The Barry Silbert segwit2x agreement with >80% miner support.

[classicsucks]

The UASF signalling chart is irrelevant - it's a one line change in a config file to signal for it. Consider that some people are signalling for it but don't want it... LOL.

You think people are uninformed about Segwit, imagine the people cheering for UASF - they're advocating an idea that CAN'T WORK and could cause serious issues for anyone foolish enough to try it.

There isn't any working code for UASF, and it likely won't work at all even if somebody starts writing it.

So go back to bed, put your little UASF hats on, and keep dreaming, you UASF-tards.

[1715082270]

1715082270

[1715082270]

1715082270

[1715082270]

1715082270

[dinofelis]

The UASF signalling chart is irrelevant - it's a one line change in a config file to signal for it. Consider that some people are signalling for it but don't want it... LOL.

You think people are uninformed about Segwit, imagine the people cheering for UASF - they're advocating an idea that CAN'T WORK and could cause serious issues for anyone foolish enough to try it.

In fact, it is so easy to sybil the number of nodes signalling something, that if it had any meaning to signal something as a node, proponents of this or that side would already have been running tens of thousands of nodes signalling whatever they think.  But it could also be a way to signal, as you point out, the opponent's view, so that people get tricked into believing they form a powerful crowd, and when they "put their money where their mouth is", get the carpet pulled from under their feet. 

[ComputerGenie]

I like the word 'squishalised'. But I do not think that word means what you think it means...

[Nagadota]

People talking about UASF POW change and the BTC price plummets... coincidence or not?

The Bitcoin price right now is almost completely unrelated to anything.  It's mostly just long-term speculation and, in some cases, failure to do long-term speculation.  It hasn't even fell in the past week or two, it just rose so much that it had to correct itself.

Bitcoin's price is, from the very beginning, completely unrelated to anything.  Bitcoin's price has almost NEVER been driven by 'demand for usage'.  It has always been long-term speculation ("moon when all people will buy their coffee with bitcoin, and I'm an early adopter").

Yes, but that long-term speculation was someone related to fundamentals, such as "this factor will change Bitcoin's ability/public image/scalability/convenience so that the future of Bitcoin will involve mainstream usage".

When I said "long-term speculation" I was talking about the trend of just buying in and almost ignoring fundamentals, which is more of a trend in the last month or so than beforehand.

And when people are trying to focus on fundamentals it often becomes a game of newbies attempting to day trade, causing immense volatility.

The reason that this trend of disregarding fundamentals won't last is because:

1.  In a few months the fundamentals are likely to get better.

2.  Long-term speculation is very good for Bitcoin if it continues because it can reduce day-to-day volatility when there are more people in it already.  It ends up taking a lot more to move the market and then people become more confident in it and give up on the philosophy of just selling when it gets a bit higher.

3.  Bitcoin will receive a lot of frequent buyers as it increases its prominence in technology and other niches.  This is already beginning to happen IMO.

[Qartada]

That's what squishalised Unlimited in the end.

I like the word 'squishalised'. But I do not think that word means what you think it means.jpg. Just now:

[fancy image]

BU still #1 in miners signaling support.

True, but misleading.  All of the pools signalling for each proposal are fairly stubborn about their stance, so those levels of support have remained the same for quite a long time now.

A compromise is fully necessary if there are two solutions with neither willing to conform to the other side's ideas.  Whether this is the right one is another matter, but I'd call Unlimited "squishalised" until it's broken out of the position it's been in for a couple of months now.

[coinsmanager]

Does anyone know if this segwit version is ASIC boost compatible?

[ComputerGenie]

Does anyone know if this segwit version is ASIC boost compatible?

Since no pool provably uses ASICBOOST on the main network, it's a moot issue. And since there's a near 100% chance that no one in this thread knows the inner-workings of ASICBOOST, there's a near 100% chance that you'd not get a factual answer even if it wasn't moot.

[mindrust]

Does anyone know if this segwit version is ASIC boost compatible?

No it is not. That's why Jihan fanboys are crying out loud. Their hackwares will be useless after UASF/Segwit activates.

ASICBOOST and Bitmain + Ver are the main enemies of bitcoin. If we succeed to get rid of them and activate SegWit, bitcoin has the potential of going 10k$ in a year and 100k$ in 5 years.

But Bitmain/Wu/Ver are doing everything to block the development. I have serious suspicions that Bitmain is actually getting funded by JP Morgan. (the biggest scam banking company ever) Because if we can't develop bitcoin further, only bankers like JPM will benefit from it.

[ComputerGenie]

Does anyone know if this segwit version is ASIC boost compatible?

No it is not.....

And you have a copy of the patented inner-workings that you can share to back that claim up? Or you're just regurgitating the FUD you read somewhere?
                                                                        ^^That's rhetorical, since we all know it's the latter^^
  

I believe you dropped this:

[CraigWrightBTC]

Whats the meaning of this? The beginning of Centralized bitcoin? I feel bad about this

No the activation of segwit on bitcoins blockchain will not makes bitcoins be centralized
that is one of solution for block size problem on bitcoins,
many people think about bitcoins will be centralized but i am doubt about that
it is just wrong understanding to the segwit. http://news.8btc.com/the-misconceptions-about-segwit

[Searing]

That's what squishalised Unlimited in the end.

I like the word 'squishalised'. But I do not think that word means what you think it means.jpg. Just now:



BU still #1 in miners signaling support.

If this chart holds, we still have stalemate. Just flipped on who blocks whatever is
Proposed.





Hope I won't still be pointing this out 4 years from now.

[gentlemand]

I like the word 'squishalised'. But I do not think that word means what you think it means.jpg. Just now:

Signalling makes you look all cool and powerful. When it comes to actually forking, your knickers suddenly fall around your ankles.

When put on the spot, almost every single economic actor of importance wiped their posterior on the idea of an Unlimited chain being acceptable.

[The One]

Does anyone know if this segwit version is ASIC boost compatible?

No it is not. That's why Jihan fanboys are crying out loud. Their hackwares will be useless after UASF/Segwit activates.

ASICBOOST and Bitmain + Ver are the main enemies of bitcoin. If we succeed to get rid of them and activate SegWit, bitcoin has the potential of going 10k$ in a year and 100k$ in 5 years.

But Bitmain/Wu/Ver are doing everything to block the development. I have serious suspicions that Bitmain is actually getting funded by JP Morgan. (the biggest scam banking company ever) Because if we can't develop bitcoin further, only bankers like JPM will benefit from it.

Seriously.... are you fucking stupid. If 100K in 5 years then no one will be blocking segwit.

Evidence? No fucking sane person is going to suddenly believe that. You are talking like a man about to die and pleading for your pathetic life. However there is public evidences of Blockstream and their partners.

A debate on the technical merit of whatever improvement bitcoin need is one thing. A series of outlandish lies made up on the hoof is another. Are you so shallow and fucking desperate for segwit, as if segwit is the last drop of water on earth.

[25hashcoin]

Does anyone know if this segwit version is ASIC boost compatible?

No it is not. That's why Jihan fanboys are crying out loud. Their hackwares will be useless after UASF/Segwit activates.

ASICBOOST and Bitmain + Ver are the main enemies of bitcoin. If we succeed to get rid of them and activate SegWit, bitcoin has the potential of going 10k$ in a year and 100k$ in 5 years.

But Bitmain/Wu/Ver are doing everything to block the development. I have serious suspicions that Bitmain is actually getting funded by JP Morgan. (the biggest scam banking company ever) Because if we can't develop bitcoin further, only bankers like JPM will benefit from it.

You're so incredibly brainwashed by Blockstream/Core who are the true enemies of bitcoin and have been preventing scaling for years. Wake up. Fegwit is the banker takeover and big blocks are the true bitcoin freedom movement.

[ComputerGenie]

.... are you fucking stupid...No fucking sane person....

A whole 21 pages before ^^ that happened; color me shocked. 

[The One]

.... are you fucking stupid...No fucking sane person....

A whole 21 pages before ^^ that happened; color me shocked. 

Not in a habit of swearing..... but that grade A idiot pissed me off. I do allow certain degrees of stupid illiterate posts, after all, people can make mistakes. But mindrust IS the most stupidest person ever.

[Wind_FURY]

A question for all of you. If Segwit was not "marketed" as a solution to scaling, would it have been activated by the miners? There other upgrades in there that does make the protocol better.

I wasn't activated, nor would it ever be with a 95% clause; that's the reason for trying to rewrite history and/or do end-arounds to get it in at "80%" (which is still ridiculous).
99% of the FUD and paranoia is sown to herd sheep into joining the "well, everyone else is going to do it so I should too" mentality (kinda like back when you asked new signups on MySpace why they joined and their answer was "because everyone is on MySpace").

That did not really answer the question. I was asking if Core 0.13.1 would have been good as a general "upgrade" rather than a scaling solution.

[ComputerGenie]

That did not really answer the question. I was asking if Core 0.13.1 would have been good as a general "upgrade" rather than a scaling solution.

My bad, even though I quoted it, I think misread it as "would it still have been". I think not only was it marketed wrong, the idea was wrong, and a lot of the resentment comes from the fact that segwit is forced on people (even if you don't want it, you're stuck with it if you want to use a version of Core that's more efficient than the older versions and contains bug-fixes). If you want Core, your only 2 options are something that Core knows is shit or forced segwit.

[Searing]

Does anyone know if this segwit version is ASIC boost compatible?

Doubtful. If it was we'd likely imho have a soft fork seg witness consensus.

Also, imho, we will continue to not have consensus due to bitcoin core never
going to accept hardfork on block size. Again, imho we have more than a couple
years left in this swamp.

Just no downside for bitcoin core to continue as is, with their view of btc mainly
as a store of value, especially if btc price continues to rise.

Thus stalemate. I'd get used to this, galling though it may be. 😩

[ComputerGenie]

Does anyone know if this segwit version is ASIC boost compatible?

Doubtful...

In other words, "I don't have the vaguest idea about either one,  but I still have an opinion on both."