Why I Am Still Not Voting for Segwit?

[AngryDwarf]

Have you ever considered what will happen in the event of a UASF? Without miner majority, those implementing the UASF are the malicious actors. It's a charge of the light brigade moment in this situation.

The amount of hashrate is really non-important. If practically every business and all exchanges support UASF, miners must join that chain or be left mining useless coins. You need to re-think the whole proposal out of the r/btc propaganda and re-think the incentives that it creates.

The keyword is 'if'. The exchanges and business that don't follow the UASF will increase their business. That's a big incentive for them to follow the majority hash rate. You need to re-think the whole proposal out of the r/bitcoin propaganda and re-think the incentives that it creates.

Perhaps you don't understand the Mutual Assured Destruction that a contentious fork will create.

[1715020138]

1715020138

[franky1]

SegWit and blocksize are two different issues. SegWit offers lots of advantages, and should be activated asap. Bigger blocks turn the Bitcoin delivery van into a lumbering articulated lorry, what is required is a rapid Bitcoin motorcycle delivery service with smaller faster blocks.

1. try to explain what advantages segwit ACTUALLY offer THE WHOLE NETWORK . i mean GUARANTEED features that are ACTUALLY achieved

[Lauda]

The keyword is 'if'. The exchanges and business that don't follow the UASF will increase their business.

Inadequate support == no UASF. It's as simple as that.

That's a big incentive for them to follow the majority hash rate.

No. FYI there were flag day soft forks in the past too.

You need to re-think the whole proposal out of the r/bitcoin propaganda and re-think the incentives that it creates.

Perhaps you don't understand the Mutual Assured Destruction that a contentious fork will create.

Cut out the bullshit and stop supporting hashrate attacks on the network, which is essentially what BU BTU is.

1. try to explain what advantages segwit ACTUALLY offer THE WHOLE NETWORK . i mean GUARANTEED features that are ACTUALLY achieved

A lot of people are waiting to start using Segwit TXs, that's your guarantee (partial, not 100% Utopian bullshit that you're talking about). On the other hand, BTU guaranteed features == none.

[franky1]

A lot of people are waiting to start using Segwit TXs, that's your guarantee (partial, not 100% Utopian bullshit that you're talking about). On the other hand, BTU guaranteed features == none.

"alot" "partial" "not 100%" sounds a bit flimsy

also thinking that its only a BU vs debate shows how limited your scope of judgement is.
there are more than a dozen implementations.

you use terms that are obvious repeats from the same reddit crowd.

just get yourself out of your cabin fever and tke a look outside of the box at the whole network and not just the glossy images that are in favour of corporate blockstream control.

as for the people that are waiting to start using segwit tx's.
those people are not the people that perform malleation/quadratics anyway. so nothing changes in that respect
those that are performing malleation/quadratics are the people that wont use segwit keys. so they will still malleate and quadratic spam the network.
meaning no fix

[AngryDwarf]

That's a big incentive for them to follow the majority hash rate.

No. FYI there were flag day soft forks in the past too.

Erm, can you explain the point you are trying to make? Was there a big hoohah about it at the time? Who were the actors opposing such a change?

I can't see why anyone would oppose this fix.

[soul-impact]

Note:Translated from Jiang Zhuo’er’s original post in Chinese.
Recently, as the discussion around activating Segwit on Litecoin becomes more and more intense, many people have been asking me why my Litecoin pool is not voting for Segwit. I feel the need to address the whole Segwit issue with the following thoughts of mine.


1. The big-block camp has never been opposed to Segwit, but rather they are opposed to Segwit without also increasing the block size.
2. The result of our hard work on Litecoin: The LTC Roundtable.
3. The development and stagnation of the Roundtable.
4. The market drives changes
5. More and more attacks
http://news.8btc.com/why-i-am-still-not-voting-for-segwit-an-open-letter-from-jiangzhuoer

You should not ask why LTC is easy to accept segwit and bitcoin is not acceptable. Because bitcoin requires a high approval rate (95%), while LTCs only need 75%, an easy rate for a currency that has come a long time ago and needs innovation. So, as soon as LTC made the segwit proposal, it was a lot of people agreeing. In addition, bitcoin does not need a segwit, it is really powerful enough for it to work independently.

[Lauda]

"alot" "partial" "not 100%" sounds a bit flimsy

All three are accurate representations of the reality. Anything else is an outright lie.

also thinking that its only a BU vs debate shows how limited your scope of judgement is.
there are more than a dozen implementations.

Straw man argument.

you use terms that are obvious repeats from the same reddit crowd.

No.

those people are not the people that perform malleation/quadratics anyway. so nothing changes in that respect

Miners can and will prioritize Segwit transactions in such cases. I have told you this several times, yet you keep misleading others like a true paid hypocrite.

I can't see why anyone would oppose this fix.

The same goes for Segwit. There is no rational reason to oppose it.

[franky1]

There is no rational reason to oppose it.

there is

TRY READING THE CODE!!!!!!

your opinion is moot.
you have not even read the code

you have not read the full documentation
you have only said "wrong, no, insult, strawman"

you have failed to show you fully understand it

for a year now i have gave you many oppertunities to actually spend time learning it all.
but your arrogance and devotion to blockstream have blinded you

just read the damned code and documentation in full
even your own words have debunked your own opinion..

one minute you say pools will prioritise segwit transactions yet for the last few weeks you have been crying about how some pools are abstaining or rejecting segwit.

68% of pools blocks are rejecting/abstaining segwit. so dont be fooled by the reddit narrative that pools will prioritise segwit.

WAKE UP to reality

[Lauda]

you have not even read the code
you have not read the full documentation

1) You can't know what I've read or what I haven't read.
2) Your completely intentional or unintentional missunderstanding of Segwit shows that either:
   2.1) You haven't read either one.
   2.2) You have read it, but you don't understand it.

one minute you say pools will prioritise segwit transactions yet for the last few weeks you have been crying about how some pools are abstaining or rejecting segwit.

68% of pools blocks are rejecting/abstaining segwit. so dont be fooled by the reddit narrative that pools will prioritise segwit.

One has nothing to do with the other and this has nothing to do with reddit. This is my own conclusion.

[jorneyflair]

A lot of people are not behind the SegWit right now, which is kind of understandable for me, because they need 95% of approval for that.
In my opinion, it will never happen in bitcoin, way too many miners are standing behind Bitcoin Unlimited, which basically makes SegWit impossible to implement.
Another important reason, is that im sure there are some miners that do not really care about SegWit or hard-fork either, they just want to stay on current Bitcoin Core without any changes.

So I hope that the BTC community will find altogether some solution, unless we really want to see blockchain being blocked by big amount of transactions every day.

[franky1]

1) You can't know what I've read or what I haven't read.
2) Your completely intentional or unintentional misunderstanding of Segwit shows that either:
   2.1) You haven't read either one.
   2.2) You have read it, but you don't understand it.

1. you have admitted you cant read C++, you ave admitted you cant read walls of text

2.1. i have quote code, i have quoted documentation. i have even shown examples of simple tweaks that could be considered as something more of the community could unite around

2.2 i have actually told you about the emphasis of the key utility and not the activation itself being the important part of segwits half gesture.
and all you can do is pleaded ignorant for a couple months then suddenly find a script that admits what have have said, but with subtle word twists.
such as how its a 'opt-in'.

but your still not getting the point. its not a network fix. its not a consensus implementation. its a back door half gesture with only if's buts and maybe's

yet the actual network effect is negative (the tier network)

atleast get passed the word twisting from your groupy mindset of blockstream adoration.. as thats temporary. just like segwits half baked gestures are temporary..
try to think with a critical hat and not a utopian sales pitch hat.

your only argument its to literally fail at describing segwit and to also fail at pidgeon holing me.


think about bitcoins 120+year and not blockstreams couple year 'experiment'

[Lauda]

A lot of people are not behind the SegWit right now, which is kind of understandable for me, because they need 95% of approval for that.

Wrong. Pretty much everyone besides a small minority of users, a few corrupt characters (Ver, Hearn, Andersen, Rizun, et. al.) and Jihan are in support of Segwit. Some pools have officially not made up their minds yet though.

1. you have admitted you cant read C++

I can read C++, I don't code C++. That's a major difference. If you familiar with one of the high end languages, it doesn't take much to understand the syntax of another.

you ave admitted you cant read walls of text

This is a lie, and yet another example of you posting false information. I've said that reading your worthless walls of text is a waste of time.

2.1. i have quote code, i have quoted documentation. i have even shown examples of simple tweaks that could be considered as something more of the community could unite around

Quoting part != reading everything & understanding.

2.2 i have actually told you about the emphasis of the key utility and not the activation itself being the important part of segwits half gesture.
and all you can do is pleaded ignorant for a couple months then suddenly find a script that admits what have have said, but with subtle word twists.
such as how its a 'opt-in'.

You understand nothing.

its a back door half gesture with only if's buts and maybe's yet the actual network effect is negative (the tier network)

This is another lie. I wonder how much $ you get per post.

[cellard]

i can see why many are disagreeing with SegWit on bitcoin (less than 70% of bitcoin hashrate) and what he says but in my opinion what he did in Litecoin is completely unacceptable because more than 80% of the existing litecoin hashrate of that time accepted SegWit activation on litecoin and then out of nowhere new hashrate was redirected to litecoin to crush the activation and change the balance.

- currently at 71%

The solution for this, will be to implement SegWit on more Alt coins to split the instigators hashing power even more. Some big pools will do anything in their power to stop SegWit, because they know what will happen. If SegWit is activated on a Alt coin and it proves to be successful, many people will start to support it and these pools know that.

BTC Core should push for activation on multiple Alt coins that are compatible with it and not just stop with LiteCoin and Bitcoin.  

nobody cares about SegWit on a random altcoin that nobody uses apart from trading them.
litecoin is different, because 1. it is exact copy of bitcoin with little change 2. it is old and it is being used.

and FYI SegWit is on some other altcoins, a couple of them have even activated SegWit.
if you are interested, these coins are:
- Groestlcoin
- Viacoin https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1840789.0
- SysCoin https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1466445.0
- a couple more that are signalling or considering that i forgot!

is it? where? i don't remember litecoin being used as a currency like bitcoin, it's the same shitty coin as before, equal to the other alt that are activating segwit, for instance vertcoin is also on track with segwith, and vertcoin is another big coin

people are just blindly attached to litecoin that's why they think it deserve more attention even now wiht segwit, which is only to increase the hype and do a random pump

What is required to implement segwit on altcoin?

signaling for a whole period of the diff retarget if i'm not mistaken, just reaching the threshold % activation won't cut it

You are missing the big picture. Litecoin is different to the rest of coins.

1) It's the longest surviving blockchain (except bitcoin). This makes investors have way more confidence when taking big risks. A coin that could be unlisted from an exchange (like the rest of coins you mentioned) aren't attractive for the long term. But we all know that LTC will be here for life on the big exchanges.

2) It's basically a bitcoin clone, which is perfect to port code from BTC to LTC. It becomes the ideal way to test segwit in a real scenario. Lightning Network developers will move there, increasing the marketcap several times. We'll see an all time high on LTC, im not sure when, but we will eventually, that im sure of.

[hl5460]

You are missing the big picture. Litecoin is different to the rest of coins.

1) It's the longest surviving blockchain (except bitcoin). This makes investors have way more confidence when taking big risks. A coin that could be unlisted from an exchange (like the rest of coins you mentioned) aren't attractive for the long term. But we all know that LTC will be here for life on the big exchanges.

2) It's basically a bitcoin clone, which is perfect to port code from BTC to LTC. It becomes the ideal way to test segwit in a real scenario. Lightning Network developers will move there, increasing the marketcap several times. We'll see an all time high on LTC, im not sure when, but we will eventually, that im sure of.

LTC is going to overtake BTC if segwit implemented?

[jonald_fyookball]

1) You can't know what I've read or what I haven't read.
2) Your completely intentional or unintentional misunderstanding of Segwit shows that either:
   2.1) You haven't read either one.
   2.2) You have read it, but you don't understand it.

1. you have admitted you cant read C++, you ave admitted you cant read walls of text

2.1. i have quote code, i have quoted documentation. i have even shown examples of simple tweaks that could be considered as something more of the community could unite around

2.2 i have actually told you about the emphasis of the key utility and not the activation itself being the important part of segwits half gesture.
and all you can do is pleaded ignorant for a couple months then suddenly find a script that admits what have have said, but with subtle word twists.
such as how its a 'opt-in'.

but your still not getting the point. its not a network fix. its not a consensus implementation. its a back door half gesture with only if's buts and maybe's

yet the actual network effect is negative (the tier network)

atleast get passed the word twisting from your groupy mindset of blockstream adoration.. as thats temporary. just like segwits half baked gestures are temporary..
try to think with a critical hat and not a utopian sales pitch hat.

your only argument its to literally fail at describing segwit and to also fail at pidgeon holing me.


think about bitcoins 120+year and not blockstreams couple year 'experiment'

I'm amazed you still have the patience to respond to this troll. 

Lauda  loves to argue technical points, and when an argument is refuted,
he just pivots his argument to a different point.

He's a successful troll because he's been able to use this tactic over and over
while being so wrong and arrogant than he baits you into further responding
to nonsense.