SegWit Signaled

[Minecache]

Has SegWit finally been signaled?

[1713985279]

1713985279

[1713985279]

1713985279

[1713985279]

1713985279

[xhomerx10]

Has SegWit finally been signaled?

 If you don't know, then why entitle your topic with a statement?  At least qualify it with a question mark.

[Motivator]

It's on the borderline, check the twitter feeds.

[Minecache]

It's on the borderline, check the twitter feeds.

This is what I'm hearing but I cannot find anything definitive. Is this why BTC price has started moving?

[xhomerx10]

It's on the borderline, check the twitter feeds.

This is what I'm hearing but I cannot find anything definitive. Is this why BTC price has started moving?

 Not close.
Also, support appears to be declining.

edit: Segwit was @ 36% of blocks last week and now is back down to 32% of blocks

[BrewMaster]

It's on the borderline, check the twitter feeds.

This is what I'm hearing but I cannot find anything definitive. Is this why BTC price has started moving?

[i m g]https://i.imgur.com/tsbmn6T.png[/img]

 Not close.
Also, support appears to be declining.

edit: Segwit was @ 36% of blocks last week and now is back down to 32% of blocks

it is the same amount as it was before, nothing has changed. that 4% is just the simple change up and down because of the way finding a block works. it is not a guarantee to find a block, it is a chance!
sometimes you find 420 blocks sometimes 425 and sometimes 418 for example.

[Qartada]

SegWit's blocks have gone up slightly since yesterday.

SegWit's hashrate has remained nearly the same, unless I'm missing a pool that's switched or something.

Blocks are subject to variance.  Hashrate is not.  For now, SegWit is not close to activation and it'll only happen when/if miners who are signalling for BU decide to switch and/or undecided miners decide to signal SegWit.

[25hashcoin]

Has SegWit finally been signaled?

UASF to activate Segwit is picking up needed momentum. This would certainly cause a spike in price and confidence.

[Bit_Happy]

Is there a viable third option, not BU & something not controlled by a central corporation which will eventually make Bitcoin worthless to anyone with a brain?

[xhomerx10]

SegWit's blocks have gone up slightly since yesterday.

SegWit's hashrate has remained nearly the same, unless I'm missing a pool that's switched or something.

Blocks are subject to variance.  Hashrate is not.  For now, SegWit is not close to activation and it'll only happen when/if miners who are signalling for BU decide to switch and/or undecided miners decide to signal SegWit.

 Hashrate is usually calculated based on found blocks so it probably also fluctuates with luck... Though this recent variance is greater than any since inception.

[Netnox]

Is there a viable third option, not BU & something not controlled by a central corporation which will eventually make Bitcoin worthless to anyone with a brain?

Is there one? I don't think so. I am fed up with all this. Perhaps BU is the only viable option now which can be implemented? But I am also not in favor of giving up to the blackmail by a certain section of the miners.

[d5000]

It's on the borderline, check the twitter feeds.

Do you have more details? Which feeds/posts are making you think it's "on the borderline"? I'm not a heavy Twitter user, that's why I'm asking.

The only reason there could be a step forward to Segwit adoption is a possible UASF. I don't consider it the best idea as of now (because of the chain split danger), but maybe it's the only way to really move some pieces on the chess board (I still favour this solution, but it seems to have lost traction).

[NeuroticFish]

Has SegWit finally been signaled?

You can check https://coin.dance/blocks from time to time.
Now it shows 34.1% for SegWit. Pretty far from 95%.

Pretty funny that "It's on the borderline" statement. Maybe that's for Litecoin

[-ck]

It's on the borderline, check the twitter feeds.

Do you have more details? Which feeds/posts are making you think it's "on the borderline"? I'm not a heavy Twitter user, that's why I'm asking.

The only reason there could be a step forward to Segwit adoption is a possible UASF. I don't consider it the best idea as of now (because of the chain split danger), but maybe it's the only way to really move some pieces on the chess board (I still favour this solution, but it seems to have lost traction).

No, there's actually been forward progress on activating segwit at last. The discussions have all been private at the moment between pools and some mediators but the twitter feeds are starting to leak information about how much progress has been made, so I retweeted one of the relevant posts.

https://twitter.com/ckpooldev/status/865188614082150400

[unamis76]

(I still favour this solution, but it seems to have lost traction).

It never really had any traction, just like any solution that mixes a bit of every scaling proposal, because unfortunately the general opinion seems to be "we either have this or that"

No, there's actually been forward progress on activating segwit at last. The discussions have all been private at the moment between pools and some mediators but the twitter feeds are starting to leak information about how much progress has been made, so I retweeted one of the relevant posts.

https://twitter.com/ckpooldev/status/865188614082150400

Following my previous reply, I think it's important to detail that this isn't exclusively about SegWit and since most opinions seem to be like what I described above, this actually doesn't really mean a lot.

[-ck]

Following my previous reply, I think it's important to detail that this isn't exclusively about SegWit and since most opinions seem to be like what I described above, this actually doesn't really mean a lot.

Interesting way to downplay its relevance to segwit activation, but okay, you make of it what you will. Time will tell now.

[d5000]

No, there's actually been forward progress on activating segwit at last. The discussions have all been private at the moment between pools and some mediators but the twitter feeds are starting to leak information about how much progress has been made, so I retweeted one of the relevant posts.

https://twitter.com/ckpooldev/status/865188614082150400

Ah, Barry Silbert's initiative. I read about it earlier today. Thanks.

The initiative has my support, although from my point of view a solution where there is only one hard fork necessary and block size is growing slower but has no hard cap, like the proposal I linked above, is better. But for now it's important to get Segwit through.

[Kprawn]

I cannot see SegWit ever being signalled, because these groups are way to far apart. I also cannot see Bitcoin Unlimited being implemented for

the same reason. They will have to come up with something new, and just use SegWit on other Alt coins, like LiteCoin. It is a pity, because it

solves other problems with Bitcoin too... and not just a slight Block size upgrade. 

[dettygt]

Thought this was an announcement thread. Very misleading!

[dothebeats]

I was somehow shocked to see the title but upon checking, we are far from getting SegWit activated. There would be some issues that would be addressed if we got SegWit through that cannot be addresed by the proposal of BU.

Checking the tweets of some devs that I follow, it seems that something is happening in the background. Negotiation towards consensus or nah? Sometimes I'm inclined to think that another alternative could be plausible and could be a mixed of BU and SegWit, but what do I know?

[stompix]

Has SegWit finally been signaled?

 If you don't know, then why entitle your topic with a statement?  At least qualify it with a question mark.

Usual this kind of clickbait thread should just vanish in the trashcan.

Thought this was an announcement thread. Very misleading!

Misleading is a nice word for this bs.
Trolling like this about a subject people are so eager to see the end of it it's like asking to be cursed by a billion pink rapist bunnies.

[Uberse]

I cannot see SegWit ever being signalled, because these groups are way to far apart. I also cannot see Bitcoin Unlimited being implemented for
the same reason . . . 

Kind of like Congress, isn't it? Meanwhile the miners and legislators are doing fine.

[MingLee]

Has SegWit finally been signaled?

No, it hasn't and it is fairly easy to figure out whether or not it has based on a simple google search, you probably don't have to make topics like this to find out something like that in the future.
If it had been activated, then chances are there would be a lot more topics that would either be complaining on this forum or just discussing it in general, and some would continue to speculate about what it means. There are a lot of things you'd see if it was close to being applied in a real capacity.

[-ck]

I cannot see SegWit ever being signalled, because these groups are way to far apart.

I don't think so. If the agreement goes forth and a majority start signalling segwit, even if it's far from a supermajority (say 80% instead of the 95% required for activation) then the remaining pools will likely change their stance because it will become obvious they're only being obstructive as opposed to offering an alternative. This happened on the last big soft fork I can remember when it was less controversial and the deepbit pool held out till last.

[SwagGirl]

Perhaps they should put a deadline on "voting" and just get on with it. They are cutting their own trhoats.

[unamis76]

Following my previous reply, I think it's important to detail that this isn't exclusively about SegWit and since most opinions seem to be like what I described above, this actually doesn't really mean a lot.

Interesting way to downplay its relevance to segwit activation, but okay, you make of it what you will. Time will tell now.

The problem is, that tweet is as relevant for SegWit activation as it is for activation of any other proposal. It mentions "scaling compromise", which covers many things beyond SegWit.

It sure is, can you imagine a Bitcoin community post segwit? No constant attack from BU shills, no yearly scaling debate with spam attacks. Imagine how much the coin could actually grow.

Can you imagine a Bitcoin post Bitcoin Unlimited, for example? Using your point of view, it would be no more constant attacks from SegWit shills... Same thing goes for both ways regardless of which proposal is best.

In my point of view, if/when SegWit activates, Bitcoin Unlimited shills will only scream louder But we'll see.

then the remaining pools will likely change their stance because it will become obvious they're only being obstructive as opposed to offering an alternative.

Let's seriously hope this happens. I too think it will, pools will only have things to lose if they become obstructive.

[franky1]

Oh look Barry silbert having a closed door meeting to pull the puppet strings again...

why am i not surprised that DCG are controlling decisions

[pixie85]

I cannot see SegWit ever being signalled, because these groups are way to far apart. I also cannot see Bitcoin Unlimited being implemented for

the same reason. They will have to come up with something new, and just use SegWit on other Alt coins, like LiteCoin. It is a pity, because it

solves other problems with Bitcoin too... and not just a slight Block size upgrade. 

It's about the money. LTC activated Segwit, because it was easier, did not require almost everyone to signal, like it is with Bitcoin.
Also activating it affected the price and everyone knew it would, so it was a good decision that brought people a lot of money.