I believe there's a 70% probability that Core will be "the Bitcoin".
I am pretty sure that you both wrong. Most Bitcoin users ("people") do absolutely not care about the scaling debate. They want a working Bitcoin, and they want to be rich quickly
(Really, I was surprised that many "non-techies" when first told about the debate were supporting Bitcoin Unlimited!)
So everything depends on the "economic" nodes/services like exchanges, wallets and payment processors. The next weeks will be exciting for people that like popcorn! Every minimal move into Core territory could be the one that kills Segwit2x, but if there isn't such a move and the big fishes of the NYA agreement keep supporting it, then it has some chance to win. Together, they have power.
I don't mind ... for me, neither the small-blocker Core proposal nor the "moderate-big-blocker" Segwit2x proposal are bad options, although I'm sympathizing a bit more with Core because the 2x hardfork comes too early.
So most people agreed to segwit2x,
Mistake, most miners agreed to that fork, people are still supporting overwhelmingly bitcoin core and no other coin,
I am pretty sure that you both wrong. Most Bitcoin users ("people") do absolutely not care about the scaling debate. They want a working Bitcoin, and they want to be rich quickly
(Really, I was surprised that many "non-techies" when first told about the debate were supporting Bitcoin Unlimited!)So everything depends on the "economic" nodes/services like exchanges, wallets and payment processors. The next weeks will be exciting for people that like popcorn! Every minimal move into Core territory could be the one that kills Segwit2x, but if there isn't such a move and the big fishes of the NYA agreement keep supporting it, then it has some chance to win. Together, they have power.
I don't mind ... for me, neither the small-blocker Core proposal nor the "moderate-big-blocker" Segwit2x proposal are bad options, although I'm sympathizing a bit more with Core because the 2x hardfork comes too early.