Quote from: Carlton Banks on June 24, 2016, 10:49:40 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on June 24, 2016, 10:29:06 PM

Quote from: AliceGored on June 24, 2016, 10:15:39 PM

According to Jihan Wu, who controls Antpool (25% of global hashrate), there won't be any live segwit without a HF blocksize increase for 2017 activation.

So we get both! (or neither) Cool!

[img ]http://i.imgur.com/S89dQkA.png[/img]

This is very good, and is very important that he holds his ground. Bitcoin is in desperate need of a max block size increase, and as long as the blockstream core devs hold a veto card for any HF, it will be difficult to get a max block size increase without withholding support for something that the blockstream core devs need.

Core team are increasing the blocksize, Segwit is that increase. They're increasing more than what the Antpool owner has demanded, so what his issue is, I'm not sure tbh. Let's not all forget that Antpool might have ~7% hashrate today, but tomorrow is another story. Even next Tuesday is a bit uncertain Wink

I am not quite sure what you are talking about. Anypool asked for an increase of the max block size to 2 MB as part of the HK roundtable, and I believe they have supported larger increases in the max block size in the past. Also Antpool's share of the network hashrate is closer to 17% and a substantial portion of that 17% is from cloud miners that they are hosing for their customers that cannot be moved from Antpool.

Also segwit is unlikely to achieve an effective increase up to anywhere near the 1.8MB that is being promised because such increase will require people to actively update their wallet to something that uses segwit.

Quote from: knightdk on June 25, 2016, 12:05:00 AM

Blockstream does not "basically represent core". That is a common misunderstanding spread by r/btc FUDers.

I disagree with this. Blockstream employs many core devs, and what the core devs have been proposing for a long time now have aligned with exactly with what will most financially benefit blockstream. I would say that it would probably be more accurate to say that core represents blockstream though.

Quote from: knightdk on June 25, 2016, 12:05:00 AM

The Hong Kong agreement explicitly states that the hard fork code would be ready within 3 months of Segwit's release, something that has not happened yet. The miners agreed that they would run Segwit in production in the meantime. IT DOES NOT SAY THAT BOTH A HARD FORK AND SEGWIT WOULD BE DELIVERED AT THE SAME TIME.

Again this is backwards. The HK agreement said that the miners will agree to run SegWit in production once there is a HF merged into core that increases the maximum block size up to 2MB. I also don't think that the miners will continue to run run/support SegWit (with the empathizes on support) if a HF that increases the max block size does not activate.

Quote from: knightdk on June 25, 2016, 02:22:39 AM

Quote from: MicroGuy on June 25, 2016, 02:18:25 AM

Quote from: BillyBobZorton on June 24, 2016, 05:53:21 PM

Very good news, Core dev keep making impressive upgrades to BTC. Many good news and a great time to buy before we go to the next uprise.

Are you being serious or joking? The core developers have done everything but run Bitcoin directly into the ground.

Are you being serious or joking? The core developers have done everything they can to keep Bitcoin from running directly into the ground. They are constantly trying to improve Bitcoin and think of new ways to improve Bitcoin.

I disagree with this in principle. The blockstream core devs are introducing additional features into Bitcoin that are increasingly complex, and have plans for additional features that are substantially more complex. As we saw with the DAO debacle, when you have very complex code, the room for error is very large, and there was literally millions of dollars that were literally sitting around for the taking for months before anyone exploited the problems in the ETH code.