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

Announcing SegWit support

blog.coinbase.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 71 posts

Re: Announcing SegWit support

#41

Post by nodja »

shard972 wrote: post #36
yorby wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

segwit will indirectly lead to centralization... when lightning network gets fully implemented

Care to explain that? I don't see how segwit makes it any easier for lightning to be brought into the fold.

Not parent but AFAIK Lightning Network requires transactions to be non malleable, i.e. the txid needs be signed together with the rest of the transaction.

Without a solution like segwit, miners can change the transaction ID and undermine layer 2 like the Lightning Network.

Re: Announcing SegWit support

#42

Post by toomuchtodo »

loeg wrote: post #40
toomuchtodo wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ACH will be same day next month.

Do any US banks actually let users initiate ACH payments to other individuals? As far as I know, my bank does not (USAA).

Not through ACH, but through a bank owned consortium:

https://www.zellepay.com/

USAA is a participant in that network. Transfers are (EDIT: mostly immediate below a certain dollar amount, next day above) between participant bank users.

https://www.usaa.com/inet/wc/mobile_banking_send_money_zelle...

Re: Announcing SegWit support

#43

Post by AgentME »

skybrian wrote: post #38

Why is it that sending the wrong kind of coin to an address results in the money being lost? It seems like a rather severe UI bug to inflict on users.

Bitcoin Cash has a separate blockchain (and peer-to-peer swarm, etc) but uses the same address format and checksum as Bitcoin. Bitcoin Cash did that on purpose so people's addresses from before the fork would continue to work if they moved to BCH at the fork. Personally I think they (BCH) like the confusion because it keeps people talking about them where Bitcoin is talked about (never mind the confusingly-similar name).

Coinbase technically could make the addresses they show be able to receive both BTC and BCH funds, but it would be more complexity on their end as their BTC and BCH support would no longer be separate systems.

There is a plan for Bitcoin to get a new type of address format eventually (BIP 173, "Bech32"), built specifically for Segwit addresses, so this problem will eventually be addressed. Well, it will be fixed until the next Bitcoin Cash Gold Deluxe Whatever fork shows up...

Re: Announcing SegWit support

#44

Post by mrep »

tekproxy wrote: post #32
kuschku wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly still nowhere close to the free transaction up to €15'000 within of 10 seconds that’s being rolled out across the European banks right now. Bitcoin was supposed to be an improvement upon existing payment methods, so far, it’s not quite there yet.

Lol. It's advantages are that it's sound money and uncensorable, not faster than visa. Layer one will never scale to superior global currency. It's an immutable, append only database. DCS is a trade-off.

> it's sound money

Can you explain what you mean by that?

> and uncensorable

With all the hacks, that is literally the last place people want to hold their money

Re: Announcing SegWit support

#45

Post by snuxoll »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #42
loeg wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do any US banks actually let users initiate ACH payments to other individuals? As far as I know, my bank does not (USAA).

Not through ACH, but through a bank owned consortium: https://www.zellepay.com/ USAA is a participant in that network. Transfers are (EDIT: mostly immediate below a certain dollar amount, next day above) between participant bank users. https://www.usaa.com/inet/wc/mobile_banking_send_money_zelle...

Immediate isn’t always so true, it depends on the transaction amount with my bank (Wells Fargo). Something like $200 a day can be sent instantly, everything else is next day which still isn’t terrible.

I actually pay my landlady with Zelle (have since it was clearxchange with every bank using different branding), it’s not half bad - the biggest downside really is that your bank has to participate unlike SEPA where it’s expected to be there.

Re: Announcing SegWit support

#46

Post by Empact »

bitL wrote: post #9
VMG wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm trying but I don't understand your question

My limited knowledge tells me that BTC will lose its main reason for existence - solution of Byzantine generals problem, allowing trustless store of value. With what I've read about SegWit, it's a practical solution to improve transaction throughput by moving transactions off blockchain, which in turn removes trustlessness from the equation. I'd like to know if my conclusion is correct.

1) Segwit does improve transaction throughput, but it does so by improving the efficiency of transaction storage on the blockchain.

2) The Lightning Network improves transaction throughput by moving transactions off the blockchain, and requires segwit to be active for reasons apart from its transaction efficiency, specifically that it fixes the transaction malleability problem.

Re: Announcing SegWit support

#47

Post by mrep »

onoffswitch wrote: post #18
sova wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't buy a cup of coffee with a slice of a gold bar either!

That was kind of his point. Crypto sounds less like a revolution if markets treat it as an asset; as opposed to treating it as a currency.

With all the crypto hacks which can cause you to lose everything, cryptocurrencies are the last place I would want to redistribute any of my current assets.

Re: Announcing SegWit support

#48

Post by toomuchtodo »

snuxoll wrote: post #45
toomuchtodo wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not through ACH, but through a bank owned consortium: https://www.zellepay.com/ USAA is a participant in that network. Transfers are (EDIT: mostly immediate below a certain dollar amount, next day above) between participant bank users. https://www.usaa.com/inet/wc/mobile_banking_send_money_zelle...

Immediate isn’t always so true, it depends on the transaction amount with my bank (Wells Fargo). Something like $200 a day can be sent instantly, everything else is next day which still isn’t terrible. I actually pay my landlady with Zelle (have since it was clearxchange with every bank using different branding), it’s not half bad - the biggest downside really is that your bank has to participate unlike SEPA where it…

Thanks for pointing that out. I've updated my comment.

Zelle will improve as more banks participate and the ACH network is modernized; I expect them to compliment each other until the US reaches their version of SEPA. A shim's a shim.

Re: Announcing SegWit support

#50

Post by Beldur »

firasd wrote: post #13

I'm glad to see the adoption of such changes. The 'hodl' crowd have changed their talking points to 'Bitcoin is an asset, not a currency' but as far as I'm concerned, if that's how it ends up--if you can't pragmatically buy a $2 cup of coffee with BTC--it would really puncture the immense promise of decentralized financial tech.

You also can't buy a cup of coffee with TCP/IP. But with PayPal you can.

Bitcoin is not ment to be used for buying coffee. But software based on it is.

Post reply on HN