A graphic of how to mind control the public into accepting a hard fork

[Hydrogen]

This graphic seems to indicate unconfirmed transactions were a politically motivated, coordinated attack.

Completely unrelated to block size or scaling issue.

From the chart above you can see network traffic & unconfirmed transactions declined significantly once attackers were appeased.

Edit: This graphic was made by someone else & posted in Bitcoin Discussion section. It should be on page 1 but somehow got bumped far down where it should be, so I'm reposting here also.

[1715186468]

1715186468

[1715186468]

1715186468

[1715186468]

1715186468

[1715186468]

1715186468

[iram1011]

This graphic seems to indicate unconfirmed transactions were a politically motivated, coordinated attack.

Completely unrelated to block size or scaling issue.

From the chart above you can see network traffic & unconfirmed transactions declined significantly once attackers were appeased.

This indeed is something new. I understood what you trying to say. But still I am confused why miners want Segwit2x this badly. What big will they achieve. I would like to know your view over this.

[Hydrogen]

This indeed is something new. I understood what you trying to say. But still I am confused why miners want Segwit2x this badly. What big will they achieve. I would like to know your view over this.

This is the best I can come up with. The designer of bit torrent who is a well known software engineer says segwit2x is unbelievably terrible.



He posted this link as evidence:  https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-July/014709.html

From my perspective, it looks like segwit developers are a lot like bitcoin unlimited devs.

They're incompetent but miners want them anyway as they're essentially puppets who would give miners absolute control. Core developers by contrast aren't willing to do anything or everything miners tell them.

That's my analysis although I can't claim to have put much time or effort into it.

[iram1011]

So, what according to you are potential disadvantage of Segwit2x?

What I have read till now is that Segwit2x will pave the way for Segwit on 1st August as UASF is still not able to get enough miner support and Segwit2x with 90%+ consensus can successfully lead to the implementation of Segwit on Aug 1. Otherwise with less consensus, UASF will lead to a drastic chain split.

[davis196]

What if some of the big miners stand behind all those unconfirmed spam transaction attacks so they want to increase transaction fees and make more profits.
Or perhaps  the Segwit supporters produced the spam attacks to make the bitcoin community  think that Segwit is the only solution for the btc transaction problems.
A year or two ago,99% of the forum members hated Segwit,now the % of Segwit supporters increased dramatically. 
Is this what you are trying to say with the graphics OP?

[kolesozw]

The only disadvantages I see with Segwit2x  is Bitmain idiots who will run "contingency plan to save the bitcoin" and this could lead to even 3! BTC chains. And it was about time to haev a bigger blocks. In the sake of bitcoin business adoption at least.

[Denker]

So, what according to you are potential disadvantage of Segwit2x?

What I have read till now is that Segwit2x will pave the way for Segwit on 1st August as UASF is still not able to get enough miner support and Segwit2x with 90%+ consensus can successfully lead to the implementation of Segwit on Aug 1. Otherwise with less consensus, UASF will lead to a drastic chain split.

SegWit2x is closed door agreement by mining cartell and a few companies who think to have the right to rule over users.
Do you think this is ok? This is not what Bitcoin was created for! If these guys should take over the network BTC is mostly done!
They are going to create another Paypal or Venmo. AML/KYC and blacklisting adresses! Guys what Garzik is going to do with his companies?!
Furthermore SegWit2x was only created because of BIP148!!!
This is nothing more than saving face for miners like Jihan!Furthermore so far it's all just signaling. This means nothing. Nobody knows what code miners will actually run at the end.
And 2x is not just 2MB. Blocks will be bigger than that. Less people will be available to run a full node! As fraudster Craih Wright said; If you can't run a $20.000 node, piss off!".
What kind of normal thinking person would agree and accept all that crap and hand full of guys is planning to do with Bitcoin?!

[HabBear]

I think we need to talk about why people are calling for growth in the blockchain capability.

The growth is being called for due to:

(1) Increased transaction sizes which are touching the limits of what's possible

(2) Larger fees

(3) Longer waiting time for to be confirmed

The chart you posted only addresses (3) and it DOES show an increase but the scale is only a year, which eliminates the ability to compare those spikes to what could be a steady upward trend (but is only seen if you use data going back several years). The call for an increase in transaction throughput size has been going on for more than a year.

The graphic I provide below shows average block size from the beginning to today. We've reached the max, guys, there's only two options from here - allow larger transaction sizes or watch Bitcoin become less and less useful.


best images for websites

Moral of the story, Don't believe everything you read on the internet! Make sure you do independent research!

And 2x is not just 2MB. Blocks will be bigger than that. Less people will be available to run a full node! As fraudster Craih Wright said; If you can't run a $20.000 node, piss off!".

What kind of normal thinking person would agree and accept all that crap and hand full of guys is planning to do with Bitcoin?!

Totally agree that Craig Wright is a fake. He's comes across as the Trump of Bitcoin. What do you propose as an alternative. Block size capacity needs to be increased...so...how do we do that?

[syaripudin]

If segwit aims to make bitcoin better. I think it must be done. But must be seen in the securities effect of segwit. If the goal is only to seek the benefit of some parties. I do not think it needs support. I just hope segwit is a technical. So bitcoin can be the preferred crypto currency. I think all need a long process. About how people think about segwit. I think everyone has different ideas. Some agree with the segwit. There is also a disagree with the segwit. It is just a process. Where bitcoin will be better for the future

[oblivi]

I think we need to talk about why people are calling for growth in the blockchain capability.

The growth is being called for due to:

(1) Increased transaction sizes which are touching the limits of what's possible

(2) Larger fees

(3) Longer waiting time for to be confirmed

The chart you posted only addresses (3) and it DOES show an increase but the scale is only a year, which eliminates the ability to compare those spikes to what could be a steady upward trend (but is only seen if you use data going back several years). The call for an increase in transaction throughput size has been going on for more than a year.

The graphic I provide below shows average block size from the beginning to today. We've reached the max, guys, there's only two options from here - allow larger transaction sizes or watch Bitcoin become less and less useful.


best images for websites

Moral of the story, Don't believe everything you read on the internet! Make sure you do independent research!

And 2x is not just 2MB. Blocks will be bigger than that. Less people will be available to run a full node! As fraudster Craih Wright said; If you can't run a $20.000 node, piss off!".

What kind of normal thinking person would agree and accept all that crap and hand full of guys is planning to do with Bitcoin?!

Totally agree that Craig Wright is a fake. He's comes across as the Trump of Bitcoin. What do you propose as an alternative. Block size capacity needs to be increased...so...how do we do that?

The problem is not if the blocksize should be increased or not, the problem is HOW and WHEN.

The segwit2x agreement is obviously rushed, and the thought of developing it leaving Core behind is an act of nothing but insanity.

We have to leave segwit running for at least an entire year, then consider again if we really need a blocksize increase and do it the right way, not in 3 fucking months. I hate the fact that in 3 months we will have another price crash and drama because of idiots wanting to rush a hardfork. After we get segwit in we don't need to raise the blocksize in 3 months, period.