Bitcoin november hard fork?

[kotbi]

lets clear this matter up

replay protection is not needed!

whn a implementation wants to utilise consensus to upgrade the network when it activates there would be only ONE network, meaning no double coins.. just a majority continuing on one network and a minority stalled with orphans unable to sync. end of

when core demand replay protection they are basically saying they want to create an altcoin by refusing to be part of the upgrade(new implementation(bip)) and will force a altcoin generation if people run the new implementation(bip).

what core should be doing is not being dictators and cause an altcoin. but instead let consensus do its job.

core have bypassed consensus a couple times now to follow the dictator roadmap designed by blockstream and tried pointing fingers elsewhere

EG avoided consensus and then gave the vote to only pools and then hypocritically blamed the pools.

in november core will have code to avoid communication with the next bip yes CORE putting in code to avoid communication with the next bip implementations.. but core will again blame the implementation when infact its core causing the split.

i really wish more people would understand the technology, code, rules and whats actually going on, instead of reading the reddit propaganda

As a bitcoin holder, and speak for many other bitcoin holders and exchanges, what we want is a smooth and stable bitcoin, less confusion and faster transaction, less fees, etc.  Would you like to address to people who think there is no such an urgent to split in November because now bitcoin is low transaction and more segwit deployment would empty more block space. We can at least wait to the point that the block is so full that we can try to increase the block size again.

[1715649052]

1715649052

[1715649052]

1715649052

[marky89]

lets clear this matter up

replay protection is not needed!

whn a implementation wants to utilise consensus to upgrade the network when it activates there would be only ONE network, meaning no double coins.. just a majority continuing on one network and a minority stalled with orphans unable to sync. end of

How do you determine majority and minority? Companies (major economic nodes) might decide for their users, but can they deal with the blowback if they were wrong about what users wanted?

Replay protection is required if users are unsure which chain to follow. If both chains are viable, they ought to have the option, rather than many people instantly losing their coins on one chain or the other.

when core demand replay protection they are basically saying they want to create an altcoin by refusing to be part of the upgrade(new implementation(bip)) and will force a altcoin generation if people run the new implementation(bip).

what core should be doing is not being dictators and cause an altcoin. but instead let consensus do its job.

On the contrary, they are simply giving users a choice, rather than forcing a hard fork through their software which many people don't support. This way, users can have a choice one way or the other.

I get it: you'd prefer one chain, no split. Wouldn't we all? The question is, which chain is that?

[pranaja]

A second hard fork from Bitcoin was previously expected to occur only in November with the advent of SegWit2x.

This is why I think it is better to have hardfork on bitcoin. we all know that the confrimation on transactions getting slow thats why we need to upgrade the speed of bitcoin.

Hard fork digital currency (cryptocurrency) is a very technical issue. You must save your Bitcoin with a dedicated Bitcoin wallet provider platform that has teams with world-class technical competencies, along with world-standard security, such as Luno.

[romani245]

A second hard fork from Bitcoin was previously expected to occur only in November with the advent of SegWit2x.

This is why I think it is better to have hardfork on bitcoin. we all know that the confrimation on transactions getting slow thats why we need to upgrade the speed of bitcoin.

I'm not too worried. When it suits their political agenda, miners like Bitmain will just spam the network and drive fees up anyway. We need to focus on layer 2 solutions regarding scaling. But more important than that: we need to focus on privacy and fungibility. Government intrusion and blockchain analysis are becoming increasing threats. Just look at BTC-e.

[lovesybitz]

Will bitcoin hard fork in November result in a third coin forked out from "Bitcoin"?

For the coming November hard fork, I think it is for the better sake of the bitcoin enthusiast for this event. Besides, whatever may happen on  that day let is put trust everything in the above, all I know is it is surely for good as well. I do believed also after this November bitcoin will continue rise again to reach 10, 000$. But still lets see what will happen of course.

[Sehorn 777]

is this bitcoin cash i’m newbie here

[figmentofmyass]

is this bitcoin cash i’m newbie here

nope. some might say "same shit, different day" but the planned november fork seems to have much more economic backing. most miners signed the NYA, and so did most big businesses like bitpay and coinbase and dgc (silbert/GBTC), etc.

and there seems to be more support among users as well. so i'm less confident that things will go quite as smoothly this time. the core developers and many users are still opposing the fork, so a major split seems very possible.

[Razick]

is this bitcoin cash i’m newbie here

nope. some might say "same shit, different day" but the planned november fork seems to have much more economic backing. most miners signed the NYA, and so did most big businesses like bitpay and coinbase and dgc (silbert/GBTC), etc.

and there seems to be more support among users as well. so i'm less confident that things will go quite as smoothly this time. the core developers and many users are still opposing the fork, so a major split seems very possible.

I just hope they do whatever it takes to get the Lightning Network up and running. We cannot continue with this low transaction processing capability and high transaction fees. Not that they have been too bad as of late, but it is still a major issue that needs to get addressed asap! I would much prefer instant, nearly free transactions like the early days of Bitcoin over large fees and long wait times, even if this involves a hard fork.

[Mallyx]

lets clear this matter up

replay protection is not needed!

whn a implementation wants to utilise consensus to upgrade the network when it activates there would be only ONE network, meaning no double coins.. just a majority continuing on one network and a minority stalled with orphans unable to sync. end of

when core demand replay protection they are basically saying they want to create an altcoin by refusing to be part of the upgrade(new implementation(bip)) and will force a altcoin generation if people run the new implementation(bip).

what core should be doing is not being dictators and cause an altcoin. but instead let consensus do its job.

core have bypassed consensus a couple times now to follow the dictator roadmap designed by blockstream and tried pointing fingers elsewhere

EG avoided consensus and then gave the vote to only pools and then hypocritically blamed the pools.

in november core will have code to avoid communication with the next bip yes CORE putting in code to avoid communication with the next bip implementations.. but core will again blame the implementation when infact its core causing the split.

i really wish more people would understand the technology, code, rules and whats actually going on, instead of reading the reddit propaganda

So you know a replay protection is required, because a split may happen.
Do you really think the Core dev will let a bunch of political lobbyists hijack Bitcoin ?

[zabisux]

It may or may not happen. But my concern is "are they gonna protect us from replay attacks?" and "is it gonna be smooth fork just like bitcoin cash?" I am really nervous about these fork discussions.

[TagaMungkahi]

yep

the devs of core have already ruled out making core compatible and done everything they can to force it to be an altcoin.

this is why blockstream employees can no longer deny that they control bitcoin
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11128

sipa closed it the same day it was opened, giving no chance for the community to review, interrogate, consider or choose

real funny part
https://bitcoincore.org/en/2017/08/18/btc1-misleading-statements/
they pretend upgrades should only happen with community support yet do everything to avoid community involvement/choice

They really decide internally ? and doesn't even take time to consider what community wants?. It seems like i smell a politics here, maybe they are really planning to control bitcoin but if that's the case , does a secret entity do control them? This is really contentious.

[olushakes]

Will bitcoin hard fork in November result in a third coin forked out from "Bitcoin"?

The fork will happen in November as being propagated by the promoters and another coin will come just like we had BCH and now we are having another rain drop of free money being pumped into the market. In all, I still think bitcoin core which is the one we are much more about and the centre of attraction will be stand tall in the midst of the storm.

[Carlsen]

Will bitcoin hard fork in November result in a third coin forked out from "Bitcoin"?

The fork will happen in November as being propagated by the promoters and another coin will come just like we had BCH and now we are having another rain drop of free money being pumped into the market. In all, I still think bitcoin core which is the one we are much more about and the centre of attraction will be stand tall in the midst of the storm.

When BCH forked, they had about 5% of the hashing power (I think, don't know the exact number anymore).
Segwit2x has about 90% at the moment.
F2Pool said to withdraw the support, but hey still flag it. And because they still flag the support we must assume they will keep supporting.
When you just look at those numbers, everything points to the conclusion that this time the new chain will be the stronger one. By far.

[Zalfa_mui]

I think segwit in november will make bitcoin better,
yes there may be more schisms
and will give birth to a new coin again like BCH
we just wait and enjoy the process ,, it will not harm us

[franky1]

So you know a replay protection is required, because a split may happen.
Do you really think the Core dev will let a bunch of political lobbyists hijack Bitcoin ?

the main core devs are part of the "political lobbyists"
the NYA (segwit2x) is headed by barry silbert who owns DCG.co
check DCG portfolio.... oh look bloq (jgarzic) and blockstream(sipa)
what you need to realise is the lobbyists BAITED segwit2x because the majority of the community wanted 2x, but the lobbyists wanted segwit.
so now they got their segwit. they are now refusing the 2x part
its called a bait and switch

but as the links in my past post showed, the devs decided THEIR direction for bitcoin WITHOUT the community.

[Lucid717]

this is why i still don't know what SegWit2x is going to do to bitcoin!

In and by itself... nothing good. 

[aoluain]

as a relative newbie to the bitcoin scene I dont like
all this forking, I would have preferred the November fork
before the August fiasco as there seems to be more industry
backing of the one coming up. The only thing is FREE coins,
it cannot be good, will it be just diluting the bitcoin pool?

[criz2fer]

If this is possibe, it's time to stock up our bitcoin to have another free altcoin just like BCC but does our wallet includes here?
Last time i have a portion of my BTC in bittrex and automatically having a airdrop of BCC. Hope wallets are also included in this. Kampay!!!

[pinkflower]

lets clear this matter up

replay protection is not needed!

Excuse me but lets not get into the politics and the counter propaganda. Isnt it dangerous for the users not to have replay protection in case of another fork happening? That would be unfair for some of them because there are some who dont want to use Segwit2x coins. Is the concern for the safety of our coins one of the objectives of the hard fork?

[Herbert2020]

lets clear this matter up

replay protection is not needed!

Excuse me but lets not get into the politics and the counter propaganda. Isnt it dangerous for the users not to have replay protection in case of another fork happening? That would be unfair for some of them because there are some who dont want to use Segwit2x coins. Is the concern for the safety of our coins one of the objectives of the hard fork?

political crap and propaganda is the main part of scaling debate. just in this topic and others regarding this, 90% of the comments are throwing insults at individuals some calling core evil and others call J. Garzik evil! out of thousands and thousands of comments you rarely see "why 2 MB hard fork is bad" (possibly 1 out of 10,000) but you keep seeing people repeat same bullshits over and over again.

and as for replay protection, it is not needed if the fork has the overwhelming majority support. just the same way SegWit fork didn't need replay protection. the 2 MB hard fork is unclear now. we have to wait to see what will happen in reality. if nobody is left mining the 1 MB blocks there is no need for replay protection! but if the support falls below the current >95% then yes it is mandatory to have replay protection.

i personally am against this hard fork. it is too rushed because we just got SegWit and the 2 MB hard fork will double the potential capacity to 8 MB. there needs to be more time at least if we are to get that hard fork. this year is way too soon.
first let the wallets release their new version enabling SegWit transactions, implement the keys (BECH? or whatever it is called) and then let people switch and see how SegWit works and then we can talk about a hard fork.