<div dir="ltr">I don't expect to convince you, but segwit didn't double the block size as you claim. You can witness the results yourself - more like a 3% increase so far. I expect it may get to a 50% increase in 8-10 months, but your mileage may vary. Even at theoretical max, its not a doubling.<div><br></div><div>Regardless, we should always be thinking about growing capacity. I'm interested in helping a much larger portion of the world have access to Bitcoin, and we know we need to move forward. This is a simple and easy step. I've never heard customers say "no thanks" to better scalability except in Bitcoin.</div><div><br></div><div>Today, Bitcoin is small potatoes. Want to make it really soar? Make it available to everyone.</div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div>Mike</div><div><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 1:46 AM, Marcel Jamin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:marcel@jamin.net" target="_blank">marcel@jamin.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 9 October 2017 at 05:46, Mike Belshe via Bitcoin-segwit2x<br>
<span class=""><<a href="mailto:bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> BitGo serves its customers; we'll handle both chains.<br>
> I still hope everyone decides to vote for bigger blocks - its taken a long<br>
> time to get here, and we have a great opportunity!<br>
<br>
</span>The block limit effectively doubled recently. You say that's because<br>
of the NYA, others say it's because of the UASF ultimatum. Personally<br>
I believe the pro-hardfork side saw a chance to get their pound of<br>
flesh with the NYA and BIP91 caught them by surprise. But the UASF<br>
deadline provided the pressure.<br>
<br>
In any case, it already doubled and you want to double it *again*.<br>
<span class=""><br>
> No reason to support two chains except pride.<br>
<br>
</span>The new chain will be run by a forked off client maintained by a new<br>
and much smaller set of developers willing to give in to business (and<br>
presumably government) pressure.<br>
<br>
The original chain will keep the most if not all of the developer<br>
talent that helped bitcoin flourish over the past years and follow a<br>
more rational and less political approach to decision making.<br>
<br>
I see plenty of reason to support the original chain and can't fathom<br>
how anyone (except some CEOs perhaps) would value the former higher<br>
than the latter. Early results on Bitfinex tend to agree with me here.<br>
This valuation will be an issue for you and the mining support you<br>
currently think you have. Understand that hashpower is a value add,<br>
not the core value proposition. Even with 1000x the hashpower, there's<br>
nothing secure about a corporately run version of bitcoin.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
- Marcel<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
><br>
> Mike<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 8:43 PM, Chris Stewart <<a href="mailto:chris@suredbits.com">chris@suredbits.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> >No.<br>
>><br>
>> Ok. Thanks for the candid answer Mike. I look forward to an official<br>
>> update from bitgo of how they will handle this chain split wrt to bitcoin<br>
>> and segwit2x.<br>
>><br>
>> -Chris<br>
>><br>
>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 10:38 PM, Mike Belshe <<a href="mailto:mike@bitgo.com">mike@bitgo.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Chris Stewart via Bitcoin-segwit2x<br>
>>> <<a href="mailto:bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> So just so this is clear to the rest of the world, Segwit2x believes<br>
>>>> there will be no chain split?<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> No.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Although the design goal was to not create a split, that doesn't mean<br>
>>> that there won't be one. Since you can never get 100.000% agreement, I<br>
>>> suppose you could say that means there must be a split - the question is<br>
>>> just how big.<br>
>>><br>
>>> From the beginning, the segwit2x crew tried to garner as much support as<br>
>>> possible and make the code as simple and unobtrusive as possible. They<br>
>>> certainly accomplished a lot - getting more miner support than ever in<br>
>>> history, and getting segwit itself activated. With regard to the 2MB<br>
>>> upgrade, it does seem that many are against it. But if you look at the node<br>
>>> counts of SPV and full nodes, its easy to see that this group is incredibly<br>
>>> small - likely 0.5% or less of all deployed wallets.<br>
>>><br>
>>> On the other hand, adding "replay protection" and orphaning the SPV<br>
>>> wallets would clearly create a massive chain split.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Mike<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> -Chris<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 5:57 PM, bitPico <<a href="mailto:bitpico@icloud.com">bitpico@icloud.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> <a href="https://blockchain.info/charts/nya-support" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://blockchain.info/<wbr>charts/nya-support</a><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> ~95-96%<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Do the math on how long it would take to solve a 1x (deprecated) block<br>
>>>>> with only 4-5% network hash power.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> There is no HACK in place to drop the difficulty either so it’s a dead<br>
>>>>> blockchain. :-)<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> On Oct 8, 2017, at 6:46 PM, Chris Stewart via Bitcoin-segwit2x<br>
>>>>> <<a href="mailto:bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> So just to be clear, segwit2x no longer believes there will not be a<br>
>>>>> chain split come November?<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> -Chris<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
>>>> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list<br>
>>>> <a href="mailto:Bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org">Bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
>>>> <a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>segwit2x</a><br>
>>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> --<br>
>>><br>
>>> Mike Belshe<br>
>>> CEO, BitGo, Inc<br>
>>> <a href="tel:408-718-6885" value="+14087186885">408-718-6885</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> --<br>
><br>
> Mike Belshe<br>
> CEO, BitGo, Inc<br>
> <a href="tel:408-718-6885" value="+14087186885">408-718-6885</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org">Bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>segwit2x</a><br>
><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><p style="font-size:12.8px"><b style="font-size:12.8px;line-height:17px"><font color="#0b5394">Mike Belshe<br></font></b><b style="font-size:12.8px;line-height:17px"><font color="#0b5394">CEO, BitGo, Inc<br></font></b><span style="font-size:12.8px;line-height:17px;color:rgb(102,102,102)">408-718-6885</span></p></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div></div></div>