If Segwit2x gains 90% support before Aug 1st, will BIP148 still go live?

[SGToken]

Since segwit already solved the block size issue, will BIP148 still necessary?

[Mad7Scientist]

If I understand correctly, BIP148 is a strategy (or 51% attack) to get all miners on segwit clients so that the [correction: soft fork] of segwit can happen.

edit: To properly answer this BIP148 is a method of getting the 95% needed to enable SegWit, or 80% if you include the possibility of SegWit2x. When SegWit (or SegWit2x which includes SegWit with it) is enabled then BIP148 no longer has a purpose and it disables itself. So the answer would be yes if SegWit had been deployed already, but it isn't deployed on the blockchain yet.

[Sithara007]

If I understand correctly, BIP148 is a strategy (or 51% attack) to get all miners on segwit clients so that when the hard fork of segwit happens there won't be any miners that are non segwit so a non segwit chain can't form so users of the old non segwit chain will get stalled with no new blocks and they'll upgrade to the segwit client.

They are both independent of each other as far as I know, but I don't know much.

This is getting more and more confusing. Can someone please tell me how much support is actually needed to activate the SegWit? Some say that it is 51%. For some others, it is 80%. A few are saying that 95% support is needed to activate it.

[Mad7Scientist]

BIP148 needs 51%, which forces the other 49% of miners to adopt BIP148. That's the end of step 1. BIP148 includes segwit support and another timer and percentage requirement to activate that. When that triggers then comes the [correction: soft fork]. [SegWit2x] is what eventually can cause a hard fork where all wallets will stall with few to no new blocks and everyone will upgrade to bitcoin software that allows segwit2x to be present so their clients/wallets accept the new chain and work again.

It is possible to mine with a modified client that has the BIP148 flag present but doesn't actually allow segwit, which would completely defeat the two stage adoption strategy, but who's going to do that?

I wrote about it here in my thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2025791.0

[Pursuer]

SegWit (the original proposal which I believe was BIP141) needs 95% to activate. it is the well thought plan, tested, needs the majority to support it to activate. it has practically no risk of any split or any danger to bitcoin.

BIP148 has no percentage. it is rushed and in my opinion not even well-planned. it is forcing the miners to switch by rejecting their blocks if they are not signalling. it doesn't need much miner support and the higher support it can gain the lower the risk of a split will be.
so far it has so little support from miners and there aren't that many nodes running it either.

SegWit2x needs 80% support to activate SegWit, I believe they are going to use the same version bit for signaling and this means if SegWit2x gains the support it needs BIP148 won't do anything because it sees the blocks as signaling what it wants.
the support is so far between 85-90% but it is only in their text that they include in the coinbase transaction. they have to start with the version bit. which I think will start on 21st.

[ladydark]

Since segwit already solved the block size issue, will BIP148 still necessary?

As far as i know,spammers who were responsible for fake transactions which caused conjestion in the bitcoin network have started to leave since they have realized that segwit is to be activated and block size is to be increased.So they could no more spam the network.Thats the result of fall in transaction fee.

[aeternus]

SegWit (the original proposal which I believe was BIP141) needs 95% to activate. it is the well thought plan, tested, needs the majority to support it to activate. it has practically no risk of any split or any danger to bitcoin.

BIP148 has no percentage. it is rushed and in my opinion not even well-planned. it is forcing the miners to switch by rejecting their blocks if they are not signalling. it doesn't need much miner support and the higher support it can gain the lower the risk of a split will be.
so far it has so little support from miners and there aren't that many nodes running it either.

SegWit2x needs 80% support to activate SegWit, I believe they are going to use the same version bit for signaling and this means if SegWit2x gains the support it needs BIP148 won't do anything because it sees the blocks as signaling what it wants.
the support is so far between 85-90% but it is only in their text that they include in the coinbase transaction. they have to start with the version bit. which I think will start on 21st.

True but segwit2x if I recall correctly will also include a 2MB fork that will be done some months later, that to me is not the way to solve the issue of scaling bitcoin but it seems that no one is willing to compromise.

[Pursuer]

SegWit (the original proposal which I believe was BIP141) needs 95% to activate. it is the well thought plan, tested, needs the majority to support it to activate. it has practically no risk of any split or any danger to bitcoin.

BIP148 has no percentage. it is rushed and in my opinion not even well-planned. it is forcing the miners to switch by rejecting their blocks if they are not signalling. it doesn't need much miner support and the higher support it can gain the lower the risk of a split will be.
so far it has so little support from miners and there aren't that many nodes running it either.

SegWit2x needs 80% support to activate SegWit, I believe they are going to use the same version bit for signaling and this means if SegWit2x gains the support it needs BIP148 won't do anything because it sees the blocks as signaling what it wants.
the support is so far between 85-90% but it is only in their text that they include in the coinbase transaction. they have to start with the version bit. which I think will start on 21st.

True but segwit2x if I recall correctly will also include a 2MB fork that will be done some months later, that to me is not the way to solve the issue of scaling bitcoin but it seems that no one is willing to compromise.

yeah, well you can not expect the scaling debate that has been going on for a couple of years to be solved that easily with a simply activation on a set date.
I am afraid the drama will stay with us for a very long time. possibly even 1 or 2 more years. and I agree that sometimes it seems like nobody is willing to compromise.

[Alex_He]

SegWit (the original proposal which I believe was BIP141) needs 95% to activate. it is the well thought plan, tested, needs the majority to support it to activate. it has practically no risk of any split or any danger to bitcoin.

BIP148 has no percentage. it is rushed and in my opinion not even well-planned. it is forcing the miners to switch by rejecting their blocks if they are not signalling. it doesn't need much miner support and the higher support it can gain the lower the risk of a split will be.
so far it has so little support from miners and there aren't that many nodes running it either.

SegWit2x needs 80% support to activate SegWit, I believe they are going to use the same version bit for signaling and this means if SegWit2x gains the support it needs BIP148 won't do anything because it sees the blocks as signaling what it wants.
the support is so far between 85-90% but it is only in their text that they include in the coinbase transaction. they have to start with the version bit. which I think will start on 21st.

Can SegWit2x and BIP co-exist without a forking??

[BenRickert]

SegWit (the original proposal which I believe was BIP141) needs 95% to activate. it is the well thought plan, tested, needs the majority to support it to activate. it has practically no risk of any split or any danger to bitcoin.

BIP148 has no percentage. it is rushed and in my opinion not even well-planned. it is forcing the miners to switch by rejecting their blocks if they are not signalling. it doesn't need much miner support and the higher support it can gain the lower the risk of a split will be.
so far it has so little support from miners and there aren't that many nodes running it either.

SegWit2x needs 80% support to activate SegWit, I believe they are going to use the same version bit for signaling and this means if SegWit2x gains the support it needs BIP148 won't do anything because it sees the blocks as signaling what it wants.
the support is so far between 85-90% but it is only in their text that they include in the coinbase transaction. they have to start with the version bit. which I think will start on 21st.

True but segwit2x if I recall correctly will also include a 2MB fork that will be done some months later, that to me is not the way to solve the issue of scaling bitcoin but it seems that no one is willing to compromise.

I thought that WAS the "compromise"? Regardless, it would appear that "scaling" challenges will be with us for a very long time. This will not be over after these dates no matter what the outcome. Has the internet ever conquered "scaling". It seems to immediately utilize all new capacity very shortly after it comes online.