Which will be the real Bitcoin after november?

[Juggy777]

So most people agreed to segwit2x, though core never did and now some people who agreed are dropping out. But still the vast majority as far as I'm aware are still supporting the 2x upgrade. And I can't understand why people are so against it, as obviously more scaling is needed and a 2x of block size if just simply a good thing. Unless people think there needs to be more time to test it, though I can't imagine why so much testing and development would be needed since it is simply changes one very small thing. The contention of this issue baffles me, seems to be a very straightforward good second step in scaling bitcoin, the negativity towards it shows the unreasonable toxicity of the bitcoin community and the refusal to prepare the technology for mass market acceptance.

Anyways, which do you guys think will be considered Bitcoin after the hard fork, the original chain or the 2x chain? I'm hoping 2x takes over since it can do twice the transactions with no downside so that is obviously better for bitcoin. Either way I will just be holding my bitcoin and won't move any bitcoin until this whole mess is over and we have a clear winner. But what do you all think?

The prices are really going berserk, if one sees the chart it went to 5700$, then takes a beating comes down to 5100$ and again today it's 5600$. This is the most volatile trend ever shown, I feel that bitcoin gold won't be successful and it shall fail, then I also believe with recent news showing that segwit2x is loosing support is as dangerous as it gets, cause that can create unnecessary tumble for Bitcoins. If support is clicked expect prices to be 6500$ if not 4000$.

[pooya87]

There is nothing to think about, because after November nothing is gonna happen, just bitcoin gold gets added to the list of altcoins same as that bitcoin cash got added. This doesn't gonna make bitcoin core down and take the lead. Past two days bitcoin cash have been growing and today the growth has started to decline.

you are confusing 2 different forks!
- bitcoin gold: which is in 6 days (October 25) and it is clearly an altcoin. it even has a different PoW algorithm (Equihash). it is an attempt to make bitcoin GPU mineable!
this fork won't change anything

- SegWit2x hard fork part which falls in November (block height 494,784).
it is the second part of NYA agreement which activated SegWit and now wants to proceed with increasing block size to 2 MB from 1 MB.
this can cause issues since core developers are against it. but a large group of miners and businesses support it, and that creates a split in community.

[farhaan]

Earlier,there was a huge support for segwit 2x with about 95% miners support.But now,slowly it has started to decline.F2Pool has withdrawn its support which had compromised 10% in it.So,now,the support is only 85%.Its a great draw back for segwit 2x.Core team has started to enjoy this move.

Not only F2Pool,other two mining pools have also said that earlier they expected that core team would support segwit 2x,but since it does not support it,so they also withdraw their support.

So,probably i tjink that only the original team would exist after the hard fork and so,just holding bitcoins might be the right decision.I would say that due to panic selling,bitcoin price may even fall a little and we should use this opportunity to even grab some more bitcoins.

[okala]

I think bitcoin core will ever remain the really bitcoin as there have all the bitcoins structure and foundation's of cryptocurrencies and because of this there is not going to be any coins that will ever take bitcoin core. I think bitcoin core will keep growing up as Investors see it as a channel to others cryptocoins.

[Shamie1002]

Bitcoin will stay bitcoin. Forks may say that splitting of bitcoin to form another altcoins but it will never affect its popularity. Cryptocoins are racing for the highest place in cryptoworld. But I think there is no need to worry, another coin will eventually test another's trust to new coins.  If bitcoin gold will not gain enough investors then it will be probably dead too like the first one bitcoin cash.

[Barbut]

Bitcoin will stay bitcoin. Forks may say that splitting of bitcoin to form another altcoins but it will never affect its popularity. Cryptocoins are racing for the highest place in cryptoworld. But I think there is no need to worry, another coin will eventually test another's trust to new coins.  If bitcoin gold will not gain enough investors then it will be probably dead too like the first one bitcoin cash.

I'm for original bitcoin, I don't have anything against bitcoin gold, cash, black and white bitcoin, for me this are new altcoins that offer something like many other altcoins, what is better and more useful is individual. After november we will see the same as we saw after august, bitcoin will stay first and strongest, and with bitcoin gold people will earn some money dump their bitcoin gold tokens and that is it. Only interesting thing about bitcoin gold is that can be mined with GPUs, that can make people interested in this new coin and nothing more.

[snowdropfore]

 no mattei which one will be true bitcoin ,i think the safe way is holding both coins ,otherwise if you make a wrong chioce, i will lose all of your bitcoins .

[marcbitcoins]

No doubt Segwit2X is the updated version with increased block size and some other advantages but there are some disadvantages too. The increase in block size will also increase the risk of attack, however everything has pros and cons. It is true i have also seen a massive support for the SegWit2X but i believe that it would be more better if after November Bitcoin will remain on the same chain instead of 2x chain.

No doubt, this is because there is no other choice and no other alternative solutions other than SegWit2X that will resolve this traffic issues that needs an immediate actions specially that everyday more and more are joining bitcoins investments causing significant increase of transactions in the block chain.

[Bolt Brownie]

Scaling bitcoin is important, and right now the network as it is, wouldn't be able to deal with a huge increase in the number of transactions. Things need to be done, but I don't think segwit2x is the solution right now because there are other alternatives to explore before having to increase the size of the blocks.

Also increasing the size could help now, but it wouldn't still solve the problem for the long run, so it's not worth the risk in my opinion, and we are already seeing some mining pools withdrawing their support as well. It's simply not the right time to do it.
From what I read a single person (Jeff Garzik, supported by a small few) is trying to impose his way, and doesn't seem to care about proper testing. I think most people are noy against the possible increment in the block size, and it will probably happen, they just want to go for it later, when the majority consider that is safe to go for the fork.

[talkbitcoin]

Bitcoin will stay bitcoin. Forks may say that splitting of bitcoin to form another altcoins but it will never affect its popularity. Cryptocoins are racing for the highest place in cryptoworld. But I think there is no need to worry, another coin will eventually test another's trust to new coins.  If bitcoin gold will not gain enough investors then it will be probably dead too like the first one bitcoin cash.

I'm for original bitcoin, I don't have anything against bitcoin gold, cash, black and white bitcoin, for me this are new altcoins that offer something like many other altcoins, what is better and more useful is individual. After november we will see the same as we saw after august, bitcoin will stay first and strongest, and with bitcoin gold people will earn some money dump their bitcoin gold tokens and that is it. Only interesting thing about bitcoin gold is that can be mined with GPUs, that can make people interested in this new coin and nothing more.

you keep saying bitcoin gold and November but these two have nothing to do with each other. bitcoin gold fork is in about 5 months in this month and then we have another fork called SegWit2x and that is in November.

the BTG one is obviously an altcoin and if it gains enough interest you will need a proper mining rig of GPUs to be able to mine it and one normal GPU in your PC is not gonna cut it.

[ChainSmoker]

I am sure 90% bitcoin will be same as bitcoin before the fork AKA bitcoin core.I don't trust Segwit2x or any other bitcoin forks that happens to achieve consensus based on miners/corporate businesses.All they want is to have control over bitcoin.Bitcoin core is the real bitcoin and will stay that way as it has major user support and that's what matters.Miners will come back to core when they see less transactions on 2x chain. 

[thecodebear]

Scaling bitcoin is important, and right now the network as it is, wouldn't be able to deal with a huge increase in the number of transactions. Things need to be done, but I don't think segwit2x is the solution right now because there are other alternatives to explore before having to increase the size of the blocks.

Also increasing the size could help now, but it wouldn't still solve the problem for the long run, so it's not worth the risk in my opinion, and we are already seeing some mining pools withdrawing their support as well. It's simply not the right time to do it.
From what I read a single person (Jeff Garzik, supported by a small few) is trying to impose his way, and doesn't seem to care about proper testing. I think most people are noy against the possible increment in the block size, and it will probably happen, they just want to go for it later, when the majority consider that is safe to go for the fork.

I agree that with how contentious the fork is, I'd rather not have it. Scaling solutions should be put in place when the community mostly supports it. And obviously off-chain solutions will be needed to come anywhere near fully scaling bitcoin. On-chain will never be be able to handle thousands of transactions per second, and maybe not even hundreds. But block size increase should absolutely be part of the scaling solution. I'd rather have as much scaling as we can get on-chain, and then move to off-chain solutions, because obviously having everything on-chain is better since the whole blockchain tech is about storing things ya know, in the blockchain.

I just don't get why people are so against what is a very straightforward and obvious way to scale bitcoin so it can at least handle transaction volume until maybe sometime next year when we can see if lightning network turns out to be a workable scaling solution. The only thing changing would be the block size. That's a very straightforward change. People say there hasn't been enough time to implement it and test it. I can't imagine how that could possibly be the case. Seems that basically bitcoin core has refused to do it and so because of that are trying to say 3 months was too short a time. Well of course it is if you don't plan on spending any of those 3 months doing it!

In summary, there is no reason the 2x upgrade should be contentious. And it shows how deeply toxic the bitcoin community is. But seeing as how it is so contentious I'd rather not have the fork happen and wait until the bitcoin community realizes that scaling is more important than the toxic attitude, which will likely be when bitcoin is at capacity for a long time again and transactions fees skyrocket. It seems the bitcoin community can only see past their own toxicity when the bitcoin protocol is failing. The no2x types seem to be the people that can't look past today, they just blindly say "nope everything is fine right now there can't possibly be any reasons to improve things".

[Silberman]

So most people agreed to segwit2x, though core never did and now some people who agreed are dropping out. But still the vast majority as far as I'm aware are still supporting the 2x upgrade. And I can't understand why people are so against it, as obviously more scaling is needed and a 2x of block size if just simply a good thing. Unless people think there needs to be more time to test it, though I can't imagine why so much testing and development would be needed since it is simply changes one very small thing. The contention of this issue baffles me, seems to be a very straightforward good second step in scaling bitcoin, the negativity towards it shows the unreasonable toxicity of the bitcoin community and the refusal to prepare the technology for mass market acceptance.

Anyways, which do you guys think will be considered Bitcoin after the hard fork, the original chain or the 2x chain? I'm hoping 2x takes over since it can do twice the transactions with no downside so that is obviously better for bitcoin. Either way I will just be holding my bitcoin and won't move any bitcoin until this whole mess is over and we have a clear winner. But what do you all think?

Mistake, most miners agreed to that fork, people are still supporting overwhelmingly bitcoin core and no other coin, there is no question which is the real bitcoin, segwit2x is just another altcoin that has nothing new to offer, the 2MB fork is not necessary at all and I see as a good sign that support is slowly diminishing for such a useless coin.

Well thats not true at all. Bitcoin is going to need A LOT MORE SCALING in the future, so an increase to 2MB is just the second step on what will no doubt be a lot of steps toward scaling to meet a global mass market demand. Sure it doesn't need the 2MB fork in November, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if segwit blocks are full within a year, at which point it will need larger blocks, so why are you people against it so much when it is obviously needed for the future?

And my first sentence wasn't a mistake. Not only miners but many many bitcoin companies agreed to segwit2x. Only after that did miners jump on board leading up to the segwit upgrade.

So why do some of you people refuse to want bitcoin to be able to scale?? Are you intentionally hoping for its demise and wanting to sabotage it? Or are you just very shortsighted and refuse to look into the future to see that more solutions are needed to scaling. When segwit blocks are full and transaction fees have skyrocketing again and wait times have skyrocketed again will you only then start to think oh maybe we do need 2MB blocks or more!?

The poster directly above this post even said he would want the fork that is better to win, and he claimed it is the original chain hahaha. That is straight up delusion. Current chain can do half the transactions as 2x can, thats the only difference. It's black and white, 2x is twice as good as current chain. I'm sure there will need to be additional hard forks in the coming years to increase the block size further, why are you people making this very obvious upgrade so contentious? The question is do you want bitcoin do be able to do the current amount of transactions, or double the amount of transactions?

It's pretty simple: if you want bitcoin to eventually fail to meet demand then obviously you want to hinder its progress and keep the current chain, if you want bitcoin to handle more transactions and scale better and its price to rise then you support 2x as well as other scaling solutions.

Seems to me this irrational denial of needed scaling is some misguided attempt to pay homage to Satoshi and not hard fork away from his code. You'd rather see Satoshi's dream for bitcoin fail than fork from his code.

We do not need 2MB blocks right now, we may need them in the future? Of course, but in a month? Of course not, and even if some businesses support the fork it does not matter, all of those entities are powerful but they do not get to decide what people want, it is like designing a video game no one wants and then expecting that it sells well, that is not going to happen, they can fork if they want, but they cannot force people to follow them.

[Hyperme.sh]

We will all grow weary of the forkathon and then we will grow weary of the insecurity of Core SegWit and then we will beg for the security and immutability of the original Satoshi Bitcoin:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2268216.msg23422490#msg23422490

[thecodebear]

So most people agreed to segwit2x, though core never did and now some people who agreed are dropping out. But still the vast majority as far as I'm aware are still supporting the 2x upgrade. And I can't understand why people are so against it, as obviously more scaling is needed and a 2x of block size if just simply a good thing. Unless people think there needs to be more time to test it, though I can't imagine why so much testing and development would be needed since it is simply changes one very small thing. The contention of this issue baffles me, seems to be a very straightforward good second step in scaling bitcoin, the negativity towards it shows the unreasonable toxicity of the bitcoin community and the refusal to prepare the technology for mass market acceptance.

Anyways, which do you guys think will be considered Bitcoin after the hard fork, the original chain or the 2x chain? I'm hoping 2x takes over since it can do twice the transactions with no downside so that is obviously better for bitcoin. Either way I will just be holding my bitcoin and won't move any bitcoin until this whole mess is over and we have a clear winner. But what do you all think?

Mistake, most miners agreed to that fork, people are still supporting overwhelmingly bitcoin core and no other coin, there is no question which is the real bitcoin, segwit2x is just another altcoin that has nothing new to offer, the 2MB fork is not necessary at all and I see as a good sign that support is slowly diminishing for such a useless coin.

Well thats not true at all. Bitcoin is going to need A LOT MORE SCALING in the future, so an increase to 2MB is just the second step on what will no doubt be a lot of steps toward scaling to meet a global mass market demand. Sure it doesn't need the 2MB fork in November, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if segwit blocks are full within a year, at which point it will need larger blocks, so why are you people against it so much when it is obviously needed for the future?

And my first sentence wasn't a mistake. Not only miners but many many bitcoin companies agreed to segwit2x. Only after that did miners jump on board leading up to the segwit upgrade.

So why do some of you people refuse to want bitcoin to be able to scale?? Are you intentionally hoping for its demise and wanting to sabotage it? Or are you just very shortsighted and refuse to look into the future to see that more solutions are needed to scaling. When segwit blocks are full and transaction fees have skyrocketing again and wait times have skyrocketed again will you only then start to think oh maybe we do need 2MB blocks or more!?

The poster directly above this post even said he would want the fork that is better to win, and he claimed it is the original chain hahaha. That is straight up delusion. Current chain can do half the transactions as 2x can, thats the only difference. It's black and white, 2x is twice as good as current chain. I'm sure there will need to be additional hard forks in the coming years to increase the block size further, why are you people making this very obvious upgrade so contentious? The question is do you want bitcoin do be able to do the current amount of transactions, or double the amount of transactions?

It's pretty simple: if you want bitcoin to eventually fail to meet demand then obviously you want to hinder its progress and keep the current chain, if you want bitcoin to handle more transactions and scale better and its price to rise then you support 2x as well as other scaling solutions.

Seems to me this irrational denial of needed scaling is some misguided attempt to pay homage to Satoshi and not hard fork away from his code. You'd rather see Satoshi's dream for bitcoin fail than fork from his code.

We do not need 2MB blocks right now, we may need them in the future? Of course, but in a month? Of course not, and even if some businesses support the fork it does not matter, all of those entities are powerful but they do not get to decide what people want, it is like designing a video game no one wants and then expecting that it sells well, that is not going to happen, they can fork if they want, but they cannot force people to follow them.

But the whole point of having a scalable technology is to not wait until the network is all jammed up to do the scaling! Why would you want to wait until the network is jammed to do anything about it?! That's what we had earlier this year and it sucked, you would have thought the bitcoin community would have learned their lesson but apparently not, since as you say, may as well not improve bitcoin now when we won't reap the rewards until a later date. Awful backwards thinking!

Going by that logic Satoshi should have originally made like 0.05 MB blocks and then only once it got congested, and not before, the community could have hard forked to 0.1 MB, then let it get jammed again, and fork again and so on on the way up only creating solutions to problems you know will arise in the future once they start hurting bitcoin, instead of ya know doing the obvious thing and scaling before it becomes a huge problem!

[Unplugged]

So most people agreed to segwit2x, though core never did and now some people who agreed are dropping out. But still the vast majority as far as I'm aware are still supporting the 2x upgrade. And I can't understand why people are so against it, as obviously more scaling is needed and a 2x of block size if just simply a good thing. Unless people think there needs to be more time to test it, though I can't imagine why so much testing and development would be needed since it is simply changes one very small thing. The contention of this issue baffles me, seems to be a very straightforward good second step in scaling bitcoin, the negativity towards it shows the unreasonable toxicity of the bitcoin community and the refusal to prepare the technology for mass market acceptance.

Anyways, which do you guys think will be considered Bitcoin after the hard fork, the original chain or the 2x chain? I'm hoping 2x takes over since it can do twice the transactions with no downside so that is obviously better for bitcoin. Either way I will just be holding my bitcoin and won't move any bitcoin until this whole mess is over and we have a clear winner. But what do you all think?

Mistake, most miners agreed to that fork, people are still supporting overwhelmingly bitcoin core and no other coin, there is no question which is the real bitcoin, segwit2x is just another altcoin that has nothing new to offer, the 2MB fork is not necessary at all and I see as a good sign that support is slowly diminishing for such a useless coin.

I also see it as another useless fork. Yet the miners support it all the way. It offers no solution, no enhancement for the system aside from the 2mb file sizing.

[Bustart]

Bitcoin will stay bitcoin. Forks may say that splitting of bitcoin to form another altcoins but it will never affect its popularity. Cryptocoins are racing for the highest place in cryptoworld. But I think there is no need to worry, another coin will eventually test another's trust to new coins.  If bitcoin gold will not gain enough investors then it will be probably dead too like the first one bitcoin cash.

I'm for original bitcoin, I don't have anything against bitcoin gold, cash, black and white bitcoin, for me this are new altcoins that offer something like many other altcoins, what is better and more useful is individual. After november we will see the same as we saw after august, bitcoin will stay first and strongest, and with bitcoin gold people will earn some money dump their bitcoin gold tokens and that is it. Only interesting thing about bitcoin gold is that can be mined with GPUs, that can make people interested in this new coin and nothing more.

No one knows what will be the real value of bitcoin and there is no obvious single explanation for the price collapse, though part of it may simply be a market correction of speculative mania that has attracted all sort of new investors to the market. As always, digital currency investing is proving not to be for the faint of heart. Although bitcoin has been in existence for five years, most countries still do not have consistent laws regulating the cryptocurrency.

[Lumada]

Bitcoin will stay bitcoin. Forks may say that splitting of bitcoin to form another altcoins but it will never affect its popularity. Cryptocoins are racing for the highest place in cryptoworld. But I think there is no need to worry, another coin will eventually test another's trust to new coins.  If bitcoin gold will not gain enough investors then it will be probably dead too like the first one bitcoin cash.

I'm for original bitcoin, I don't have anything against bitcoin gold, cash, black and white bitcoin, for me this are new altcoins that offer something like many other altcoins, what is better and more useful is individual. After november we will see the same as we saw after august, bitcoin will stay first and strongest, and with bitcoin gold people will earn some money dump their bitcoin gold tokens and that is it. Only interesting thing about bitcoin gold is that can be mined with GPUs, that can make people interested in this new coin and nothing more.

No one knows what will be the real value of bitcoin and there is no obvious single explanation for the price collapse, though part of it may simply be a market correction of speculative mania that has attracted all sort of new investors to the market. As always, digital currency investing is proving not to be for the faint of heart. Although bitcoin has been in existence for five years, most countries still do not have consistent laws regulating the cryptocurrency.

After the fork or even after many more corrections or  fork may happen in the near future, i think it will still be bitcoin, no other alts now can replace it even those that came from split. Bitcoin still have lots to develop and to reveal in the next few years.

[Casdinyard]

no mattei which one will be true bitcoin ,i think the safe way is holding both coins ,otherwise if you make a wrong chioce, i will lose all of your bitcoins .

Bitcoin is bitcoin. No other alts can deny that fact and many people are also in the same way and he'll remain in top of all. Don't sacrifice your bitcoin into some new born alts as it has nothing yet to prove in the market, if so you just left crying in the corner.

[Cranidos]

So most people agreed to segwit2x, though core never did and now some people who agreed are dropping out. But still the vast majority as far as I'm aware are still supporting the 2x upgrade. And I can't understand why people are so against it, as obviously more scaling is needed and a 2x of block size if just simply a good thing. Unless people think there needs to be more time to test it, though I can't imagine why so much testing and development would be needed since it is simply changes one very small thing. The contention of this issue baffles me, seems to be a very straightforward good second step in scaling bitcoin, the negativity towards it shows the unreasonable toxicity of the bitcoin community and the refusal to prepare the technology for mass market acceptance.

Anyways, which do you guys think will be considered Bitcoin after the hard fork, the original chain or the 2x chain? I'm hoping 2x takes over since it can do twice the transactions with no downside so that is obviously better for bitcoin. Either way I will just be holding my bitcoin and won't move any bitcoin until this whole mess is over and we have a clear winner. But what do you all think?

Either chain can be treated as the real Bitcoin, all depends on the community. Yes, the community will decide what chain will be the true Bitcoin. So if the classic coin will still have the majority of support from the community as well as the miners then it will remain as the true Bitcoin. However, if the community decides that the forked chain will be the new Bitcoin because it can scale or whatever reason they may give, then the latter will be the new Bitcoin.