BREAKING: Bitcoin Miners Reach Scaling Agreement for SegWit Upgrade + 2MB Blocks

[mr.mister]

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/breaking-bitcoin-miners-reach-scaling-agreement/

[1714178983]

1714178983

[darkangel11]

Now the question is what does that mean for us all as investors. A price crash because people fear hard fork will somehow make their money disappear, or maybe another pump because the network just got improved? Usually a software update makes is better, faster, in other words more valuable, but bitcoin has its own ways. So, buy buy buy or sell sell sell

[franky1]

its all whistles in the wind and drama until we actually see some code to review that actually says it does 'what it say on the tin'

anyone can have a meeting. but meetings are meaningless.
code rules.. simple

[iluvpie60]

“The group of signed companies represents a critical mass of the bitcoin ecosystem. As of May 23, this group represents:

56 companies located in 21 countries
83.28% of hashing power
5.1 billion USD monthly on chain transaction volume
20.5 million bitcoin wallets”

Good to see such a big majority number percentage-wise.

But....That is a lot of hashing power for 56 companies to have. I hope we have further innovations to bring back some of that somehow. Would love to see more pools created by regular people and startup invesrments.

Show us the code that will be used for the hard fork in 6 months. That really needs to be put out there so we can really examine it.

With things being faster and bigger blocks I imagine price would go down on transaction fees by a lot. This will bring btc back to being useful in the poorer countries.

[Last of the V8s]

good luck to them with their suitcoin
bitcoin otoh will not hard fork

[Baofeng]

I didn't see any dates as to when they are going to implement Segwit Upgrade. I think this is long overdue. Scaling solution should have been provided to the users because the price is really going up everyday.

[Raja_MBZ]

Now the question is what does that mean for us all as investors. A price crash because people fear hard fork will somehow make their money disappear, or maybe another pump because the network just got improved? Usually a software update makes is better, faster, in other words more valuable, but bitcoin has its own ways. So, buy buy buy or sell sell sell

That's a million dollar question mate, only time can tell that.

Bitcoin literally has its own ways.

[25hashcoin]

Softfork Segwit THEN increase blocksize after? This is acceptable.

Hardfork Segwit and 2mb blocks at same time? Unacceptable, and UASF is the answer.

[mamaya]

This news is misrepresented and its nothing good for bitcoin, they said they will agree on segwit if signalling reaches 80% but bitmain won't signal it they already said it so its already dead. They have however said hardfork within 6 months for 2 mb blocks which will likely split the chain and which Jihan Wu said on his twitter he doesn't mind.

[knircky]

Softfork Segwit THEN increase blocksize after? This is acceptable.

Hardfork Segwit and 2mb blocks at same time? Unacceptable, and UASF is the answer.

I feel the opposite

[Yakamoto]

“The group of signed companies represents a critical mass of the bitcoin ecosystem. As of May 23, this group represents:

56 companies located in 21 countries
83.28% of hashing power
5.1 billion USD monthly on chain transaction volume
20.5 million bitcoin wallets”

Good to see such a big majority number percentage-wise.

But....That is a lot of hashing power for 56 companies to have. I hope we have further innovations to bring back some of that somehow. Would love to see more pools created by regular people and startup invesrments.

Show us the code that will be used for the hard fork in 6 months. That really needs to be put out there so we can really examine it.

With things being faster and bigger blocks I imagine price would go down on transaction fees by a lot. This will bring btc back to being useful in the poorer countries.

Well, if you really want to get the hashing power controlled by so few companies down (considering they each control something like 1.x% of the hashing power presented, each), the best thing that could happen would be taking away massive ASIC farms that push average joes out of the game and go back to GPU mining or something. Even that wouldn't be good since it sparks more GPU sales and the big farms continue to do what they do, but it brings down the barrier to entry for some people.

[CoinCube]

its all whistles in the wind and drama until we actually see some code to review that actually says it does 'what it say on the tin'

anyone can have a meeting. but meetings are meaningless.
code rules.. simple

Looks like code is coming soon.

Parties seem to be slowly converging closer towards possible consensus.

Luke Jr is working on this - https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-May/014399.html

Let us hope that everyone moulds it into the least shit option on the table.

[shivamchawla]

I am strictly against hard forks. A hard fork must only be done if it is really really necessary like a bug in the code or something. Also they keep pulling back the release time and are trying to release the hard fork as soon as possible which means the code wont be thoroughly tested which is absolutely necessary in case of hard fork. I dont want an early segwit with bugs. A delayed segwit would be better so that more people can go through the code and verify it.

[crazyivan]

FINALLY! Now, there s nothing to stop BTC from going to $5k+

This issue stalled development of BTC for years. Now it s quite clear how all this will unravel.

[25hashcoin]

I am strictly against hard forks. A hard fork must only be done if it is really really necessary like a bug in the code or something. Also they keep pulling back the release time and are trying to release the hard fork as soon as possible which means the code wont be thoroughly tested which is absolutely necessary in case of hard fork. I dont want an early segwit with bugs. A delayed segwit would be better so that more people can go through the code and verify it.

Bitcoin has been stalled for years...now you want it stalled more? Those corrupt Core developers really fooled you guys good. Can't wait for miners to take back bitcoin for good.

[shivamchawla]

I am strictly against hard forks. A hard fork must only be done if it is really really necessary like a bug in the code or something. Also they keep pulling back the release time and are trying to release the hard fork as soon as possible which means the code wont be thoroughly tested which is absolutely necessary in case of hard fork. I dont want an early segwit with bugs. A delayed segwit would be better so that more people can go through the code and verify it.

Bitcoin has been stalled for years...now you want it stalled more? Those corrupt Core developers really fooled you guys good. Can't wait for miners to take back bitcoin for good.

Bitcoin development was never stalled. New features are released on a regular basis. This problem however does not have a good solution. What the core developers want is a good solution. Increasing the blocksize is a horrible solution. Also there were a lot of bugs in BU's code which were fixed later on which destroys their credibility. Handing over bitcoin to miners lead to centralization which is horrible. If core devs were corrupt, they would have already forced segwit on everyone which they didnt do. Miners however want to force BU on everyone and are asking for hard fork.

[25hashcoin]

I am strictly against hard forks. A hard fork must only be done if it is really really necessary like a bug in the code or something. Also they keep pulling back the release time and are trying to release the hard fork as soon as possible which means the code wont be thoroughly tested which is absolutely necessary in case of hard fork. I dont want an early segwit with bugs. A delayed segwit would be better so that more people can go through the code and verify it.

Bitcoin has been stalled for years...now you want it stalled more? Those corrupt Core developers really fooled you guys good. Can't wait for miners to take back bitcoin for good.

Bitcoin development was never stalled. New features are released on a regular basis. This problem however does not have a good solution. What the core developers want is a good solution. Increasing the blocksize is a horrible solution. Also there were a lot of bugs in BU's code which were fixed later on which destroys their credibility. Handing over bitcoin to miners lead to centralization which is horrible. If core devs were corrupt, they would have already forced segwit on everyone which they didnt do. Miners however want to force BU on everyone and are asking for hard fork.

Increase blocksize horrible solution? Wow. Again, those slimy Core devs pulled a number on you and so many others.

[25hashcoin]

If core devs were corrupt, they would have already forced segwit on everyone which they didnt do.

Are you joking? They've been trying to force it by purposefully stalling scaling. Now you have crazies pushing UASF. Even still people are agreeing to add Segwit garbage to bitcoin just to compromise. Miners fork to big blocks soon is the best possible outcome.

[pedrog]

I am strictly against hard forks. A hard fork must only be done if it is really really necessary like a bug in the code or something. Also they keep pulling back the release time and are trying to release the hard fork as soon as possible which means the code wont be thoroughly tested which is absolutely necessary in case of hard fork. I dont want an early segwit with bugs. A delayed segwit would be better so that more people can go through the code and verify it.

Bitcoin has been stalled for years...now you want it stalled more? Those corrupt Core developers really fooled you guys good. Can't wait for miners to take back bitcoin for good.

Bitcoin development was never stalled. New features are released on a regular basis. This problem however does not have a good solution. What the core developers want is a good solution. Increasing the blocksize is a horrible solution. Also there were a lot of bugs in BU's code which were fixed later on which destroys their credibility. Handing over bitcoin to miners lead to centralization which is horrible. If core devs were corrupt, they would have already forced segwit on everyone which they didnt do. Miners however want to force BU on everyone and are asking for hard fork.

Well, they're the ones forking, we stay on the original chain and we keep the name.

[Pettuh4]

I didn't see any dates as to when they are going to implement Segwit Upgrade. I think this is long overdue. Scaling solution should have been provided to the users because the price is really going up everyday.

Exactly I don't know why the long wait, it's been long overdue and I hope the politicization has ceased because we need a consensus and one mind going forward.