[bitcoin-dev] A Segwit2x BIP
Luke Dashjr
luke at dashjr.org
Wed Jul 12 01:06:14 UTC 2017
On Monday 10 July 2017 11:50:33 AM Sergio Demian Lerner via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Regarding the timeline, its certainly rather short, but also is the UASF
> BIP 148 ultimatum.
BIP148 began with 8 months lead time, reduced to 5 months from popular request
and technical considerations. There is nothing about BIP148 that compels an
attempted hardfork 90 days later - that could just as well have been 18
months.
> More than 80% of the miners and many users are willing to go in the
> Segwit2x direction. With the support and great talent of the Bitcoin Core
> developers, Segwit2x activation will not cause any major disruptions.
That's not true at all. Based on my observations, only approximately 20% of
the community follow Core's technical lead without significant consideration
of their own - and who knows if that would change if Core were to suggest
clearly-unsafe block size increases, or attempted to force a hardfork against
consensus. Even with Core's support, many people would oppose the hardfork
attempt, and it would fail.
> Without Core, there will be a temporary split. Both sides will have to
> hard-fork.
Segwit2x's hardfork does not compel the remaining Bitcoin users to also
hardfork.
> I want a Bitcoin united. But maybe a split of Bitcoin, each side with its
> own vision, is not so bad.
I concur, but I disagree your approach has any possibility of a united
Bitcoin. The only way to get that today, would be to do Segwit+Drivechain, not
Segwit+Hardfork.
Luke
More information about the bitcoin-dev
mailing list