Segregated Witness vs Bitcoin Unlimited vs Do Nothing

[newIndia]

From what I see SegWit is gaining more and more %.

95% in next 7 month is just impossible.

[1715613791]

1715613791

[1715613791]

1715613791

[1715613791]

1715613791

[1715613791]

1715613791

[cryptoanarchist]

From what I see SegWit is gaining more and more %.

95% in next 7 month is just impossible.

95% in any amount of time is impossible. They will never get past the amount of hash power that is for bigger blocks. BU will pick up hashing power once it is firmly over 40% that will send it over 50%. Then things will probably go quickly as the rest of miners will be pressured to also accept big blocks.

[newIndia]

From what I see SegWit is gaining more and more %.

95% in next 7 month is just impossible.

95% in any amount of time is impossible. They will never get past the amount of hash power that is for bigger blocks. BU will pick up hashing power once it is firmly over 40% that will send it over 50%. Then things will probably go quickly as the rest of miners will be pressured to also accept big blocks.

But, I wonder, who'll bell the cat? I mean, what I understand, BU may gain 75% hash power and still operate as 1mb, until a pool owner raises the limit to 2mb or 8mb... whatever. Others are at their will to follow or not. I wonder, which pool will take the risk of losing 12.5 BTC by raising the block size?

[franky1]

Others are at their will to follow or not. I wonder, which pool will take the risk of losing 12.5 BTC by raising the block size?

unlike core that bypass node consensus. bu and other dynamic and >1mb blocks wont make blocks over 1mb unless they have both node and pool consensus.

dont start thinking they are gonna make a 4 or 8mb block instantly .. thats more reddit fud drama creating false narative
they will start slow like 1.000250 and test the water for issues (like the 500kb level db issue core had in 2013) , orphan risk and timing to propagate.. and slowly increase increments when demed safe and it actually forms blockheight

logically and naturally.
which if the block does not get accepted its not "losing 12.5" .. its just not winning /gaining 12.5..

you only gain 12.5btc after 100 confirms. so you cant really risk losing 12.5 unless you had it in the first place

[newIndia]

if the block does not get accepted its not "losing 12.5" .. its just not winning /gaining 12.5..

If the block is orphaned after wasting hash power to find it, then should not we call it losing?

you only gain 12.5btc after 100 confirms.

I dont get this 100 confirms part. Does BU has such logic?

[AngryDwarf]

you only gain 12.5btc after 100 confirms.

I dont get this 100 confirms part. Does BU has such logic?

Newly minted coins are not spendable until after 100 confirmations. Standard protocol.

[franky1]

if the block does not get accepted its not "losing 12.5" .. its just not winning /gaining 12.5..

If the block is orphaned after wasting hash power to find it, then should not we call it losing?

nope.
if it doesnt get accepted and doesnt stay in the chain. then the pool never had it

there are 20 pools and only one block gets it in an average of 10 minutes
put it this way

EG thats why if a pool put in a reward of lets say 1000000btc..
it would get rejected.. does not mean it had it and lost it.. it just means it never had 1000000btc

yes it wasted hash trying..

but doesnt mean it lost 12.5btc or 1000000btc.. it just means it didnt win..

when you play the lottery.. you dont lose millions.. you just dont win, someone else does

[newIndia]

if the block does not get accepted its not "losing 12.5" .. its just not winning /gaining 12.5..

If the block is orphaned after wasting hash power to find it, then should not we call it losing?

nope.
if it doesnt get accepted and doesnt stay in the chain. then the pool never had it

there are 20 pools and only one block gets it in an average of 10 minutes
put it this way

EG thats why if a pool put in a reward of lets say 1000000btc..
it would get rejected.. does not mean it had it and lost it.. it just means it never had 1000000btc

yes it wasted hash trying..

but doesnt mean it lost 12.5btc or 1000000btc.. it just means it didnt win..

when you play the lottery.. you dont lose millions.. you just dont win, someone else does

That's a different explanation than the original course of discussion. I said...

I wonder, which pool will take the risk of losing 12.5 BTC by raising the block size?

The question of loss is coming here because one pool need to take the risk of raising block size. There is not much extra reward for this risk other than some minuscule mining fee. It is BIG risk vs little reward and hence I said risk of losing 12.5 BTC.

[XbladeX]

Will be nice to see BU fork away forever.

[ReckLess.6]

Will be nice to see BU fork away forever.

If they do, that might not be a sweet story for Core chain as well. Because BU will fork only when they have above 50% hash power. This majority hash power supporting them may do rogue things to core chain and the only option left at that time will be to change the algo.

[Lauda]

Does BU has such logic?

The logic behind EC, as implemented by BU, ensures that no amount of confirmations is enough to secure your payment due to chain reorganizations (not that this is relevant to the 100 number).

Will be nice to see BU fork away forever.

Ironically, those who claim to be "pro-users" and "pro-capacity" are the ones that are staling a capacity increase. Without BU, we'd be long within >1 MB blocks due to Segwit activation & usage.

This majority hash power supporting them may do rogue things to core chain and the only option left at that time will be to change the algo.

They can surely attempt that. Good luck explaining this behavior to anyone looking to join their chain (investment, development and any other kind of form of interaction). "Remember that time when we played dictators and attacked anyone who didn't obey our rules?"

[ReckLess.6]

This majority hash power supporting them may do rogue things to core chain and the only option left at that time will be to change the algo.

They can surely attempt that. Good luck explaining this behavior to anyone looking to join their chain (investment, development and any other kind of form of interaction). "Remember that time when we played dictators and attacked anyone who didn't obey our rules?"

It started with Core...

Confession time: I lobbed the RAM grenades earlier. Core nodes were sufficiently armored to repel the shrapnel. All's fair in cryptoanarchy.

https://twitter.com/lopp/status/856498402951090176

[gmaxwell]

It started with Core...

No it didn't.

[cryptoanarchist]

It started with Core...

No it didn't.

I guess this means you know who was behind ddos attack?

[leopard2]

If BU activates there will be no more pie charts in the future. Asicboost will make sure only Jihan and his underlings will be able to mine profitably, so he will have 99% of the pie from then on.

And the Chinese government will control Jihan. End of Bitcoin story.

BU could be the most perfect software in the world and we should still oppose it. 

[Lauda]

It started with Core...

No it didn't.

I guess this means you know who was behind ddos attack?

Are you trying to imply that, in case of you not knowing or not having adequate proof of someone being behind [insertAttack] (any), you blame "Core" for it?

And the Chinese government will control Jihan. End of Bitcoin story.

What makes you think that they already are not?

[cryptoanarchist]

If BU activates there will be no more pie charts in the future. Asicboost will make sure only Jihan and his underlings will be able to mine profitably, so he will have 99% of the pie from then on.

And the Chinese government will control Jihan. End of Bitcoin story.

BU could be the most perfect software in the world and we should still oppose it.  

For someone with legendary status this comment displays profound ignorance about how bitcoin works. BU doesn't 'activate', I think what you mean is if miners generate larger than 1MB blocks. When that happens, there will still be pie charts for various pools, there just will no longer be a 'SegWit' part of the pie.

I think that is what you're upset about.

[gmaxwell]

It started with Core...

No it didn't.

I guess this means you know who was behind ddos attack?

The post I was responding to has someone who was claiming to be responsible.

[franky1]

If BU activates there will be no more pie charts in the future. Asicboost will make sure only Jihan and his underlings will be able to mine profitably, so he will have 99% of the pie from then on.

And the Chinese government will control Jihan. End of Bitcoin story.

BU could be the most perfect software in the world and we should still oppose it.  

but wait..
wasnt the reddit propaganda that the blocks opposing segwit meant to be all be jihan...  67% (12+ pools)  
- im laughing at that part that jihan owns 12 pools(67%)..

if bu activates now controversially(wont happen, so relax) or segwit pulls the UASF bomb(could happen, they have made many threats)..
then bu, classic, xt and other diverse decentralised nodes would have 12+ pools and 67% of average blocks

- im still laughing how people still think the core opposition is just ver and jihan.
thats way beyond fox news sheeple mindset of repeating what they see... thats alex jones sheeple mindset of repeating what they see.

but in both cases.. all they see is one enemy that needs to be bombed. rather than think naturally about who poked the bear first

[steamon]

I don't like the bitcoin unlimited idea at all. I really hope it becomes segwit for now. If no agreement can by made then do nothing for a while. Like 2018.