Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

lists.linuxfoundation.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 253 posts

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#101

Post by hudon »

lawn wrote: post #99
hudon wrote: post #73

"6 people called off the fork. Think about that." [0] A censorship resistant digital cash is being built, and it only took 6 small time CEOs to completely throw everyone off and almost derail the project. When someone like CME Group, who now has skin in the game, also starts pulling their weight, who knows if the bitcoin experiment will survive? [0] https://twitter.com/arronschaar/status/928316853092433920

Contrast it to how many people it takes to block any on chain scaling. As everyone practically runs Core the power in practice lies with their maintainers. Bitcoin as it is now is crippled. There is no reason to block on chain scaling except for the Core maintainers to retain their power and allow their second layer solutions to viable.

People choose to run Core and the network is worth 122 billion dollars. You haven't provided any good arguments for on chain scaling but the market is screaming "bitcoin is doing it right".

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#102

Post by mbgaxyz »

wmf wrote: post #63

Sadly, this exact scenario was predicted by multiple people and could have been avoided by making segwit and 2MB activate atomically at the same time. This is a huge embarrassment for big blockers; they have been completely politically out-maneuvered.

It's an embarrassment for the industry as a whole.

The "New York Agreement" was a blog post, it was never a legally binding and enforceable contract.

There's a strong argument that the "agreement" was designed to fail, as it's hardly a compromise when party A gets what they want immediately, but party B has to wait.

In future, all "agreements" should be ignored.

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#103

Post by Marazan »

pwaai wrote: post #51
bpicolo wrote: post #14

So bitcoin went up because they were going to fork, and now it's going up again because they will not? k Edit: Otoh, looks like it's seeing a bit of a drop now, but I doubt it will hit the pre-anticipation levels.

Market fundamentals seem non existant here. At least a few years ago, when there were bad news the prices would reflect that. Now, it seems to go up anytime bitcoin is mentioned at all, regardless whether the market understands the implications or not.

Bitcoin price matches the Google trends search graph for Bitcoin.

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#104

Post by Marazan »

Kiro wrote: post #95
deevolution wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember seeing a chart that correlated botcoins price with it's Google search volume.

It's the other way around.

It's actually more complicated. With previous bubble spikes bitcoin price starts rising first then search term follows but search term then peaks before the price peaks.

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#107

Post by olegkikin »

wc- wrote: post #83
olegkikin wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not ethereum, but one of the contracts written on top of it had a bug that some newbie triggered by mistake and locked something like $160M worth of moneys.

Ethereum's value, its reason for existing, is the deployment and operation of smart contracts. When one of the most popular semi-complex smart contracts fails not once but twice in a matter of months (losing hundreds of millions USD in the process), it is time to look not at the newbie or the contract programmer, but the platform itself.

Ethereum works fine as a currency too (~15 sec per block, quite nice). It also works fine with simple contracts, it's the humans who aren't good enough (yet) to write bug-free code.

Bugs in software of various kinds cause billions of dollars worth of damage, deaths too. Yet I don't see people claiming it's the fault of C++.

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#108

Post by it_learnses »

bdcravens wrote: post #87
deevolution wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember seeing a chart that correlated botcoins price with it's Google search volume.

correlation != causation

we are not looking for causation here. simply correlation is sufficient to predict the trend.

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#109

Post by dane-pgp »

wmf wrote: post #63

Sadly, this exact scenario was predicted by multiple people and could have been avoided by making segwit and 2MB activate atomically at the same time. This is a huge embarrassment for big blockers; they have been completely politically out-maneuvered.

To be fair, the game theory of the Segwit + 2MB blocksize "compromise" was well understood:

"Give me the whip!"

"Throw me the idol! ... No time to argue!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJ920fat50M

This is why Bitcoin Cash was forked off from the legacy chain before Segwit was added.

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#110

Post by xwvvvvwx »

I still don't really understand why people were so against a block size increase.

I get that there are centralisation risks if the block size increases too much, but it doesn't really seem as though increasing to 2mb really make such a big difference?

Am I missing something?

Post reply on HN