<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"MS Gothic";
panose-1:2 11 6 9 7 2 5 8 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@MS Gothic";
panose-1:2 11 6 9 7 2 5 8 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-GB" link="blue" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">You are barking up the wrong tree by using a “rigged” futures’ price to estimate the hash supporting the upgrade at fork time. They NYA was presented as being backed by at least 80% of the network hash then and was activated / locked-in
by over 90%. Since then, it has continued to receive and sustain intent signalling above the introduction threshold. It is only rational to expect the hash on fork to reflect the latter as opposed to futures’ prices.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Obiter dicta: the futures’ price is more reflective of the wavering non mining, none economic users. It goes without saying, a lot of people are going to loose a lot of money on this otherwise rigged futures’ market.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="border:none;padding:0cm"><b>From: </b><a href="mailto:bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org">Dr Adam Back via Bitcoin-segwit2x</a><br>
<b>Sent: </b>13 October 2017 10:11<br>
<b>To: </b><a href="mailto:emil@bitcoin.com">Emil Oldenburg</a><br>
<b>Cc: </b><a href="mailto:bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org">Peter Todd via Bitcoin-segwit2x</a><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Bitcoin-segwit2x] F2Pool backing out of NYA - Fork still happening?</p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt">The futures price is 1/3 of 40% so yes actually < 40% hashrate is quite likely.<br>
<br>
<a href="https://www.cryptonator.com/rates/BT2-BTC?utm_referrer=https%3a%2f%2fwww.google.com%2f">https://www.cryptonator.com/rates/BT2-BTC?utm_referrer=https%3a%2f%2fwww.google.com%2f</a><br>
<br>
Nodes should upgrade because code changes are being made and it's not<br>
a good idea to run pre-production code on the live network. Do you<br>
recall when the company you work for lost bitcoin by running<br>
pre-release fork code before on the pool?<br>
<br>
Is anyone running BTC1 head in production? Protecting how much value.<br>
Reminder this is a public list.<br>
<br>
Adam<br>
<br>
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Emil Oldenburg via Bitcoin-segwit2x<br>
<bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:<br>
> The hardfork part is already locked in and is not subject to change. Many<br>
> btc1 nodes are already deployed and they should not and don't need to<br>
> update. The only thing left is a potential extra softfork for opt-in replay<br>
> protection. Only the miners need this softfork.<br>
><br>
> What makes you think the hardfork will have less than 40% hashpower?<br>
><br>
><br>
> Emil Oldenburg, CTO<br>
> Emil@bitcoin.com<br>
> Visit the all new <a href="https://bitcoin.com">https://bitcoin.com</a><br>
> Wechat: emilold<br>
> Telegram: emilold<br>
><br>
> On 2017</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"MS Gothic"">年</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt">10</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"MS Gothic"">月</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt">13</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"MS Gothic"">日</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt">
17:31, Peter BitcoinReminder.com wrote:<br>
><br>
> Thats not a reason, the BTC1 sourcecode is still in development (f.e. replay<br>
> protection was reverted just 1-2 days ago?) - so the argument „it can’t be<br>
> called off“ is just wrong.<br>
><br>
> So wouldn’t it make sense to add a minimum required hashrate for the HF to<br>
> lock in? You are really going to fork off with f.e. 40 % hashpower?<br>
><br>
><br>
> Am 13.10.2017 um 03:42 schrieb Emil Oldenburg via Bitcoin-segwit2x<br>
> <bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org>:<br>
><br>
> If we try to be technical here. The HF is already activated, is estimated to<br>
> trigger in 36 days, and can't be "called off". Nor is there any logic to<br>
> delay it if hashrate deflects. That's the rules of the btc1 client.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Emil Oldenburg, CTO<br>
> Emil@bitcoin.com<br>
> Visit the all new <a href="https://bitcoin.com">https://bitcoin.com</a><br>
> Wechat: emilold<br>
> Telegram: emilold<br>
><br>
> On 2017</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"MS Gothic"">年</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt">10</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"MS Gothic"">月</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt">13</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"MS Gothic"">日</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt">
05:31, John Heathco via Bitcoin-segwit2x wrote:<br>
><br>
> I don't believe there is an explicitly stated hashpower in which the fork<br>
> would be "called off", but I would assume it is much lower than what is<br>
> currently signaling, even if we make the (unwise) assumption that F2Pool<br>
> would not contribute to mining 2x whatsoever.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:57 PM Peter BitcoinReminder.com via<br>
> Bitcoin-segwit2x <bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> I’m not Peter Todd, we just share the same (nice) firstname.<br>
>><br>
>> I still didn’t get an answer what the minimum amount of hashpower is<br>
>> required, before the fork is getting delayed?<br>
>> We have to plan time for the whole security measures etc, so I think it’s<br>
>> reasonable to get more information about this?<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Am 12.10.2017 um 21:53 schrieb bitPico <bitpico@icloud.com>:<br>
>><br>
>> Without you knowing why they stopped signaling this is FUD and off-topic<br>
>> for this list. Please instead let F2Pool state their own opinion here since<br>
>> yours doesn’t count. If you think your opinion does count then show us your<br>
>> blocks that your pool has produced; until then you are simply an end-user<br>
>> and still you are off-topic for this list. If you need ELI5 for how this<br>
>> list works please let us know and we can help you Peter Todd.<br>
>><br>
>> Have a groovy day!<br>
>><br>
>> On Oct 12, 2017, at 8:49 AM, Peter BitcoinReminder.com via<br>
>> Bitcoin-segwit2x <bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Since F2Pool stopped signaling for the NYA[1] and slush also mines mostly<br>
>> non-NYA blocks, are you still going to fork off in November - splitting the<br>
>> chain intentionally?<br>
>><br>
>> —<br>
>> [1] <a href="https://imgur.com/LgYdFKw">https://imgur.com/LgYdFKw</a><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list<br>
>> Bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org<br>
>> <a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x">
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list<br>
>> Bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org<br>
>> <a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x">
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list<br>
> Bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org<br>
> <a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list<br>
> Bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org<br>
> <a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list<br>
> Bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org<br>
> <a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x</a><br>
><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list<br>
Bitcoin-segwit2x@lists.linuxfoundation.org<br>
<a href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>