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

[achow101]

I heard somewhere else it's 10mb, can you show me the code?

You have heard completely incorrectly. In Bitcoin Core, the maximum size a serialized block can be is 4 MB: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/consensus/consensus.h#L13. In btc1 (segwit2x), it's 8 MB: https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/blob/segwit2x/src/consensus/consensus.h#L12

Isn't Bitcoin science? If it is science you should do prediction the future So could you explain at what conditions the hard fork is inevitable? and how much is the probable of getting those conditions at future?

Sure, its a science, but it also includes randomness. There is randomness and several unknown variables that make an accurate prediction hard to do. We don't know what percentage of miners are spy mining; we don't know what percentage will actually be enforcing BIP 91. Then you also have to factor in the human factors too like will a pool start or stop enforcing BIP 91 based on what they see happens to a BIP 91 invalid block? Or will a pool which currently isn't signaling start signaling before or after activation. Then there's other things like how much will the hashrate grow? Since there are so many things that you need to know in order to predict anything related to forks, making a prediction is hard to do without assuming many of those things, and those assumptions can be completely wrong thus making the prediction completely wrong.

[1714887062]

1714887062

[plims]

The must-read Segwit Decision Tree
posted: 7/17/2017
https://www.cryptoninjas.net/2017/07/17/must-read-segwit-decision-tree/

Fairly comprehensive summary outlining timelines and scenarios.

Thanks, this one is good and easy to understand.

[titan20]

Hi All,
can some one tell me what i have to do as a bitcoin user to support the bitcoin core developers preferred solution in this mess of Bip 91, 141, 148. Still don't get it.

Cheers.

[gueorguiev]

Hi All,
can some one tell me what i have to do as a bitcoin user to support the bitcoin core developers preferred solution in this mess of Bip 91, 141, 148. Still don't get it.

Cheers.

Core only supports BIP 141,you dont need to do anything other than run the latest wallet Bitcoin core has to offer, but im pretty sure a solution was already found. BIP 91 should be going active in a few more blocks.

https://www.xbt.eu/

[Rahar02]

But I've read about miners which signaling on bit 1 has been declined after BIP91 locked-in, maybe you can see it on bitcoin core wallet or it just fud news?

That is completely incorrect. Signaling on bit 1 has significantly increased after BIP 91 locked in. You can clearly see the increase in signaling of bit 1 over the past day in this graph:

The yellow line is segwit signaling over the last 144 blocks. As you can see, it has sharply increased today as BIP 91 locked in.

Thanks for enlighten me.
Which sites - Where could I find such charts about miners signaling various proposals?

No. BIP 91 (aka the first half of segwit2x) requires that all blocks after activation must signal for segwit on bit 1. Segwit2x is not a different implementation of segwit. Rather it is a plan to activate segwit via BIP 91 (and BIP 91 activates segwit by requiring all blocks signal for segwit) and then to hard fork later.

I always thought it is the same but it turns out just a half of segwit2x.
Since BIP91 to activate segwit require all blocks signal for segwit, all blocks? So, if some of miners are spy mining or a pool stop enforcing bip91, then segwit2x won't be activated?

I'm waiting for BIP148 which is on mooting right now, whether it still necessary or whatever it could be.

Right now, BIP 148 is theoretically pointless as miners should be enforcing BIP 91. If they do not, then BIP 148 will have an effect as then BIP 148's rules activate on August 1st. However I am told that most miners are running either btc1 (aka the segwit2x client) or segsignal (aka a BIP 91 patch on top of Core) so they will be enforcing BIP 91.

Hopefully, they stick to BIP91 instead of signaling other nodes, then chain split won't happen and traders can't speculate about crash again.

Encapsulated means another way, a secret path to activate segwit
BIP91 includes a hard forking, about 2Mb hard fork, right?

No, BIP 91 does not include a hard fork. That is segwit2x. Segwit2x contains BIP 91, but BIP 91 is not segwit2x.

It's make me confuse about how to activate segwit2x? All blocks should signaling for it?

[achow101]

Thanks for enlighten me.
Which sites - Where could I find such charts about miners signaling various proposals?

That chart was from http://bitcoin.sipa.be/. You can also check out https://coin.dance/ and https://www.xbt.eu/.

I always thought it is the same but it turns out just a half of segwit2x.
Since BIP91 to activate segwit require all blocks signal for segwit, all blocks? So, if some of miners are spy mining or a pool stop enforcing bip91, then segwit2x won't be activated?

Segwit2x is not one thing that is activated, it is several things that must be activated sequentially.

If some miners are spy mining or they stop enforcing BIP 91, then segwit may not be able to activate, and segwit2x will not continue with its plan.

It's make me confuse about how to activate segwit2x? All blocks should signaling for it?

Segwit2x will continue when segwit becomes active. According to BIP 91, all blocks must signal for segwit. That way segwit can become locked in in its next signaling period, and then activate one signaling period after it becomes locked in.

[Rahar02]

Thank you for your answers,
Could you mention some reliable-trusted sites where I can learn about segwit or segwit2x activation sequence?
Because I notice there are several proposals about bitcoin scale such as bitcoin ABC or bcc or whatever it is. Just consider it as some useless proposals but I would like to learn how it could affect current events, whether it could be or not.
And, I would like to know about your best predictions regards bitcoin scale solution; whether segwit or segwit2x could be activated with or without hard fork or what/how? Just prediction, thanks.

[nizamcc]

Theymos gave a hint of the possibility of Bitcoin Cash coming into existence regardless on Aug 1, so does that mean it will be the same like we had that previous ALT which went nowhere but dumped by everyone? Why is it too necessary for these miners to come up with a new currency they already know that will get evaluated with nothing when it doesn't get supported by the majority?

[gueorguiev]

Theymos gave a hint of the possibility of Bitcoin Cash coming into existence regardless on Aug 1, so does that mean it will be the same like we had that previous ALT which went nowhere but dumped by everyone? Why is it too necessary for these miners to come up with a new currency they already know that will get evaluated with nothing when it doesn't get supported by the majority?

For the same reason any ICO these days gets developed and released. They suggest a better Bitcoin, get people involved and invested, then pump the price and then dump it. It's all about money, you're dealing with currency here. its not bizarre to think that a lot of the reasons things get developed in and around Bitcoin stem and/or are influenced from the need for profit. They playing on the confusion and uncertainty of the past few months.

[nizamcc]

Theymos gave a hint of the possibility of Bitcoin Cash coming into existence regardless on Aug 1, so does that mean it will be the same like we had that previous ALT which went nowhere but dumped by everyone? Why is it too necessary for these miners to come up with a new currency they already know that will get evaluated with nothing when it doesn't get supported by the majority?

For the same reason any ICO these days gets developed and released. They suggest a better Bitcoin, get people involved and invested, then pump the price and then dump it. It's all about money, you're dealing with currency here. its not bizarre to think that a lot of the reasons things get developed in and around Bitcoin stem and/or are influenced from the need for profit. They playing on the confusion and uncertainty of the past few months.

Do you remember BTU? Bitcoin Unlimited coin which was spread like fire when it came and miners were too much under the influence of Roger Ver that they decided to give more than 40% of the total hash power to this, but what happened? It's not even being traded at 1/10th the price of Bitcoins. I think revealing alts for their own beneficial monetary purposes will get them nowhere but dumps as ViaBTC has already allowed the trading of BCC and it started at 0.5 BTC and is currently being bought at 0.14 BTC. I just want to know that even if the chain split happens, why do we need a coin split here?

Can't Bitcoin only run on a split chain itself? Sorry if I ask something wrong here.
Isn't it possible to just shift Bitcoins' algorithm itself to PoS? It would definitely save a lot of energy consumption as well as expenses that miners bear atm, like giving just 0.05-0.1% interest only a year, so that Satoshi's 21 million cap also don't get crossed. Is there any possibility for this? Because if this gets into action then just like BitShares, Bitcoins will also be able to process most amount of transactions at better speeds and no more fear will be left of network as well as chain splits.

[IGCGamers]

Theymos gave a hint of the possibility of Bitcoin Cash coming into existence regardless on Aug 1, so does that mean it will be the same like we had that previous ALT which went nowhere but dumped by everyone? Why is it too necessary for these miners to come up with a new currency they already know that will get evaluated with nothing when it doesn't get supported by the majority?

For the same reason any ICO these days gets developed and released. They suggest a better Bitcoin, get people involved and invested, then pump the price and then dump it. It's all about money, you're dealing with currency here. its not bizarre to think that a lot of the reasons things get developed in and around Bitcoin stem and/or are influenced from the need for profit. They playing on the confusion and uncertainty of the past few months.

Do you remember BTU? Bitcoin Unlimited coin which was spread like fire when it came and miners were too much under the influence of Roger Ver that they decided to give more than 40% of the total hash power to this, but what happened? It's not even being traded at 1/10th the price of Bitcoins. I think revealing alts for their own beneficial monetary purposes will get them nowhere but dumps as ViaBTC has already allowed the trading of BCC and it started at 0.5 BTC and is currently being bought at 0.14 BTC. I just want to know that even if the chain split happens, why do we need a coin split here?

Can't Bitcoin only run on a split chain itself? Sorry if I ask something wrong here.
Isn't it possible to just shift Bitcoins' algorithm itself to PoS? It would definitely save a lot of energy consumption as well as expenses that miners bear atm, like giving just 0.05-0.1% interest only a year, so that Satoshi's 21 million cap also don't get crossed. Is there any possibility for this? Because if this gets into action then just like BitShares, Bitcoins will also be able to process most amount of transactions at better speeds and no more fear will be left of network as well as chain splits.

So you mean after aug 1st, like btu, even the new coin will not have a good value and btc will continue to remain the same?

[gueorguiev]

Theymos gave a hint of the possibility of Bitcoin Cash coming into existence regardless on Aug 1, so does that mean it will be the same like we had that previous ALT which went nowhere but dumped by everyone? Why is it too necessary for these miners to come up with a new currency they already know that will get evaluated with nothing when it doesn't get supported by the majority?

For the same reason any ICO these days gets developed and released. They suggest a better Bitcoin, get people involved and invested, then pump the price and then dump it. It's all about money, you're dealing with currency here. its not bizarre to think that a lot of the reasons things get developed in and around Bitcoin stem and/or are influenced from the need for profit. They playing on the confusion and uncertainty of the past few months.

Do you remember BTU? Bitcoin Unlimited coin which was spread like fire when it came and miners were too much under the influence of Roger Ver that they decided to give more than 40% of the total hash power to this, but what happened? It's not even being traded at 1/10th the price of Bitcoins. I think revealing alts for their own beneficial monetary purposes will get them nowhere but dumps as ViaBTC has already allowed the trading of BCC and it started at 0.5 BTC and is currently being bought at 0.14 BTC. I just want to know that even if the chain split happens, why do we need a coin split here?

Can't Bitcoin only run on a split chain itself? Sorry if I ask something wrong here.
Isn't it possible to just shift Bitcoins' algorithm itself to PoS? It would definitely save a lot of energy consumption as well as expenses that miners bear atm, like giving just 0.05-0.1% interest only a year, so that Satoshi's 21 million cap also don't get crossed. Is there any possibility for this? Because if this gets into action then just like BitShares, Bitcoins will also be able to process most amount of transactions at better speeds and no more fear will be left of network as well as chain splits.

I dont think PoS will ever happen or work with Bitcoin. All it will do is give an advantage to people who already have hundreds and thousands of coins, and it will incentivize coin hoarding and  cripple the trading market which in the long run might cause the price to plummet and/or kill bitcoin. So having an algorithm around the amount of coin you have rather than the amount of effort put in is not going to fair well with a big majority of current users.

So you mean after aug 1st, like btu, even the new coin will not have a good value and btc will continue to remain the same?

The new coin will have some value for a while, and BTC might go down a bit, but there is just no future for the new coin and people will just migrate back to BTC in the long run.

[Black_bl]

Theymos gave a hint of the possibility of Bitcoin Cash coming into existence regardless on Aug 1, so does that mean it will be the same like we had that previous ALT which went nowhere but dumped by everyone? Why is it too necessary for these miners to come up with a new currency they already know that will get evaluated with nothing when it doesn't get supported by the majority?

For the same reason any ICO these days gets developed and released. They suggest a better Bitcoin, get people involved and invested, then pump the price and then dump it. It's all about money, you're dealing with currency here. its not bizarre to think that a lot of the reasons things get developed in and around Bitcoin stem and/or are influenced from the need for profit. They playing on the confusion and uncertainty of the past few months.

Do you remember BTU? Bitcoin Unlimited coin which was spread like fire when it came and miners were too much under the influence of Roger Ver that they decided to give more than 40% of the total hash power to this, but what happened? It's not even being traded at 1/10th the price of Bitcoins. I think revealing alts for their own beneficial monetary purposes will get them nowhere but dumps as ViaBTC has already allowed the trading of BCC and it started at 0.5 BTC and is currently being bought at 0.14 BTC. I just want to know that even if the chain split happens, why do we need a coin split here?

Can't Bitcoin only run on a split chain itself? Sorry if I ask something wrong here.
Isn't it possible to just shift Bitcoins' algorithm itself to PoS? It would definitely save a lot of energy consumption as well as expenses that miners bear atm, like giving just 0.05-0.1% interest only a year, so that Satoshi's 21 million cap also don't get crossed. Is there any possibility for this? Because if this gets into action then just like BitShares, Bitcoins will also be able to process most amount of transactions at better speeds and no more fear will be left of network as well as chain splits.

So you mean after aug 1st, like btu, even the new coin will not have a good value and btc will continue to remain the same?

I´m not sure about that. Don´t forget if someone with a large amount of money wants manipulate BCC´s price in this case price of BTC would be affected too

[layoutph]

I sold all my bitcoins to USDT while it was 2800usd. Is this the best decision?  Is there still any possibility to face two bitcoins after Aug 1?

Just incase Bitcoin split to two what should I buy from the money I bought at 2800usd rate?

[nizamcc]

So you mean after aug 1st, like btu, even the new coin will not have a good value and btc will continue to remain the same?

BCC is already being traded as futures at ViaBTC where it started at BTC0.5 per BCC and had already seen its low at BTC0.12 and is currently at BTC0.1618 (at the time of writing this post). Seeing this, do you really think it will gain its value back after Aug 1?

I dont think PoS will ever happen or work with Bitcoin. All it will do is give an advantage to people who already have hundreds and thousands of coins, and it will incentivize coin hoarding and  cripple the trading market which in the long run might cause the price to plummet and/or kill bitcoin. So having an algorithm around the amount of coin you have rather than the amount of effort put in is not going to fair well with a big majority of current users.

Yeah, putting a lot of effort with a lot of electricity being consumed each year behind mining it, right? Don't you think we should take it as a positive measure if it ever gets implemented? I said max 0.05%-0.1% a year and that will hardly affect the number of coins if a proper mining management gets injected and the only number of coins that are being mined each day, it should be done accordingly even after going effectively into PoS state.

[rchstr]

So you mean after aug 1st, like btu, even the new coin will not have a good value and btc will continue to remain the same?

BCC is already being traded as futures at ViaBTC where it started at BTC0.5 per BCC and had already seen its low at BTC0.12 and is currently at BTC0.1618 (at the time of writing this post). Seeing this, do you really think it will gain its value back after Aug 1?

I dont think PoS will ever happen or work with Bitcoin. All it will do is give an advantage to people who already have hundreds and thousands of coins, and it will incentivize coin hoarding and  cripple the trading market which in the long run might cause the price to plummet and/or kill bitcoin. So having an algorithm around the amount of coin you have rather than the amount of effort put in is not going to fair well with a big majority of current users.

Yeah, putting a lot of effort with a lot of electricity being consumed each year behind mining it, right? Don't you think we should take it as a positive measure if it ever gets implemented? I said max 0.05%-0.1% a year and that will hardly affect the number of coins if a proper mining management gets injected and the only number of coins that are being mined each day, it should be done accordingly even after going effectively into PoS state.

For me BCC is just another shitcoin like bitcoinplus(XBC). we all know that many miners supports segwit and as a proof I see that 100% of miners are now supporting segwit. my reference is from this site: xbt.eu