Quote from: illinest on November 06, 2017, 05:15:22 AM

Quote from: Hugroll on November 06, 2017, 01:46:47 AM

You are suggested to not spend any coins after the fork until either chain integrates replay protection. I'm sure one of the chains is going to cave in and enable it.

I think that's unlikely. As much as the NYA signers want B2X to succeed, they don't seem interested in supporting it as a minority chain. Replay protection would only be introduced if they wanted the fork to survive (as an altcoin) despite having minority hash rate. Why would they do that? With majority hash rate, they can at least argue that B2X is the stronger chain. That doesn't make it "Bitcoin" to us, but according to most of the NYA signers' policies, it does.

At the end of the day, companies like Coinbase, BitGo and Blockchain want to see regular capacity increases to Bitcoin that simply aren't realistic. I can see why they are pivoting to altcoins. I just wish they'd do it a bit more peacefully...

that's right the NYA signers want segwit2x to succeed and became a majority chain but due it lack of replay protection which is needed for hard fork and without it the loss of funds is unvoidable due to replay spending and because of this issue, the communities and notable bitcoin start ups condemned this and some NYA signers dropped their support. and if they successfully forked the coin, the market will choose legacy over B2X. so, in the end B2X will fail