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

[ComputerGenie]

...More miners has signaled Segwit2x.

[image]

Im' cornfuzzed!
Antpool is signaling Segwit2x and BU:
https://btc.com/stats/pool/AntPool
 

[BTCLuke]

Im' cornfuzzed!
Antpool is signaling Segwit2x and BU:
https://btc.com/stats/pool/AntPool
 

It's confusing to you that Jihan would signal both of the clients that are in opposition to the Core devs and would help oust them?

Perfect evidence that you simply have no clue what is going on with bitcoin.

[chek2fire]

...More miners has signaled Segwit2x.

[image]

Im' cornfuzzed!
Antpool is signaling Segwit2x and BU:
https://btc.com/stats/pool/AntPool
 

the code change for support will be at 16 July. For now they can comment to their blocks whatever they like.

[ComputerGenie]

...Perfect evidence that you simply have no clue what is going on with bitcoin.

Perfect evidence that the concepts of sarcasm and irony are entirely over your head.  


EDIT:
BTW, "what is going on with bitcoin" is the same pissing match that has gone on for the last 30 years (the software guys are crying in their Mommies' panties over the fact that they haven't been able to monetize a protocol in the same manner that the hardware guys have [as evidenced by the thousands of times the software guys (who "only" make hundreds of thousands of dollars to develop a free piece of software) have extended the anti-hardware campaign by repeatedly hurling more unfounded accusations of the hardware guys (who make millions of dollars from physical devices and the use of those devices - ergo "profiting twice") using "covert" asicboost because they know that Joe Average is above demanding evidence for such accusations]).

[25hashcoin]

...Perfect evidence that you simply have no clue what is going on with bitcoin.

Perfect evidence that the concepts of sarcasm and irony are entirely over your head. 

Lol, save fail.

[squatz1]

The thing that we're going to have to understand is that if the miners want to do this and if we don't agree we can simply stop using the currency all together and stick to using the one we love, we don't have to follow in their hard fork if you don't want to. I do fully support it think this is the best for Bitcoin, but I don't really know what the others hear think about it.

Well, that escalated very fast with those miners signaling Segwit2x. I think Segwit2x will be the compromise that makes everyone happy.

I'm gonna buy a bottle of Bacardy rum when this long-term scaling debat has come to an end.

I'm going to be with this guy and just simply get the point of simply praying that this will be the end all be all for this debate. Maybe the fucking TX fees will go down from the insane prices they're at now as well, please miners?

[ComputerGenie]

Every time "the price of tx frees" is mentioned in all of this, I taste a little bit of sick in my mouth. It's sad to see the politicized buzz-words/phrases that get tossed into this mix.

[Gyrsur]

Every time "the price of tx frees" is mentioned in all of this, I taste a little bit of sick in my mouth. It's sad to see the politicized buzz-words/phrases that get tossed into this mix.

BTW, Amir Taaki is back in town from the frontline (w/ AK47) in Syria. things could get funny again.

[BTCLuke]

...Perfect evidence that you simply have no clue what is going on with bitcoin.

Perfect evidence that the concepts of sarcasm and irony are entirely over your head.  

Oh please... You were about a sarcastic as Janet Yellen delivering a report to congress.

We're in a visual medium here, so you can't use icons like to end your otherwise drooling-newbie mistaken posts and have other people imagine that you were just being sarcastic.

Worse yet, if you were being sarcastic, you would have been defending the core dev team with that statement... And then turned around seconds later to tear them down, accusing them of " hurling more unfounded accusations of the hardware guys." -Which is ludicrous but that's another argument.

So it couldn't have been sarcasm. Give it up.

[classicsucks]

What's also amusing is the corresponding drop in transactions back to normal basal levels again now that all those pools are in agreement about what to do next. This adds circumstantial evidence that someone was injecting all that shit into the transaction biosphere to make it look like there was a transaction volume crisis there that didn't exist.

I pointed out the drop in mempool spam a few weeks ago and nobody commented. What's interesting is fees haven't gone down, probably because the blocks are still full and people have their fees cranked up to avoid stuck transactions. Since the blocks are full, I'm guessing that fake volume with a lot of inputs was clogging the mempool. I also saw last month 1000s of transactions that were invalid, that slowed the network down, indicating an actor with high technical knowledge.

I'm hoping somebody who is more technically knowledgeable than me can figure out who was/is spamming. I know it's not that easy to attribute the transactions. Chances are we could at least get a source IP address, and then work from there...

[chek2fire]

What's also amusing is the corresponding drop in transactions back to normal basal levels again now that all those pools are in agreement about what to do next. This adds circumstantial evidence that someone was injecting all that shit into the transaction biosphere to make it look like there was a transaction volume crisis there that didn't exist.

I pointed out the drop in mempool spam a few weeks ago and nobody commented. What's interesting is fees haven't gone down, probably because the blocks are still full and people have their fees cranked up to avoid stuck transactions. Since the blocks are full, I'm guessing that fake volume with a lot of inputs was clogging the mempool. I also saw last month 1000s of transactions that were invalid, that slowed the network down, indicating an actor with high technical knowledge.

I'm hoping somebody who is more technically knowledgeable than me can figure out who was/is spamming. I know it's not that easy to attribute the transactions. Chances are we could at least get a source IP address, and then work from there...

or more possible because wallet failed to calculate right the fee right now. Today even a transaction with zero fees has confirmed

[JessicaG]

Kindly help a not-so techie a bit, as the term 'SegWit2x' is confusing for me:

BIP148, USAF, SegWit, I understand those. But SegWit2x, that confuses me; I assume that SegWit2x is just another name for SegWit2Mb ?

[-ck]

Im' cornfuzzed!
Antpool is signaling Segwit2x and BU:
https://btc.com/stats/pool/AntPool
 

They're infamous for doing shit like that purely to save face from having to admit they're backpedalling on their BU stance. It's just a coinbase message so it doesn't cost them anything in terms of risk to leave it in there. BU was always just a bargaining tool for them in the first place once UASF was mentioned. Now that they have a way to make it look like they're not actually agreeing to core, even though they actually are, they can finally get rid of it but they're proving their usual level of inertia with previous claims. Most of the other pools that are either covertly or overtly under bitmain's control are still doing the same thing. These morons need to get off their arses and be clear about their message and stop adding conflicting messages to their coinbase. The joke got tired a long time ago.

Segwit2x support over 24 hours is now over 55% making it higher than any activation signal to date and looks set to easily get to the 80% required to start signalling in mid July. Adding the existing BIP141 signalling pools to the total means segwit is a surety unless something happens for them to start backpedalling on their agreement.

This whole approach was really stupid in the first place by the mining agreement and I'm just glad someone stepped up to the plate to make their incompatible bit4 nonsense compatible with existing core nodes and segwit activation.

[Gyrsur]

Kindly help a not-so techie a bit, as the term 'SegWit2x' is confusing for me:

BIP148, USAF, SegWit, I understand those. But SegWit2x, that confuses me; I assume that SegWit2x is just another name for SegWit2Mb ?

yes it is. are you already married? 

[-ck]

I pointed out the drop in mempool spam a few weeks ago and nobody commented. What's interesting is fees haven't gone down, probably because the blocks are still full and people have their fees cranked up to avoid stuck transactions. Since the blocks are full, I'm guessing that fake volume with a lot of inputs was clogging the mempool. I also saw last month 1000s of transactions that were invalid, that slowed the network down, indicating an actor with high technical knowledge.

I'm hoping somebody who is more technically knowledgeable than me can figure out who was/is spamming. I know it's not that easy to attribute the transactions. Chances are we could at least get a source IP address, and then work from there...

or more possible because wallet failed to calculate right the fee right now. Today even a transaction with zero fees has confirmed

Pretty much this. A lot of the wallets, both online and standalone are not that smart with respect to fees and have been manually adjusted to higher levels and haven't been adjusted back down. Anyone running bitcoin core/qt which has a dynamic fee estimator would have noticed the drop in recommended minimum fees to just over 100 satoshi per byte over a week ago.

This site has been showing it for a while too if people have been paying attention instead of using some braindead default:
https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

[JessicaG]

Kindly help a not-so techie a bit, as the term 'SegWit2x' is confusing for me:

BIP148, USAF, SegWit, I understand those. But SegWit2x, that confuses me; I assume that SegWit2x is just another name for SegWit2Mb ?

yes it is. are you already married? 

Thank you.

And yes, I'm already married; in a monogamous relation that is, should future questions arise 

[jbreher]

...More miners has signaled Segwit2x.

[image]

Im' cornfuzzed!
Antpool is signaling Segwit2x and BU:
https://btc.com/stats/pool/AntPool
 

It is indeed possible to generate blocks that are valid to both those proposals. As well as XT, Classic, 8MB, ...

[ComputerGenie]

...Perfect evidence that you simply have no clue what is going on with bitcoin.

Perfect evidence that the concepts of sarcasm and irony are entirely over your head.  

Oh please... You were about a sarcastic as Janet Yellen delivering a report to congress.

We're in a visual medium here, so you can't use icons like to end your otherwise drooling-newbie mistaken posts and have other people imagine that you were just being sarcastic.

Worse yet, if you were being sarcastic, you would have been defending the core dev team with that statement... And then turned around seconds later to tear them down, accusing them of " hurling more unfounded accusations of the hardware guys." -Which is ludicrous but that's another argument.

So it couldn't have been sarcasm. Give it up.

  These kinds of false dichotomies are everything that is wrong with trying to have any meaningful discussion which would yield any actual long-term solution.  

(emoticons for requested effect)

In the real world, it is entirely possible to be against the beliefs and/or actions of Core devs and be against the beliefs and/or actions of those that the Core devs have led you to believe are their "enemies" (and/or the "enemies of Bitcoin"). It truly baffles me how people with your narrowness of thinking are even capable of being taught how to tie your own shoes.   (emoticon for requested effect)

It's sad that I have to explain to your little mind that the Core devs professional income revolves around Core being relevant and, despite their repeated claims on medium which they or their fanboys control, that is entirely no different than Bitmain needing to stay on top of the miner/pool business (I'm sure the people that spoon-feed you everything you know have given you a list of justifications of how I'm wrong, but justifications don't change base-level facts). Bitmain and Core are the equally-toasted, equally-sliced pieces of bread (from the same loaf) that make up the shit-sandwich that is Bitcoin.   (emoticon for requested effect)

Some day, one can hope, you'll stop living your life based on what someone on social media says, do some reading, do some actual research, learn a thing or two, actually have an original thought of your own, and realize that it's actually possible to have a disagreement where upon both sides are wrong (and being a fanboy of either side doesn't change the fact that the group you're a fan of is wrong).   (emoticon for requested effect)

[-ck]

How ridiculous the face saving code has become is nicely summarised by Samson Mow.

Letter to signal intent to use "NYA" coinbase signal to signal using bit4 to signal bit1 to signal BIP141 activation.

Instead of just signalling BIP141... One day history will look back upon our blockchain and facepalm. Heck I think it already is.

Meanwhile support just hit 64% over the last 24 hours.

[BTCLuke]

It's sad that I have to explain to your little mind that the Core devs professional income revolves around Core being relevant and, despite their repeated claims on medium which they or their fanboys control...

It's far sadder to explain to your sub-atomic mind that the core devs are in a decentralized, open source github project, which you yourself are welcome to join and that far more of them are volunteers, not working for any company.

I'm continually surprised by people's incredibly manufactured (in China) stance on Blockstream. Most claims made about the whole company are completely baseless and appear to be FUD produced by someone (in China) to perpetuate the block size debate. I invite you to look deeper into them yourself.

Some points I've found:

1. Blockstream isn't even the company with the most bitcoin devs in it. 100% of Chaincode's devs are Bitcoin core devs: http://chaincode.com/#team

2. The 'corporate money' that blockstream accepted, AXA, is just a French investment bank, not goldman sachs. Very few in the US has even heard of AXA. But more importantly, there was no contract stating that AXA could direct blockstream's efforts or leadership in any way, much less any of their partners. (The paperwork isn't available, but no one who saw it made the claim that it does. This must be treated as baseless slander.)

3. Adam Back is one of the most well-documented Cypherpunks on anyone's record. Before he wrote Hash Cash, which brought proof of work to where it is today, he worked on the systems that underlie TOR and Bittorrent. Now he's full time on bitcoin. Why in the hell would anyone assume that someone who spent decades working on at least three of the most important decentralized, cypherpunk projects ever be trying to harm the latest one by centralizing it? That's compelling evidence alone, if not proof, that Roger's off his rocker for all those baseless accusations he makes of Back on twitter.

Ex: The TOR whitepaper referenced him directly: https://svn.torproject.org/svn/projects/design-paper/tor-design.pdf

4. At Blockstream, every developer is HIGHLY incentivized to make bitcoin's price go up, thus incentivizing working against the vision you seem to believe they are following. At hiring $10,000 worth of bitcoin is purchased (part of their hiring contract) and set aside for them, and they can't touch it for the first year. After year one, each paycheck is paid in it for four years, equally distributed over that time. This is well documented. If developers there saw plans to harm bitcoin, then they'd likely fight those plans to keep their paycheck valuable.

5. Scaling off-chain is, as you know, required for bitcoin to be used in daily payments. Blockstream hasn't stated their price sheet yet for liquid, nor their version of the Lightning Network, but yet they are attacked for thinking about it. These are just two of the projects they are working for towards scaling anyway, and they don't make up a large percentage of their other projects that do not involve scaling.  Meanwhile, why penalize specifically Blockstream for trying to make a buck from off-chain scaling when we can name at least 10 other projects/companies trying to do the same?

6. The most 'valuable target' in bitcoin core for any infiltrating source would naturally be the Commit keys, which allow the Wladamir-led team of core code cleaners the final say on what becomes bitcoin and what doesn't.

Today there are 4 bitcoin developers who work at Blockstream. Sipa is one, and although he has a commit key, due to the scaling debate he has publicly sworn off using his key for scaling changes. Maxwell used to have the 5th key, but he actually gave it back a year ago because of the scaling debate. He doesn't even have the access he used to anymore.

So if blockstream was trying to take over Bitcoin or lead it's governance in any way, they've not only failed, they've hobbled themselves so badly at it that it's now impossible.

P.S., Not that it should matter, but the argument against Back being a cypherpunk because of his being missing for the first couple of years in bitcoin makes me laugh out loud every time... Are we really supposed to penalize someone with Satoshi's skillset who was missing while satoshi was present, for not being around with satoshi at the right time?

Maybe, like Clark Kent, it's his glasses that make us so against the idea that he could be satoshi?  Lulz...