LISTEN! THIS IS IMPORTANT & URGENT

I will explain why this charting of support for the various Bitcoin scaling proposals could be misleading.

1. A non-hashrate UASF node count fork (aka BIP 148) is never going to succeed because as Craig Wright explained about the economics of node connectivity in Bitcoin: it is the connections between nodes (aka “edges”) and not the node count which matters. And the UASF nodes only have a very small ~0.3% fraction of the connections. Ignore BIP 148.

2. The recent hashrate based voting which locked in BIP 91 with voting (but not economically risked, only Sybil attackable reputation risked!) support of 80+% of the hashrate, does not guarantee there will not be a hard fork in August. If even 1% of the miners continue mining only blocks which do not signal SegWit, then that minority fork still represents the real, original Bitcoin.

I continue to believe that August is a membership in the TMSR test wherein we separate real Bitcoiners from fake (and consequently bankrupted) ones.

If we believe Mircea Popescu, then those who sell the real BTC and buy the fake BTC, will end up losing all their money.

I don’t expect the Bitcoin fork(s) will have as much success did Ethereum Classic because Bitalik Vuterin (^{humor sourced from @r0achtheunsavory}) has been promising to switch to proof-of-stake cutting miners out (^{although ETH can be mined with GPUs which can be repurposed to other altcoin mining}), Classic represented immutability which many thought was important. And the DAO attacker (Mircea Popescu) had an incentive to support Classic, so miners and some of the ETH whales had an incentive to take a risk on Classic which they probably thought they could control and keep mining indefinitely. Whereas, as I explained in my prior comments, for Bitcoin there is no Schelling point except for whales uniting to protect the immutability of Bitcoin. There are various factions who want different things for scaling, but these are fractured (not united) and I doubt they are willing to risk a million BTC trying to fight Mircea Popescu the (sic) “million buttcoin” whale and his followers in the TMSR (The Most Serene Republic).

I already had linked for you in my prior comments that the whales had promised to defeat any fork of the real Bitcoin by selling the SegWit fork and buying the real, original unmodified Bitcoin fork:

When the segwit part of seg2x activates, it still will be the original BTC though.

Not if Craig Wright’s claimed 20% of network hashrate miners fork off so that the original BTC does not include any SegWit blocks. And that mining minority wins if the “million buttcoins” whales sell Jihan’s fork and buy the original BTC.

…The generative essence is my point from months ago that the “ultimately, the miners and the whales are economically the same entities”.
…
Bottom line my stance is sell all Bitcoin forks which are not the original Bitcoin, because the (sic) “million buttcoins” whale wrote Fork off and lose (some recent discussion of that). Remember Mircea Popescu also had a strong claim that he was the DAO attacker.

So if they keep their promise, then the Schelling point is others will follow the price move and copy them selling the forks and buying the real BTC (let us also assume some exchanges are going to accommodate trading each of the forks), thus the forks die and the real, original Bitcoin lives with a much higher price than now because a lot of capital will be stampeding to buy the original BTC all at once (this is known as the “wealth effect” where float determines price not total capital invested or marketcap)!

The minority fork could initially run slower than the majority fork, so the block times could slow down by as much as say 5X (if the hashrate that initially supports the minority fork is 20% of the total ^{and the majority fork would also run 20% slower as Craig Wright pointed out}). But this is not enough of a difference to defeat the economic majority if they see the price is rising on the real BTC. And then the hashrate must also switch to the real BTC because it has a higher price.

The safest option is to do nothing, so you do not lose no matter what happens. The most profitable option is to pick the winning fork as early as possible and sell all other forks and buy the winning fork. Select the losing fork and lose your investment (presuming only one fork wins and other goes essentially to zero).

Again I think the TMSR is composed of many wealthy BTC whales and only the real, original Bitcoin will win. Craig Wright appears to be supporting this fork with his claim to make a 20% hashrate pool that rejects SegWit chains. As for Craig Wright’s scaling plans, that is sort of a carrot thrown out there for the future, but apparently he is not activating any block size increase in August and thus he is not in conflict with the TMSR.

EDIT: someone just make me aware of this recent blog post by Mircea Popescu which implies:

thus the forks die and the real, original Bitcoin lives with a much higher price than now…

So it appears I was correct in my analysis.

P.S. @finitemaz could you (or anyone) do me a favor and make a post at BCT in the Altcoin Discussion section letting everyone know I am active over here at Steemit? (since I am banned from BCT)