SegWit2x will get activated for sure?

[OmegaStarScream]

I'm checking Coin.dance since yesterday and I see a really decent increase on the mining power.



It seems like It's going to get activated at 80% If I got things right and there is nothing we could do about it, this will also cancel UASF activation. The agreement they made a few weeks ago include most of the mining power so It seems unlikely to me that they would fail to do this.
Is this our way to centralization? I mean this could make the core developers unemployed, right?

[mike4001]

They are implementing the exact SegWit version Core made.

So I don't really see the centralization part.

But yes, it looks like if they finish the code before August 1st, they will activate it and UASF will be canceled.

[pooya87]

~ I mean this could make the core developers unemployed, right?

what the F** does this mean?!!
since when developing, coding, contributing to an open source project became a job that you apply so that you get "unemployed" if something happened!

and actually this way of thinking is leading to centralization.

p.s. this is activation of SegWit compatible with bip91 (https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/pull/21) (https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0091.mediawiki)

[OmegaStarScream]

~ I mean this could make the core developers unemployed, right?

what the F** does this mean?!!
since when developing, coding, contributing to an open source project became a job that you apply so that you get "unemployed" if something happened!

and actually this way of thinking is leading to centralization.

p.s. this is activation of SegWit compatible with bip91 (https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/pull/21) (https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0091.mediawiki)

I know that bitcoin is an open source project but what I meant is that there are some developers that are really working on the project more then others. If SegWit2X takes place, we will probably see another repository on GitHub controlled by other people (whoever made the new SegWit proposa) and since they are against Bitcoin core developers this could mean that the core developers suggestions from now on won't be taken seriously.

[DooMAD]

If SegWit2X takes place, we will probably see another repository on GitHub controlled by other people (whoever made the new SegWit proposa) and since they are against Bitcoin core developers this could mean that the core developers suggestions from now on won't be taken seriously.

A change in consensus doesn't mean anyone is excluded unless they can't accept the change.  If SegWit2X takes place, the Core devs can simply add the 2MB part to their own code and carry on like nothing happened.  As long as their code is compatible with the new standard, anyone can continue to develop.  It's only if Core refuse to acknowledge the change and opt to maintain a minority chain that they potentially lose influence, which is beyond unlikely.  It would, however, set what I consider to be a healthy precedent in demonstrating that developers aren't "in control" as such.  Devs can push code, but the users securing the chain (that's both miners AND nodes) choose and enforce the code.  That's the way it should be.

[pooya87]

I know that bitcoin is an open source project but what I meant is that there are some developers that are really working on the project more then others. If SegWit2X takes place, we will probably see another repository on GitHub controlled by other people (whoever made the new SegWit proposa) and since they are against Bitcoin core developers this could mean that the core developers suggestions from now on won't be taken seriously.

all i'm going to say about this is that there is no core dev, SegWit2x dev, XYZ dev.
there are only a set of rules known as consensus rules (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Consensus) that are enforced by the network, it just happens that core devs have been the best and most dedicated group of people to code for bitcoin and keep it alive and also improve it all these years.

- this doesn't mean core devs are employees and nothing else matters.
- this doesn't mean nobody else can contribute, and even if they do it must be ignored!
- this doesn't mean bitcoin core is THE bitcoin client. bitcoin core (github/bitcoin/bitcoin) is A bitcoin client.

with that said if SegWit2x or any other future proposals about anything in general gained an overwhelming support from the network (not just miners, miners ARE the employees) and if it was really a good and needed change it must be implemented by everyone.
it being good or not remains to be seen though.

the thing you said about not taken seriously is another political matter which i don't even want to get into its discussion.

[deisik]

They are implementing the exact SegWit version Core made.

So I don't really see the centralization part.

But yes, it looks like if they finish the code before August 1st, they will activate it and UASF will be canceled.

Whether UASF is good or bad is debatable, or course

But I don't quite like the idea of "if they finish the code before August 1st". Being a developer myself, I know that it takes many months to polish the code and get rid of nasty bugs that may be sitting patiently there and then one day wreak total chaos. We have seen that already with Bugs Unlimited, and now they want to do this again? Whenever there is some deadline, you can be dead sure that the code will be infested with bugs. I'm talking about the 2x part apparently, SegWit itself seems to be pretty consistent after a few years of development and testing. Whoever promotes SegWit2x is obviously out of his mind and seriously looking for trouble

If SegWit2X takes place, the Core devs can simply add the 2MB part to their own code and carry on like nothing happened

That seems to be the most scary part of the whole shebang

[bryant.coleman]

They are implementing the exact SegWit version Core made.

So I don't really see the centralization part.

But yes, it looks like if they finish the code before August 1st, they will activate it and UASF will be canceled.

Whether UASF is good or bad is debatable, or course

But I don't quite like the idea of "if they finish the code before August 1st". Being a developer myself, I know that it takes many months to polish the code and get rid of nasty bugs that may be sitting patiently there and then one day wreak total chaos. We have seen that already with Bugs Unlimited, and now they want to do this again? Whenever there is some deadline, you can be dead sure that the code will be infested with bugs. I'm talking about the 2x part apparently, SegWit itself seems to be pretty consistent after a few years of development and testing. Whoever promotes SegWit2x is obviously out of his mind and seriously looking for trouble

If SegWit2X takes place, the Core devs can simply add the 2MB part to their own code and carry on like nothing happened

That seems to be the most scary part of the whole shebang

Your post makes me really nervous about the short-term future. If some bug is found in the code, and if it can be exploited by the hackers, then there will be all sort of chaos. I still remember what happened in March 2014, when Mt Gox crashed (although it had nothing to do with software bugs). There were chaos all around and the exchange rate was doing down like a falling knife.

[hase0278]

Your post makes me really nervous about the short-term future. If some bug is found in the code, and if it can be exploited by the hackers, then there will be all sort of chaos. I still remember what happened in March 2014, when Mt Gox crashed (although it had nothing to do with software bugs). There were chaos all around and the exchange rate was doing down like a falling knife.

Even if that is the case, it would still get fixed soon and don't be nervous about the short-term future and think about the long term one. There would be chaos all around if that happens but it would still be like Mt Gox, it will wear out soon and just be another part of bitcoin history. For now I hope for the best ever bitcoin proposal to win and I expect it to resolve the slow confirmation times on transactions that we are experiencing now.

[itooam]

Well, the segwit code is actually the same as used by core and has had all the rigorous testing already performed!  The new development will be the extension to larger blocks.  I would assume this is just changing a hard coded value somewhere, if that was the case then it shouldn't be that difficult to code, as most emphasis would be on tweaking existing test procedures to consider the new block size).  Having said that, it probably isn't coded in this way (?) and there are perhaps indirectly affected processes, nothing it seems, is ever easy when programming haha.

[itooam]

On another note, I see BTCC has just started flagging Segwit2x too, so I would expect > 80% for sure by the end of today!

[deisik]

They are implementing the exact SegWit version Core made.

So I don't really see the centralization part.

But yes, it looks like if they finish the code before August 1st, they will activate it and UASF will be canceled.

Whether UASF is good or bad is debatable, or course

But I don't quite like the idea of "if they finish the code before August 1st". Being a developer myself, I know that it takes many months to polish the code and get rid of nasty bugs that may be sitting patiently there and then one day wreak total chaos. We have seen that already with Bugs Unlimited, and now they want to do this again? Whenever there is some deadline, you can be dead sure that the code will be infested with bugs. I'm talking about the 2x part apparently, SegWit itself seems to be pretty consistent after a few years of development and testing. Whoever promotes SegWit2x is obviously out of his mind and seriously looking for trouble

If SegWit2X takes place, the Core devs can simply add the 2MB part to their own code and carry on like nothing happened

That seems to be the most scary part of the whole shebang

Your post makes me really nervous about the short-term future. If some bug is found in the code, and if it can be exploited by the hackers, then there will be all sort of chaos. I still remember what happened in March 2014, when Mt Gox crashed (although it had nothing to do with software bugs). There were chaos all around and the exchange rate was doing down like a falling knife

You are certainly not alone

I myself feel quite worried even though I mostly moved my funds to Litecoin and the US dollar by now. I'm afraid that if some vulnerability found and exploited to the full, it may also affect all cryptocurrencies, not just Bitcoin. And the most dreadful thing would be if major exchanges start failing and falling. This SegWit2x thing looks like a Trojan horse to me since exchanges won't be able to decline it unless they choose to delist Bitcoin completely (even if temporarily). Personally, I hope that it will be postponed for at least half a year (if not abandoned altogether)

[BillyBobZorton]

Even if 100% of miners signal for something, that something is irrelevant if it's not backed by Bitcoin Core devs. Bitcoin Core devs developed all the technology, and they think it's a good idea to fire them and put some random morons in charge instead to maintain and develop Bitcoin. Big mistake. Every miner supporting this instead of BIP141 will soon face bankruptcy if they are stupid enough to run that software.

[deisik]

Even if 100% of miners signal for something, that something is irrelevant if it's not backed by Bitcoin Core devs. Bitcoin Core devs developed all the technology, and they think it's a good idea to fire them and put some random morons in charge instead to maintain and develop Bitcoin. Big mistake. Every miner supporting this instead of BIP141 will soon face bankruptcy if they are stupid enough to run that software

You certainly don't see how dangerous the current situation is

It is not just about miners going bust, they are basically a waste material anyway (in the sense they can be easily processed and substituted if required). Indeed, this is not how they feel and behave right now but this is how things should be if done right, and this is the crux of the matter. If it were only about them being spent and wiped out, no one would give a goddamn fuck. The real problem is that they have enough power to take Bitcoin down with them if they choose so (or at least, turn Bitcoin into a waste material as well), and I for one have no doubts that they will (I refer to Jihan and his minions, more specifically)

[BillyBobZorton]

Even if 100% of miners signal for something, that something is irrelevant if it's not backed by Bitcoin Core devs. Bitcoin Core devs developed all the technology, and they think it's a good idea to fire them and put some random morons in charge instead to maintain and develop Bitcoin. Big mistake. Every miner supporting this instead of BIP141 will soon face bankruptcy if they are stupid enough to run that software

You certainly don't see how dangerous the current situation is

It is not just about miners going bust, they are basically a waste material anyway (in the sense they can be easily processed and substituted if required). Indeed, this is not how they feel and behave right now but this is how things should be if done right, and this is the crux of the matter. If it were only about them being spent and wiped out, no one would give a goddamn fuck. The real problem is that they have enough power to take Bitcoin down with them if they choose so (or at least, turn Bitcoin into a waste material as well), and I for one have no doubts that they will (I refer to Jihan and his minions, more specifically)

Let's wait until october and see what happens. I suspect there will be fireworks and it will be a failure that will display NYC is a mistake. The rushed hardfork into inferior software is going to be a joke. If they try to attack the legacy chain that sticks with Core we may need a PoW change... I dont know honestly how it will play out.

[Krimster]

Hello!

New to this forum, been reading for a few days and trying to educate myself in these issues, but still trying to understand:

Can someone explain, or more likely, link to me, what is so dangerous about the whole SegWit2x issue? For what I know, Litecoin already does SegWit, and as for the 2 MB block, is it really that much or that complex? On the surface it seems rather straightforward. To me it sounds like anything that improves scalability will strengthen BTC. Maybe not its value short-term, but for sure its validity as a currency.

Best regards.

[mike4001]

Even if 100% of miners signal for something, that something is irrelevant if it's not backed by Bitcoin Core devs. Bitcoin Core devs developed all the technology, and they think it's a good idea to fire them and put some random morons in charge instead to maintain and develop Bitcoin. Big mistake. Every miner supporting this instead of BIP141 will soon face bankruptcy if they are stupid enough to run that software

You certainly don't see how dangerous the current situation is

It is not just about miners going bust, they are basically a waste material anyway (in the sense they can be easily processed and substituted if required). Indeed, this is not how they feel and behave right now but this is how things should be if done right, and this is the crux of the matter. If it were only about them being spent and wiped out, no one would give a goddamn fuck. The real problem is that they have enough power to take Bitcoin down with them if they choose so (or at least, turn Bitcoin into a waste material as well), and I for one have no doubts that they will (I refer to Jihan and his minions, more specifically)

Let's wait until october and see what happens. I suspect there will be fireworks and it will be a failure that will display NYC is a mistake. The rushed hardfork into inferior software is going to be a joke. If they try to attack the legacy chain that sticks with Core we may need a PoW change... I dont know honestly how it will play out.

Then we have SegWit activated and no hard fork

Exactly what Core wants, isn't it?

[deisik]

Hello!

New to this forum, been reading for a few days and trying to educate myself in these issues, but still trying to understand:

Can someone explain, or more likely, link to me, what is so dangerous about the whole SegWit2x issue? For what I know, Litecoin already does SegWit, and as for the 2 MB block, is it really that much or that complex? On the surface it seems rather straightforward. To me it sounds like anything that improves scalability will strengthen BTC. Maybe not its value short-term, but for sure its validity as a currency

You simply can't take and merge two two different codebases in one project

And hope that there wouldn't be bugs. Now imagine that some dude has a pacemaker implanted, so if its software has a bug and the device malfunctions due to this bug, the poor dude may get instantly killed by an electric discharge. It is the same with forcing such updates on cryptocurrencies. One bug found and exploited may render the whole system totally unusable. And it doesn't really matter how complex the resulting code will be, you can safely assume that it is complex enough to contain a few nasty bugs that may require many months of intensive testing to weed them out. If anything, that has already been proven in practice with BU

Let's wait until october and see what happens. I suspect there will be fireworks and it will be a failure that will display NYC is a mistake. The rushed hardfork into inferior software is going to be a joke. If they try to attack the legacy chain that sticks with Core we may need a PoW change... I dont know honestly how it will play out.

Then we have SegWit activated and no hard fork

This in no way prevents miners from taking revenge on Bitcoin

[Paashaas]

Miners wont HF with buggy code even the market will refuse it with overwhelming support. Jihan wants to rush it to try to be ahead of the waves of new people after sewitt. Those side-chains will scale Bitcoin beyond expectations wich making a HF unnecessary.

[Vishnu.Reang]

You are certainly not alone

I myself feel quite worried even though I mostly moved my funds to Litecoin and the US dollar by now. I'm afraid that if some vulnerability found and exploited to the full, it may also affect all cryptocurrencies, not just Bitcoin. And the most dreadful thing would be if major exchanges start failing and falling. This SegWit2x thing looks like a Trojan horse to me since exchanges won't be able to decline it unless they choose to delist Bitcoin completely (even if temporarily). Personally, I hope that it will be postponed for at least half a year (if not abandoned altogether)

Why Litecoin? If the Bitcoin exchange rates crash, then that is going to affect all the altcoins as well, including Litecoin. And another thing is that when the Bitcoin prices crash, the altcoin exchange rates crash even more (percentage-wise). For example, if Bitcoin prices crash by as much as 50%, then it is possible that the altcoin prices can crash by a massive 95%.