franky1, no sane Bitcoin developer will say that Bitcoin has "bilaterally split" into two. It was Bitcoin Cash that split into an altcoin, and the insane part of it is Roger Ver and his sock puppets believe and spread this misinformation that "BCH is Bitcoin".
If the miners truly believe that and would follow Jihan Wu to threaten to "kill" Bitcoin, then I believe Bitcoin will undergo a POW change as a last resort.
If the miners truly believe that and would follow Jihan Wu to threaten to "kill" Bitcoin, then I believe Bitcoin will undergo a POW change as a last resort.
if bitcoin core did not change from the legacy rules .. bitcoin core would still only be using only the legacy rules
core split from the legacyrules by enabling weight to get the 4mb weight. and bitcoin cash just increased the base block to get their 8-32mb block buffer
they BOTH changed at the same time..
2 networks.. 2 different rules compared to the rule pre august. = bilateral split.
Activation of Segwit was an inclusive soft fork that did not kick anyone out of the network. There was no "chain split", so there was no "bilateral split". It was Bitcoin Cash that changed the consensus rules and split from the Bitcoin blockchain.
Quote
as to WHO orchestrated it.. you could argue that is was not core... but then in 2015-2016 Luke JR backtracked out of a consensus agreemnt by saying he was not part of core.
so you can play the social drama of who is or is not part of the core supporters all you like. but if you follow their salaries, you follow who they prefer to side with and who they play these silly social games for. you will see which side was which. and.. guess what
so you can play the social drama of who is or is not part of the core supporters all you like. but if you follow their salaries, you follow who they prefer to side with and who they play these silly social games for. you will see which side was which. and.. guess what
Who, what, where are behind now us. The network has Segwit activated. Blame the miners, they did it.
Quote
the UASF was not to continue legacy. and was not to create clams 2.0(unnilateral) it was to to be part of a mandatory planned consensus bypassing split where at the exact same block 2 separate rules came into play and the legacy blocks got killed off on that date
Well some people in the community say that it was BIP91, not the UASF, that had Segwit activated. But blame the miners, they did it.
Quote
after all it it was a whole network of pools wanting segwit and a whole network of nodes wanting segwit.. it would have got activated in december 2016-june 2017.. but the only supporters of it were those tight to a certain team.. but ill let you play around arguing the team game social games as all i care about is code that got implimented without true consensus.
Blame the miners, they did it.
Quote
I will not debate to the rest of this post to make everything more confusing. It was the miners that activated Segwit, not the Core developers who most of them were against the UASF.
If Core did have control then it would have activated in one week. Blame the miners, they did it.
OMG
turn it as you wish
Miners wanted compromise - the 2x only got them on board.
W/O - no SW today.
I agree, that might also be the correct answer, and it plays right in the point I was making. "Blame the miners, they did it". The Core developers cannot do anything, the community cannot do anything, but the miners did it. Was it then the fault of Barry Silbert, Jeff Garzik and the NYA signatories? Hahaha.
I'd say, many hoped that core d compromise as well - or split, if not
and we split
