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

171–180 of 253 posts

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#171

Post by wol_ »

ojr wrote: post #158
wol_ wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Segwit activation in August was a blocksize increase, and a much more elegant solution than just doubling the blocks. An agreement was made by a few corporate entities to allow for segwit after a long standoff. They also decided on doubling the blocksize later in the year to appease the miners. Miners reneged on the agreement when Bitcoin Cash or BCH was forked when a small minority thought a better solution was to a…

Segwit is a horrible blocksize increase strategy, the mempool is filled with unconfirmed transactions that 1mb believers call spam

segwit is the most thoroughly reviewed code that's ever been written, a vulnerability in SSL was revealed and patched as a result of this work. you're free to use BCH if segwit is a problem for you. and the mempool is fine.

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#172

Post by shanusmagnus »

bdcravens wrote: post #86
byset wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess people say all kinds of things, but I don't recall anyone arguing that Bitcoin was going up because of the impending fork. It certainly wasn't the conventional wisdom.

There was tons of discussion around the price and the fork. Why wouldn't the prospect of free money make it a sellers market? Bitcoin Cash fork brought Bitcoin holders 7-20% free coins.

Because this wasn't like BCash -- it was a hostile fork, with no replay protection, such that the two forks could not reasonably co-exist without first a major cataclysm. The best case result (according to most) would be the preservation of value on whichever chain survived. Anyone investing in the last couple of days looking for a dividend would have been a total imbecile.

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#174

Post by ifdefdebug »

RyanZAG wrote: post #125
justzisguyuknow wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like yes the day-to-day fluctuations may be at the whim of the large wallets, but how can they actually be in control of the price over longer periods? Or if they can, then given that it's in their interest for the price to keep rising long-term, why not hold and go along for the ride?

They want to slowly sell off their stock so as not to affect the price too much. If they sold nothing, they'd make no money off bitcoin and eventually when they did want to sell, the effect would be so huge as to crash the entire currency. So to maximize their return from their bitcoins, they need to constantly sell off bitcoins. Not too much to affect the price too badly, but not so little that they aren't cashing i…

Most whales don't want to sell off their stock. Simplified spoken, they want to sell one coin for 7100, then buy one coin back for 7000 and cash out those 100 bugs (or cash out 50 and reinvest the other 50). They use their huge volume to try to influence the market their way.

But I guess most whales are in competition against each other, rather than cooperating. And that would be a good thing.

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#175

Post by Kiro »

byset wrote: post #163
Kiro wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It certainly wasn't the conventional wisdom. It was for sure. Where do you get your Bitcoin news?

From places that don't promote silly theories, apparently.

Alright then. Where do your get your information? I'm apparently living in a bubble. (honest question, would love to get out of it if that's the case)

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#176

Post by matthewbauer »

bdcravens wrote: post #85
olalonde wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trying to explain Bitcoin price movements is a futile exercise.

Not in this case; it's actually pretty simple. There was anticipation of "free" coins after the fork, as there was when Bitcoin Cash forked. Price rose as people bought coins that would later be forked. Now it's cancelled, "free" coins are gone, so people see no need to tie up that money.

I guess what's weird is the idea that you could split two coins and the two coins price is greater than the original. That doesn't make any sense even though it happened with Bitcoin cash.

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#177

Post by ifdefdebug »

AgentME wrote: post #170
ifdefdebug wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> waiting to put money into the market until there was a clear sense of which Bitcoin fork would be the successful one. I don't know, only if they did not understand that it's a win-win-win situation... they would have equal amount of coins on both chains so none of the three possible outcomes would be actually losing.

It's possible that confusion and conflict coming from there being two chains (imagine if a user sends bitcoin to a retailer who then claims they never received a payment because they were actually expecting coins on the b2x fork) could depress the price. Now we know that won't happen.

I stand corrected, didn't consider the case of both chains crashing due to the fork.

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#178

Post by lawn »

hudon wrote: post #142
lawn wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So your only focus is on full nodes. So where's the research of how expensive nodes are and how many nodes would be lost if an upgrade to 2MB would happen? How big of a loss would be acceptable? Ideally how many nodes should exist in the network for it to be sufficiently decentralized? How much bandwidth is needed? How long can we expect our storage to last? There is no credible research done , there are no numbers,…

> So where's the research of how expensive nodes are and how many nodes would be lost if an upgrade to 2MB would happen? How big of a loss would be acceptable? Ideally how many nodes should exist in the network for it to be sufficiently decentralized? How much bandwidth is needed? How long can we expect our storage to last? > There is no credible research done That's precisely my point. Contributors have shown that f…

The damage the 1MB limit has done and is doing to Bitcoin is far more than possibly a couple of lost nodes would mean after an upgrade to 2MB.

This has been a problem for years. For example Gavin thought 16MB would be perfectly safe. There's research being done now examining 1GB blocks and how that would affect propagation time. A lousy 2MB is honestly laughable.

Doing nothing isn't the pragmatic or sane approach, it's the insane one.

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#179

Post by bdcravens »

shanusmagnus wrote: post #172
bdcravens wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was tons of discussion around the price and the fork. Why wouldn't the prospect of free money make it a sellers market? Bitcoin Cash fork brought Bitcoin holders 7-20% free coins.

Because this wasn't like BCash -- it was a hostile fork, with no replay protection, such that the two forks could not reasonably co-exist without first a major cataclysm. The best case result (according to most) would be the preservation of value on whichever chain survived. Anyone investing in the last couple of days looking for a dividend would have been a total imbecile.

Markets are filled with and driven by tons of imbeciles :-)

Re: Segwit2x Bitcoin Fork Suspended

#180

Post by tpallarino »

matthewbauer wrote: post #176
bdcravens wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not in this case; it's actually pretty simple. There was anticipation of "free" coins after the fork, as there was when Bitcoin Cash forked. Price rose as people bought coins that would later be forked. Now it's cancelled, "free" coins are gone, so people see no need to tie up that money.

I guess what's weird is the idea that you could split two coins and the two coins price is greater than the original. That doesn't make any sense even though it happened with Bitcoin cash.

It's not that weird. It's like any exchange of goods, both parties can come out with an advantage by getting something they want. In the case of Bitcoin Cash, 2 sides of the community got what they wanted.
Post reply on HN