Bitcoin Forum
January 21, 2018, 11:05:45 PM *
News: Electrum users must upgrade to 3.0.5 if they haven't already. More info.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Next UASF in 1 August/2017. Bitcoin UP or DOWN?  (Read 1625 times)
Bitcoin Guy
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238



View Profile
July 12, 2017, 03:01:16 AM
 #21

Not a big deal, who cares if it does hit $1200? anyone bought at any price will dump before it's too late for them and that's the exact reason why the price drops to that level in the first place. one thing miners should keep in mind, there are not many big investors as themselves, only a few have big investments directly buying from exchanges they are the ones who'd dump with the first signs of a drop and the majority are small investors and they can't afford high fees simple. if they think someone will invest $5B in a decentralized currency they're wrong.
Bitcoin is standing to date only because of the same small traders and if it continues to stay the same system without any upgrade then I promise you they will abandon bitcoin just because it won't be profitable for them any more. time to wake up you are not the only currency generator in town.

I will be really pissed if thing goes wrong because of the miners are not corporating.  Like you said, It will hurt them more. 

- To be or not to be, that is the question. -
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
licutis
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 37


View Profile
July 12, 2017, 03:37:03 AM
 #22

Everyone screams that it will go down to nothing, so obviously, it will go up. After all of those people panic sell between now and then. When there are no sellers left on Aug 1, the buyers will push the price significantly.
ulfsaar
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 198



View Profile
July 12, 2017, 04:31:16 AM
 #23

Even if the hardfork fails. The Segwit part of Segwit2x will most likely get activated.

I very much doubt it. That requires 80% miner support, but BitMain has much more than 20%, and they'll never willingly cause SegWit to activate because it destroys asicboost. The current signalling percentages are a result of BitMain trying to get people to think as you do, in order to hurt BIP148's chances. (I think that BIP148 was doomed regardless, but it doesn't help when people are thinking that "segwit2x" will activate SegWit around the same time anyway.)

The asicboost were not issued on all bitmain asics. Only few ones for personal use, less than 20%.
deisik
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456



View Profile
July 12, 2017, 06:33:02 AM
 #24

With high fees and slow confirmation times, which is good for altcoins, especially Litecoin with SW and LN already activated. The bottom line is that Bitcoin will likely continue to slowly bleed with its prices stagnating and people looking for alternatives elsewhere. In other words, instead of spectacular crash we will see the same boring faces sending curses as before. That would be kind of meh. Jihan will likely abandon his Jihancoin too, at least for the time being

Do you know the maximum transactions per second that Litecoin can process with the LN?  I searched online, but cannot find the answer.  Ethereum is about 20 and Bitcoin is about 3

I guess this number is virtually unlimited

That's likely the reason why you couldn't find any relevant info. Basically, any blockchain is conceptually centralized in respect to processing transactions, i.e. the majority of nodes should accept the mined block to make this transaction valid (read confirmed). This is not the case with LN, since you don't need blocks to send transactions via payment channels, and this basically means that it is meaningless to talk about processing capacity of LN network in terms of transactions per second. Transactions are processed as soon as they reach the receiving end of the payment channel, i.e. they are real time and they are independent of each other as well as blocks found

theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2912


View Profile
July 12, 2017, 08:36:58 AM
 #25

This is turning out to be a real dampener. All these days, I was checking the SegWit2x support levels. It was hovering at around 86% for the past 2-3 weeks, and I was finally hoping that the scaling problems will be solved for ever. Seems like the issue is going to get even worse.

It's very annoying, but there's no reason to get depressed about it. BIP148 will fail because it was poorly-designed. BIP149 is similar, but well-designed (and therefore slower): it'll finally get the job done in about a year, and the sky won't fall between now and then.

The asicboost were not issued on all bitmain asics. Only few ones for personal use, less than 20%.

I don't believe it. All of Bitmain's behavior is in-line with them desperately doing everything possible to preserve asicboost. No other theory explains their behavior nearly so well.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
HaXX0R1337
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392


View Profile
July 12, 2017, 10:33:57 PM
 #26

With the UASF coming up on August 1 i really do think that the price will go up but there is a chance that the price might go down and it is a high possibility that people would sell of their coin because of this uncertainty.
Bitcoin Guy
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238



View Profile
July 13, 2017, 12:18:41 AM
 #27

With high fees and slow confirmation times, which is good for altcoins, especially Litecoin with SW and LN already activated. The bottom line is that Bitcoin will likely continue to slowly bleed with its prices stagnating and people looking for alternatives elsewhere. In other words, instead of spectacular crash we will see the same boring faces sending curses as before. That would be kind of meh. Jihan will likely abandon his Jihancoin too, at least for the time being

Do you know the maximum transactions per second that Litecoin can process with the LN?  I searched online, but cannot find the answer.  Ethereum is about 20 and Bitcoin is about 3

I guess this number is virtually unlimited

That's likely the reason why you couldn't find any relevant info. Basically, any blockchain is conceptually centralized in respect to processing transactions, i.e. the majority of nodes should accept the mined block to make this transaction valid (read confirmed). This is not the case with LN, since you don't need blocks to send transactions via payment channels, and this basically means that it is meaningless to talk about processing capacity of LN network in terms of transactions per second. Transactions are processed as soon as they reach the receiving end of the payment channel, i.e. they are real time and they are independent of each other as well as blocks found

For Bitcoin, a LN would require a hard fork, correct?  Is it in Bitcoin's roadmap somewhere?

- To be or not to be, that is the question. -
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414


Put BTC here: 1P7K1FyEtD3WQtk4Zd2Dph3qs9gcFGu1pU


View Profile
July 13, 2017, 05:57:46 AM
 #28

With high fees and slow confirmation times, which is good for altcoins, especially Litecoin with SW and LN already activated. The bottom line is that Bitcoin will likely continue to slowly bleed with its prices stagnating and people looking for alternatives elsewhere. In other words, instead of spectacular crash we will see the same boring faces sending curses as before. That would be kind of meh. Jihan will likely abandon his Jihancoin too, at least for the time being

Do you know the maximum transactions per second that Litecoin can process with the LN?  I searched online, but cannot find the answer.  Ethereum is about 20 and Bitcoin is about 3

I guess this number is virtually unlimited

That's likely the reason why you couldn't find any relevant info. Basically, any blockchain is conceptually centralized in respect to processing transactions, i.e. the majority of nodes should accept the mined block to make this transaction valid (read confirmed). This is not the case with LN, since you don't need blocks to send transactions via payment channels, and this basically means that it is meaningless to talk about processing capacity of LN network in terms of transactions per second. Transactions are processed as soon as they reach the receiving end of the payment channel, i.e. they are real time and they are independent of each other as well as blocks found

For Bitcoin, a LN would require a hard fork, correct?  Is it in Bitcoin's roadmap somewhere?


Apparently Lightning network could be currently run on bitcoin; however, if segwit is implemented, then LN becomes easier to run.. that is why lots of folks are equating LN with Segwit (even though on a technical level segwit does not seem to be absolutely necessary for LN). 

So the answer is that no hardfork is required for LN.

deisik
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456



View Profile
July 13, 2017, 06:18:44 AM
 #29

With high fees and slow confirmation times, which is good for altcoins, especially Litecoin with SW and LN already activated. The bottom line is that Bitcoin will likely continue to slowly bleed with its prices stagnating and people looking for alternatives elsewhere. In other words, instead of spectacular crash we will see the same boring faces sending curses as before. That would be kind of meh. Jihan will likely abandon his Jihancoin too, at least for the time being

Do you know the maximum transactions per second that Litecoin can process with the LN?  I searched online, but cannot find the answer.  Ethereum is about 20 and Bitcoin is about 3

I guess this number is virtually unlimited

That's likely the reason why you couldn't find any relevant info. Basically, any blockchain is conceptually centralized in respect to processing transactions, i.e. the majority of nodes should accept the mined block to make this transaction valid (read confirmed). This is not the case with LN, since you don't need blocks to send transactions via payment channels, and this basically means that it is meaningless to talk about processing capacity of LN network in terms of transactions per second. Transactions are processed as soon as they reach the receiving end of the payment channel, i.e. they are real time and they are independent of each other as well as blocks found

For Bitcoin, a LN would require a hard fork, correct?

I don't really know

If it requires all clients to upgrade (i.e. old clients won't be able to accept new blocks), then yes, it would require a hard fork (since this is what a hard fork is essentially about). Regarding Bitcoin's roadmap, I guess we should first
activate SegWit simply because LN is a completely new technology which effectively makes Bitcoin into another coin (well, to a certain extent), while SW is just an upgrade which (somewhat) solves current issues (e.g. makes blocks more accommodative)

Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!