Jihan blocks segwit on LTC: price crashes

[jonald_fyookball]

  BTC doesn't have to change, and can be used for high fee, but higher security large transactions,

This is something I consider a myth.  Here's why:

If Bitcoin has high fees, global demand is likely to drop.  If that happens, the price will drop, which will lead to lowered revenues for miners, which in turn will lead to lower security.

[Searing]

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.

Seg witness is not going to happen if bitmain gets its way. Also UASF is not gonna happen the F2pool guy said he'd play the same bitmain games if that happened.

Thus screwed. Its all on their twitter wars.

frigging cluster

brad

[dinofelis]

 BTC doesn't have to change, and can be used for high fee, but higher security large transactions,

This is something I consider a myth.  Here's why:

If Bitcoin has high fees, global demand is likely to drop.  If that happens, the price will drop, which will lead to lowered revenues for miners, which in turn will lead to lower security.

In any case, bitcoin's security is not that terribly high, because its security is derived from PoW.  At this point, I think that the total number of hashes "securing" the bitcoin chain is something like 2^85 (rough estimation on my part).  That means that the entire chain has a security level of about 85 bits.  That's much less than a single digital signature (a 256 bit ECDS signature has 128 bits of security, which means is it about 2^43 times more secure).

It is about a trillion times easier to redo the whole block chain, than to crack one single ECDS.
That's because PoW is an utterly stupid cryptographic security mechanism.

[basesaw]

Yes, the accumulated pump was because of the segwit. I see that a momentum is forming but bitcoin price against us dollar become agressive.

[kiklo]

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?

Of course they'll pour in, if only for proof of concept. There must be loads of Bitcoin projects waiting to roll out right now which'll head straight there. If Bitcoin gets left behind then so be it. However a successful LTC Segwit will also hugely increase the desire for the same on BTC.

As for a Lightning Network, I'd like to see one in action before deciding it's the greatest thing ever.

Groestlcoin activated Deadwit,

Tell the LN devs to use it, because all they have done is ignore groestlcoin and connecting it with LN. (Imagine that)
It is like they only care about sinking their claws into BTC.




 

[Amph]

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.

not a good solution, litecoin is even more instable than bitcoin, merchants don't accept it for a reason, also if what you say was a possibility why it was not done before?

it's not like litecoin need segwit to work side by side with bitcoin, also i was more in favor of sidechain than using altcoin to help bitcoin

[kiklo]

not a good solution, litecoin is even more instable than bitcoin, merchants don't accept it for a reason, also if what you say was a possibility why it was not done before?

it's not like litecoin need segwit to work side by side with bitcoin, also i was more in favor of sidechain than using altcoin to help bitcoin

Merchants do not hold Crypto , at least not the smart ones, they immediately convert it to FIAT to avoid market changes.

Agreed LTC does not need deadwit.  The only thing vendors & merchants have been missing is the coinbase LTC to Fiat Wallet, once that is active, you will see a paradigm shift from BTC to LTC for the faster speed and reduced fee structure.  Economics 101 , Cheaper & Faster & Just as Secure wins the day.  


 

FYI:
On GDax LTC is running over $11 , it is going up, not crashing. 

[Searing]

not a good solution, litecoin is even more instable than bitcoin, merchants don't accept it for a reason, also if what you say was a possibility why it was not done before?

it's not like litecoin need segwit to work side by side with bitcoin, also i was more in favor of sidechain than using altcoin to help bitcoin

Merchants do not hold Crypto , at least not the smart ones, they immediately convert it to FIAT to avoid market changes.

Agreed LTC does not need deadwit.  The only thing vendors & merchants have been missing is the coinbase LTC to Fiat Wallet, once that is active, you will see a paradigm shift from BTC to LTC for the faster speed and reduced fee structure.  Economics 101 , Cheaper & Faster & Just as Secure wins the day.  


 

FYI:
On GDax LTC is running over $11 , it is going up, not crashing.  

That is because this hashing war is pumping the price......wait till bitmain takes the profits is made in LTC by this move....sells it and then sends equip out (new equip we paid for
they are mining our paid and not shipped equip..knc did the same thing with btc miners neptunes ..took paid $$ filled data halls then shipped....they were worthless in 4 or 5 months and maybe made 1/4 back to ROI..same song as then imho) and then because of this NEW equip we are late to the game with the  diff  wil rise again.then report back to us the price of LTC w/o any seg witness being adopted and the price the same..unlikely imho

hope I'm wrong

but I"m figuring at best $6 LTC at best and at worse back to $4.15 LTC as a result of this cluster among all invovlved

later

[kiklo]

not a good solution, litecoin is even more instable than bitcoin, merchants don't accept it for a reason, also if what you say was a possibility why it was not done before?

it's not like litecoin need segwit to work side by side with bitcoin, also i was more in favor of sidechain than using altcoin to help bitcoin

Merchants do not hold Crypto , at least not the smart ones, they immediately convert it to FIAT to avoid market changes.

Agreed LTC does not need deadwit.  The only thing vendors & merchants have been missing is the coinbase LTC to Fiat Wallet, once that is active, you will see a paradigm shift from BTC to LTC for the faster speed and reduced fee structure.  Economics 101 , Cheaper & Faster & Just as Secure wins the day.  


 

FYI:
On GDax LTC is running over $11 , it is going up, not crashing.  

That is because this hashing war is pumping the price......wait till bitmain takes the profits is made in LTC by this move....sells it and then sends equip out (new equip we paid for
they are mining our paid and not shipped equip..knc did the same thing with btc miners neptunes ..took paid $$ filled data halls then shipped....they were worthless in 4 or 5 months and maybe made 1/4 back to ROI..same song as then imho) and then because of this NEW equip we are late to the game with the  diff  wil rise again.then report back to us the price of LTC w/o any seg witness being adopted and the price the same..unlikely imho

hope I'm wrong

but I"m figuring at best $6 LTC at best and at worse back to $4.15 LTC as a result of this cluster among all invovlved

later

http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/litecoin/#markets
Actually the Chinese are already taking profits,

OKCoin        LTC/CNY    $9,558,180    $9.03    
Huobi           LTC/CNY    $7,934,860    $9.29    
BTCC           LTC/CNY    $201,195        $8.94    

But everyone else is buying it up, so the market price is reported as ~$10.59 instead of over $11 that everyone else is paying.

 

[Instamined]

I don't understand how OKCoin has CNY pairs that were stuck at 66 CNY for the last week and longer while the U.S. flipped their shit and bought the top at $13 because of some useless segwit feature that isn't even getting activated without a total hardfork of the coin.

They have had and still have $9 litecoin meanwhile poloniex is going full retard.

[coinchaser007]

By hook or by crook Segwit will happen on Litecoin now. It's literally one man against everyone else by the looks of things.

Not sure about now, but yes probably at least before the end of the year.  Though, I wouldn't put it past this guy to lose money ramping up the hashrate just to try and get his way.

[kiklo]

No one gives a shit about deadwit.

It is the direct LTC/Fiat Wallet on Coinbase that is the game changer. 


 

[jonald_fyookball]

 BTC doesn't have to change, and can be used for high fee, but higher security large transactions,

This is something I consider a myth.  Here's why:

If Bitcoin has high fees, global demand is likely to drop.  If that happens, the price will drop, which will lead to lowered revenues for miners, which in turn will lead to lower security.

In any case, bitcoin's security is not that terribly high, because its security is derived from PoW.  At this point, I think that the total number of hashes "securing" the bitcoin chain is something like 2^85 (rough estimation on my part).  That means that the entire chain has a security level of about 85 bits.  That's much less than a single digital signature (a 256 bit ECDS signature has 128 bits of security, which means is it about 2^43 times more secure).

It is about a trillion times easier to redo the whole block chain, than to crack one single ECDS.

That's because PoW is an utterly stupid cryptographic security mechanism.

This is completely apples and oranges.  Of course it is harder (its essentially impossible) to brute force a private key than it is to solve a block or a series of blocks.   This doesn't make PoW bad.  Other security models like PoS have their own issues as well.

[Searing]

Seg witness is a done deal for ltc.

http://www.coindesk.com/litecoin-miners-back-plan-support-segwit-blockchain-upgrade/

[Zetminster]

Seg witness is a done deal for ltc.

http://www.coindesk.com/litecoin-miners-back-plan-support-segwit-blockchain-upgrade/

That is a good compromise. Will that happen to bitcoin as well?

[kiklo]

Seg witness is a done deal for ltc.

http://www.coindesk.com/litecoin-miners-back-plan-support-segwit-blockchain-upgrade/

Nope, a bunch of guys pretend they have an agreement, but they are irrelevant.
They did agree USAF is not an viable option. (We will see how long before they change their minds.)


All that matters is
3273/4689 (69.80%) blocks signaling! 6048 out of 8064 (75%) blocks are required to activate.
http://litecoinblockhalf.com/segwit.php

It stills says NO to deadwit.  
until it says yes , segwit=deadwit.


 

[kiklo]

Seg witness is a done deal for ltc.

http://www.coindesk.com/litecoin-miners-back-plan-support-segwit-blockchain-upgrade/

That is a good compromise. Will that happen to bitcoin as well?

Devs lying and saying , Oh sure, we will hard fork as soon as we are half full. wink wink nudge nudge
Once LN is activated on a blockchain it will never get a blocksize increase, because it decreases the reason for LN offchain transactions.  

BTC Blocks are already full, which means they should increase block size immediately.

No compromise, just more bullshit by a bunch of deceiving individuals.


 


FYI:  


Lucy is the Devs promising Larger Blocksizes, the Bald kid is the Miners.
(Personally don't think the miners are dumb enough to fall for the lies, but time will tell.)

[edonkey]

Seg witness is a done deal for ltc.

http://www.coindesk.com/litecoin-miners-back-plan-support-segwit-blockchain-upgrade/

Nope, a bunch of guys pretend they have an agreement, but they are irrelevant.
They did agree USAF is not an viable option. (We will see how long before they change their minds.)


All that matters is
3273/4689 (69.80%) blocks signaling! 6048 out of 8064 (75%) blocks are required to activate.
http://litecoinblockhalf.com/segwit.php

It stills says NO to deadwit.  
until it says yes , segwit=deadwit.


 

Let's be clear here. The only reason why segwit will not active on LTC for this period is because Bitmain is pointing all of their new mining hardware against it.

Prior to Jihan Wu deciding to nuke segwit (and make his pre-order customers pay for it, no less) it was at 85%.

Clearly you don't like segwit. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

But how can anyone look at what is happening and think that a single company interfering with protocol development is a good outcome.

[cryptoanarchist]

BU hashpower is over 50% the last 24 hours. SegWit is dead on bitcoin which means its dead for litecoin too.

I hope all you Blockstream trolls bought some lube with your AXA money...

 

[edonkey]

BU hashpower is over 50% the last 24 hours. SegWit is dead on bitcoin which means its dead for litecoin too.

I hope all you Blockstream trolls bought some lube with your AXA money...

 

I am nobody's troll. People can disagree with you on their own without being bought.

The success or failure of SegWit on Bitcoin has nothing to do with Litecoin.

But if SegWit activates on Litecoin (which is very likely, baring any more Bitmain shenanigans), will its success affect Bitcoin?

There's going to be some interesting times ahead...