Shocking: Small amount of chinese miners block 88% of segwit support by services

[pereira4]

https://coin.dance/poli

As of today, 88% wants segwit. EC (BUcoin) has a bigger rejection rate than UASF, which is revealing. As we have seen with LTC, the price rises along with the segwit hashrate (and we'll see an ATH due BTC's inability to get to enjoy segwit, thus blocking LN development efforts, since segwit provides for full capacity LN and other features needed for proper payment channel functionality).

A small amount of miners (how many really? Jihan Wu? and a couple other pools, no more than 5 guys) are blocking hundreds of people involved in BTC services, exchanges and so on.

They also go against node majority.

Segwit is officially held hostage by a tiny amount of miners with a hashrate monopoly, probably state-sponsored. Meanwhile, LTC will eat BTC's lunch as segwit activates.

[lurker10]

Liar!
34% of miners support Segwit: https://coin.dance/blocks http://nodecounter.com/
the rest of them support Unlimited, Classic or undecided.

[franky1]

A small amount of miners (how many really? Jihan Wu? and a couple other pools, no more than 5 guys) are blocking hundreds of people involved in BTC services, exchanges and so on.

by a tiny amount of miners

lol
wait last month you were saying that they owned the majority.. now your saying a small amount. tiny amount

come on get your story straight

Segwit is officially held hostage by a tiny amount of miners with a hashrate monopoly, probably state-sponsored. Meanwhile, LTC will eat BTC's lunch as segwit activates.

segwit is not held hostage.

consensus is about only moving forward with majority approval.. if there is not majority approval. then take no as an answer and then start listening to the community to try something that will get approval

trying to bypass consensus and then play the victim card, and then have tantrums is silly and childish

lastly if segwit is sooo "backward compatible" then they can activate at any level and uptopian promises of segwit will still occur.. (if you beleive in the backward compatibility promise)

[gmaxwell]

34% of miners support Segwit

That is 34% of hashpower, it may well be 99% of miners.  That is also signaling rather than support-- there are miners that support segwit who are not signaling it due to pressure or payments from others.

[franky1]

34% of miners support Segwit

That is 34% of hashpower, it may well be 99% of miners.  That is also signaling rather than support-- there are miners that support segwit who are not signaling it due to pressure or payments from others.

Gmax. remember all them fully paid for all inclusive weekends you offered pools, al them social and roundtable events.. closed door meetings etc

[lurker10]

34% of miners support Segwit

That is 34% of hashpower, it may well be 99% of miners.  That is also signaling rather than support-- there are miners that support segwit who are not signaling it due to pressure or payments from others.

He said 88% of miners support segwit, not 88% of hashpower. I corrected the number which was way off.

There are also miners who do not signal BU+Classic due to pressure and DDoS threats from others. It works both ways.

[Qartada]

Even for services you're wrong.  Not that I particularly support any other solution, but you're just showing us the statistics and lying about what's literally right in front of our faces.

It says that 46% support SegWit.  The rest that you've included for some reason say that they're ready for SegWit - completely different thing.

[d.kevin29]

34% of miners support Segwit

That is 34% of hashpower, it may well be 99% of miners.  That is also signaling rather than support-- there are miners that support segwit who are not signaling it due to pressure or payments from others.

He said 88% of miners support segwit, not 88% of hashpower. I corrected the number which was way off.

There are also miners who do not signal BU+Classic due to pressure and DDoS threats from others. It works both ways.

It doesn't really matter. Who owns the power rules. If you'd promote a product in your mini-market together with 50 other mini-markets in your city and Walmart comes and says the product you're promoting is bad, most people will prefer Walmart's opinion over your mini-markets' ones. Not sure if it's the perfect example though.

Look at what happened a few days ago when Jihan wanted to block LTC SegWit. Could he do it? Yes, indeed, because of the hashing power he owns.

A man with $1.000.000 surely has some power and matters way more than a guy with $1.000.

In the end, this will be the decision of the whales. Just like it is when it comes to most things around us, including presidential elections and all that other stuff..

[AngryDwarf]

Selective use of statistics. The link you refers to shows 46% explicit support, and 42% prepared / ready. That still means less than half the businesses they have polled explicitly support it. Business would be stupid not to be prepared or ready for it, especially since some are hell bent on trying to force it through.
Applying their 'economic weighting' shows 23% explicit support and a further 68% prepared / ready for a total of 91%.

Hardly a ringing endorsement is it?

[lurker10]

Who owns the hashpower rules.

Exactly how Bitcoin was designed to be. Bitcoin is a Proof-of-work coin. This is all in the whitepaper by Satoshi Nakamoto.

[Yakamoto]

I'm not going to blindly agree with this. There isn't an 88% support for segwit that's being blocked by just a few miners, maybe in terms of actual individuals there are only 12% of miners blocking the remaining 88% of individual miners, but the fact of the matter is they simply aren't putting forth enough hashing power to make it mean all that much. If they had more hashing power, and they could if they wanted to get more invested, then it might be more of an issue. But right now I can't say that Segwit is anywhere close to being this 88% figure.

[lionheart78]

Who owns the hashpower rules.

Exactly how Bitcoin was designed to be. Bitcoin is a Proof-of-work coin. This is all in the whitepaper by Satoshi Nakamoto.

Oh well one miner can have 10% of hashpower while 100 miners can have 2% of the hashpower, the way you are saying, Bitcoin is not decentralized after all.  So Satoshi is just faking about decentralization since the group who owns the highest hashrate has power towards Bitcoin's next movement? If that so we  are just dreaming about Bitcoin as decentralized p2p currency.

[lurker10]

Who owns the hashpower rules.

Exactly how Bitcoin was designed to be. Bitcoin is a Proof-of-work coin. This is all in the whitepaper by Satoshi Nakamoto.

Oh well one miner can have 10% of hashpower while 100 miners can have 2% of the hashpower, the way you are saying, Bitcoin is not decentralized after all.  So Satoshi is just faking about decentralization since the group who owns the highest hashrate has power towards Bitcoin's next movement? If that so we  are just dreaming about Bitcoin as decentralized p2p currency.

Change the whitepaper and make a new coin if you don't like how Bitcoin works.

[AngryDwarf]

Follow the link. The OP is talking about businesses polled not hashpower. Even then the OP has managed to turn a minority explicit business support argument by including business ready statistics in order to play the victim card against the evil miners.

[lurker10]

Follow the link. The OP is talking about businesses polled not hashpower. Even then the OP has managed to turn a minority explicit business support argument by including business ready statistics in order to play the victim card against the evil miners.

Businesses can be sybil'ed, it makes no sense to poll them.
Hashpower cannot be sybil'ed, that is why Satoshi Nakamoto chose hashpower to decide network consensus.

[lionheart78]

Who owns the hashpower rules.

Exactly how Bitcoin was designed to be. Bitcoin is a Proof-of-work coin. This is all in the whitepaper by Satoshi Nakamoto.

Oh well one miner can have 10% of hashpower while 100 miners can have 2% of the hashpower, the way you are saying, Bitcoin is not decentralized after all.  So Satoshi is just faking about decentralization since the group who owns the highest hashrate has power towards Bitcoin's next movement? If that so we  are just dreaming about Bitcoin as decentralized p2p currency.

Change the whitepaper and make a new coin if you don't like how Bitcoin works.

Why create another coin when there is already some coins existing in the market that offers better feature than Bitcoin  .   I would rather save the effort and follow that better coin.   Besides I am not a programmer to create one lol.

[ImHash]

Most of the services and exchanges are ready or want SegWit there are however some key exchanging services undecided or with no instance on any available proposals.
If miners want bigger blocks and don't care about 1GB extra data daily, if they can maintain current node count after 6 months past from mining blocks of 2MB/4MB/8MB if they can guarantee fast confirmations and low fees and a stable network functioning without any problem then why not?

But even they know something is not right with BU.

[d.kevin29]

Who owns the hashpower rules.

Exactly how Bitcoin was designed to be. Bitcoin is a Proof-of-work coin. This is all in the whitepaper by Satoshi Nakamoto.

Oh well one miner can have 10% of hashpower while 100 miners can have 2% of the hashpower, the way you are saying, Bitcoin is not decentralized after all.  So Satoshi is just faking about decentralization since the group who owns the highest hashrate has power towards Bitcoin's next movement? If that so we  are just dreaming about Bitcoin as decentralized p2p currency.

Change the whitepaper and make a new coin if you don't like how Bitcoin works.

Why create another coin when there is already some coins existing in the market that offers better feature than Bitcoin  .   I would rather save the effort and follow that better coin.   Besides I am not a programmer to create one lol.

New coins will never be perfect. Even if a new coin comes up, others will come with new ideas and new coins with more features will show up. You cannot stop that. It's going to keep happening.

[BillyBobZorton]

Selective use of statistics. The link you refers to shows 46% explicit support, and 42% prepared / ready. That still means less than half the businesses they have polled explicitly support it. Business would be stupid not to be prepared or ready for it, especially since some are hell bent on trying to force it through.
Applying their 'economic weighting' shows 23% explicit support and a further 68% prepared / ready for a total of 91%.

Hardly a ringing endorsement is it?

The poll done by 21 suggest that around 75% of big players in the space want segwit and the  70.5% reject Buggy Unlimited explicitly:




https://medium.com/@21/using-21-to-survey-blockchain-personalities-on-the-bitcoin-hard-fork-1953c9bcb8ed

So let's not circlejerk about some %, the thing is clear: most reject EC, not even neutral. Segwit has more support by nodes and big actors in the field. Only like 3 people running big mining pools don't want it, which means we either convince them, or we will see some big problems to get segwit since we'll have to UASF and that is not an easy road.

Meanwhile, LTC is rising to new all time highs as all lightning networks development will move there. Anyone not holding LTC right now is an idiot.

[XbladeX]

***
Meanwhile, LTC is rising to new all time highs as all lightning networks development will move there. Anyone not holding LTC right now is an idiot.

This all situation is so broken Jihan now have like 30% of LTC mining and eating profits from LTC segwit same time he with Asicboost earns 20x more than other BTC miners so for him is better to keep status quo.
Situation with patent of field is unacceptable i don't see problem with "exploit" when it won't hold development i bet Satosi didn't wrote about such situation on whitepaper.
What is more he even was not thinking that one single entity will have such influence and will stop progress to keep patented edge. Many ideal views on BTC was corrected by hard life examples. 1st BTC have no block limit then people started spamming so in defense they added limit. Now we have asicboost so in defense we have to make some POW change to destroy that patented edge.
In history BTC was making HF to defend itself.