You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: SegWit2x: Chinese Mining Pool Giants Have Taken Their Stance on Bitcoin
I'm not sure SegWit2x is the way to go. Almost the entire roster of Core devs have already said 'NO' to it. Some even have 'LOL' on it.
You can view the list here:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Segwit_support
There is a reason bitcoin has been operating securely as it has all these years. These core devs are some of the best programmers and cryptographers in the world right now. If they don't sign off on SegWit2x then I'm all for the UASF-BIP148.
Thanks for posting tho.
Oh I am not for SegWit2x lol...trust me the holes in security are so bad there...just reporting the news. BIP 148 is my hope, but what i see here is the miner camp pulling this stunt here to avoid BIP 148....which means more drama probably coming. SegWit2x was tested starting yesterday but I am not so sure I believe the hype that its so great by the miners. Something tells me they are rushing to cease some power plays early on. Its just a huge mess. Figured I would write these up from side to side neutrally but man is it hard to be neutral in this drama lol. We see the same very thing
You said it and it is! To me it looks like Bitmain is trying to hijack Bitcoin and it isn't looking good. It's a tough spot to be in because Bitmain with their ASIC miners have done wonders for bitcoin but they kept their ASICBoost a secret and it doesn't work with SegWit so that's why they're against it. If it does fork we should just call their fork 'CHINACOIN' because that's all it will really be.
If we could have just implemented SegWit to begin with we wouldn't need the UASF. Glad to hear you're on the UASF side. :)
Cheers @sflaherty
What we have here is a few mistakes in Bitcoin that the miners are trying to call a weak link to force a way in to take on over. They believe because the network has relied on them that they are the be all end all...this sadly stems from Bitcoin Core not taking charge almost 2 years ago from taking action....almost think a blackmail game is going on between the two behind the scenes. UASF to me seems to only logical way to go, even for the miners to create a user friendly transaction lowering and backlog fix. If I was Bitcoin and the miners won't go for it, let them have their own coin and we go on after the split. I sure won't side with Bitmain, I own their miners lol but I can't even afford the elec cost to run them with the up and down stuff in prices due to them in the first place. One option, shut her down....strike a new coin that is minerless lol....we know it can be done but then again that is a huge risk to undertake at this stage. UASF is key to giving it back to the users, if we don't go there, then start picking a new coin...just hope not ETH I do not like the banks involved in that one. All I know is I am here for the movement, fix the central bank issues in this world, we need one of these to take up that movement again or we are all doomed anyways.