesting.

[btbrae]

Jihan's dirty tricks of late only serve to increase the likelihood of a UASF and gives everybody a good picture of why letting miners play games with the signalling only invites centralized corruption and greed, and needs to end on both LTC and BTC and other coins.

[blade87]

even if segwit was the most amazing scaling solution in the world, it wont help litecoin that much right now since litecoin barely has any merchants.  it was just a p&d.

I think Litecoiners themselves would be the first to admit they won't have a capacity problem for a very long time, if ever. It would shine a light on them and attract more quality developers though.

It would do more than that. All of the various side chain devs could look to litecoin instead of bitcoin. Litecoin could pass over bitcoin in short order if that happened. How would you like LN to go with litecoin instead?

Or people could just use both BTC and LTC with LNs. BTC doesn't have to change, and can be used for high fee, but higher security large transactions, and LTC handle small transactions with small fees. Everyone wins, at least in the next few years. I'm almost certain that if LTC gets SegWit, it will buy BTC at least a year to figure out its own scaling problem (SegWit or another route), should it continue to have one if users decide not to use alternative technology.

So I think SegWit will happen on LTC for at least the reason of relieving some pressure on BTC and allowing it to do nothing for the time being. We will just likely have to wait a month or two, as "LTC Round Table" meeting is in June from what I've read.