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

Poll Finds 70% of Bitcoin Users Prefer Segwit for Scaling

coinjournal.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 72 posts

Re: Poll Finds 70% of Bitcoin Users Prefer Segwit for Scaling

#11

Post by simias »

nicky0 wrote: post #9
Analemma_ wrote: post #8

To people entering this comment section: if you're not totally caught up on this debate and only have a passing interest in Bitcoin-- leave now, there's nothing for you here. This thread is going to be a lot of sound and fury from the two sides of the civil war, and little else.

I occasionally dip in to r/bitcoin and am repeatedly baffled by the whole debate; both in its inscrutability and the level of (let's say) "passion" exhibited. Still I have no real clue of the issues.

I'm guessing that many of the people who participate in these communities have a significant number of bitcoins to their names. Given the current trading price of BTCs many of them are probably virtual millionaires. All that could go poof if the coin were to collapse. Not really surprising that they would be very passionate about these issues.

Re: Poll Finds 70% of Bitcoin Users Prefer Segwit for Scaling

#13

Post by r1ch »

simias wrote: post #10
JustinAiken wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's what users that only post in the unbelievably censored r/bitcoin want, and what Blockstream wants. For those of us users that want bitcoin to work as intended, instead of being artificially crippled to push second layer solutions, Segwit is terrible.

I'm an external observer in all of this and I was reading some discussion about this earlier, could you explain your position to those like me who aren't very familiar with this issue? From what I read segwit sounds like a reasonable solution to what seems like a very real practical issue with bitcoin today. So far all the people I've seen arguing against this change seem more interested in fueling conspiracy theorie…

Segwit is an complicated and large code change that fundamentally alters the bitcoin protocol to solve a problem that can instead be fixed by adding:

if (blocknumber > 500000) maxblocksize = 8000000;

Re: Poll Finds 70% of Bitcoin Users Prefer Segwit for Scaling

#14

Post by nicky0 »

simias wrote: post #11
nicky0 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I occasionally dip in to r/bitcoin and am repeatedly baffled by the whole debate; both in its inscrutability and the level of (let's say) "passion" exhibited. Still I have no real clue of the issues.

I'm guessing that many of the people who participate in these communities have a significant number of bitcoins to their names. Given the current trading price of BTCs many of them are probably virtual millionaires. All that could go poof if the coin were to collapse. Not really surprising that they would be very passionate about these issues.

That may be part of it, but if it were purely about wealth they could surely just sell some of those holdings right now and become actual millionaires.

Re: Poll Finds 70% of Bitcoin Users Prefer Segwit for Scaling

#15

Post by out_of_protocol »

simias wrote: post #10
JustinAiken wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's what users that only post in the unbelievably censored r/bitcoin want, and what Blockstream wants. For those of us users that want bitcoin to work as intended, instead of being artificially crippled to push second layer solutions, Segwit is terrible.

I'm an external observer in all of this and I was reading some discussion about this earlier, could you explain your position to those like me who aren't very familiar with this issue? From what I read segwit sounds like a reasonable solution to what seems like a very real practical issue with bitcoin today. So far all the people I've seen arguing against this change seem more interested in fueling conspiracy theorie…

Why segwit is not good:

* Realistically, can not be activated (95% support level required, way more than achievable). Means we'll stuck with current 1MB forever waiting for segwit

* Upon activation it does not add any benefits. Real increase in throughput will be achieved later, then all major players updated their client code, started crafting segwit transactions and moved coins to new segwit addresses. Means it delays throughput increase even more

* After full adoption, throughput will be increased from 1MB/10min up to ~1.7-2MB/10min while worst-case scenario (useless, specially crafted transactions) is 4MB - miners should be prepared for it. Means "2MB forever" and "hard to increase block size because miners should be prepared for 4x load"

There are other points as well, i'll stop here. Simple block size increase don't have such cons

Re: Poll Finds 70% of Bitcoin Users Prefer Segwit for Scaling

#16

Post by darawk »

jswny wrote: post #12

Oh boy another incoming Bitcoin proposal civil war in the comments section. I can't wait until nullc gets here. Why is it so hard to have a non-censored, rational discussion about this topic without it becoming some ridiculous flame war every time?

To be fair, I think this is the same Bitcoin proposal civil war that happens each time :). There's only really the one ultra-contentious issue.

Re: Poll Finds 70% of Bitcoin Users Prefer Segwit for Scaling

#17

Post by kbaker »

Warning for those who are not following this debate closely: This is an incredibly polarizing discussion. Approach all comments and articles posted about this subject carefully.

Though I'd like to try and provide a summary for people who don't know what's going on.

Bitcoin desperately needs to scale to handle higher transaction demand. It can take multiple hours for transactions to be confirmed, and due to the demand, fees are high ($2-3 per transaction for fast confirmation.) A technical approach (SegWit) was proposed and implemented by the Bitcoin developers in order to improve transaction capacity a couple years ago. This also brings along a number of innovations which can help implement what is termed 'Layer 2' solutions to happen inside Bitcoin, instead of using an altcoin like Litecoin or Ethereum. Think of this enabling a Visa-like entity to provide instant settlement services denominated in BTC, and secured by the Bitcoin blockchain.

However, this upgrade is very contentious with the miners who are entrusted with securing the blockchain against attackers. Bitcoin mining now is a professional enterprise where major players need to be located in places with cheap ASIC production and cheap electricity to have any hope of making a profit. In some cases, they see these new layer 2 solutions as reducing their transaction fees, which are becoming a large percentage of their profits. Instead, they have been proposing just a larger base block size limit, which will solve the transaction backlog and send the fees to the miners, but then not make progress moving forward with what users and developers want, which is increased innovation. In addition, the larger block size is seen as increasing centralization of mining since only larger providers will be able to deal with the extra data rates (since there is an advantage to having quick transfers of newly created blocks when mining.)

Since Bitcoin is decentralized, anyone can run any software. There are mechanisms in place for miners to 'vote' with their hashpower/mining rate to agree on software changes, then after enough support, the mechanism activates. This is the easiest way to make sure global upgrades happen smoothly and in a coordinated fashion. However, users are becoming desperate and are looking for other ways to make these innovations happen without needing support from the miners.

Unfortunately the Internet and echo chambers have destroyed the hope of meaningful discussion about this topic. Please, HN commenters, do not bring in Reddit-level comments here... Provide sources and a balanced view, and please be respectful.

Re: Poll Finds 70% of Bitcoin Users Prefer Segwit for Scaling

#18

Post by simias »

r1ch wrote: post #13
simias wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm an external observer in all of this and I was reading some discussion about this earlier, could you explain your position to those like me who aren't very familiar with this issue? From what I read segwit sounds like a reasonable solution to what seems like a very real practical issue with bitcoin today. So far all the people I've seen arguing against this change seem more interested in fueling conspiracy theorie…

Segwit is an complicated and large code change that fundamentally alters the bitcoin protocol to solve a problem that can instead be fixed by adding: if (blocknumber > 500000) maxblocksize = 8000000;

But isn't that just a temporary workaround? And it doesn't address the other issues SegWit tries to solve, like allowing "instantaneous" transactions? How can Bitcoin ever hope to become a mainstream currency if you have to way dozens of minutes for your transaction to be validated?

I also see that some people worry that using bigger and bigger block sizes could end up "concentrating the mining power in the hands of a few miners" but since that already seems to be the case I'm not sure it's a very good counter argument.

Re: Poll Finds 70% of Bitcoin Users Prefer Segwit for Scaling

#20

Post by gfody »

nicky0 wrote: post #9
Analemma_ wrote: post #8

To people entering this comment section: if you're not totally caught up on this debate and only have a passing interest in Bitcoin-- leave now, there's nothing for you here. This thread is going to be a lot of sound and fury from the two sides of the civil war, and little else.

I occasionally dip in to r/bitcoin and am repeatedly baffled by the whole debate; both in its inscrutability and the level of (let's say) "passion" exhibited. Still I have no real clue of the issues.

meanwhile r/btc is calm and collected. I suspect r/bitcoin is targeted by certain entities seeking to instill doubt and divide the community. the network is going through its usual boring phase of doubling the block size by way of emerging consensus. around this time just before the block size jumps there's a lul in efficiency that translates into higher transaction fees. if you're a psycopathic pumper dumper it's a good time to scream that the sky is falling as loud as you can.
Post reply on HN