[Bitcoin-segwit2x] Segwit2x Final Steps

Sun Nov 12 13:56:29 UTC 2017

On 11 November 2017 at 11:09, Hugh Madden via Bitcoin-segwit2x <
bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> I don't chime in much... But this is true.
>
> Later 2 can be considered a form of compression.
>
> If the source data set is amenable to compression, IE a limited number of
> nodes sending many transactions to reach other, the compression and hence
> effectiveness of lighting is high.
>
> If you have a large number of participants (retail) sending payments to
> each other without many collisions the compression is poor.
>
> So ultimately the effectiveness of a layer 2 solution will be only as
> stochastically effective as the real world use case in the above scenarios.
>
> I'd be pleasantly surprised to be wrong.
>

Layer 2 solutions already exist.  Consider an exchange or a poker room.
While effective, they, however are generally not zero trust, which is an
issue in itself.  For example, exchanges can be hacked, or go out of
business.  Segwit based L2 solutions require less trust, so provide a
useful addition to scaling transactions to a wider audience.

FWIW I do think the case for 2x is still strong, and I'd support it.  The
reason being that while it will be more expensive to run a full node,
hardware seems to be improving fast and the added benefit of the network
effect due to many businesses being able to operate more efficiently (at
least in the medium term) will be a net plus to bitcoin.  I also think
rolling out a hard fork, which will be needed in the longer term is a
useful exercise, and this is the hard fork most likely to achieve
consensus.  I believe well constructed arguments along these lines have a
chance of gaining traction.

>
> On 11 Nov. 2017 5:25 pm, "bitPico via Bitcoin-segwit2x" <
> bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> Attempting to send millions of SegWit transactions with hopes to settle
>> them later “on chain” is easily mathematically proven impossible. L2
>> solutions can only scale to the limits of the base block size. The party
>> never stopped; SegWit2x is still on.
>>
>> Apparently and as Vice/Motherboard informed us we have a new group
>> joining: https://bitcoin2x.org/
>>
>> Domain registered in 2012. 🐳
>>
>> Sent from my Space Ship
>>
>> On Nov 8, 2017, at 7:59 PM, Will M <will.madden at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> This email string is priceless. Entirely possible if you have miner
>> support.
>>
>> I’ll say this, the fixed blocksize is pricing out our ability to build
>> features, and I know we’re not alone. If you are competing against hedge
>> funds for space on the bitcoin blockchain with an artificially fixed supply
>> and huge speculative demand, all use cases that do not involve very large
>> transactions will be priced out of the market.
>>
>> Long term, companies will now see to build on top of other
>> cryptocurrencies if the use cases they are trying to meet do not work with
>> very high fees and low transaction volume. The failure to fully honor the
>> agreement, and without an “L2 solution” of some form proven at scale, BTC
>> is now foolish to use for anything but a dumb money speculative investment
>> or a gamble on specific L2 schemes for most of the use cases that were
>> exciting and got most people interested in Bitcoin years ago.
>>
>> Quite a ride, and what an epic disappointment.
>>
>> On Nov 8, 2017, 5:05 PM -0700, bitPico via Bitcoin-segwit2x <
>> bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org>, wrote:
>>
>> We are carrying out the fork regardless as everything is set in motion.
>> Backing down the difficulty right now is a strategy. Wonder why 30% network
>> hash-rate disappeared?  It’s ours; the miners that will continue what is
>> set in motion... A handful of humans cannot stop what they have no control
>> over...
>>
>> Sent from my Space Ship
>>
>> On Nov 8, 2017, at 11:58 AM, Mike Belshe via Bitcoin-segwit2x <
>> bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> The Segwit2x effort began in May with a simple purpose:  to increase the
>> blocksize and improve Bitcoin scalability. At the time, the Bitcoin
>> community was in crisis after nearly 3 years of heavy debate, and consensus
>> for Segwit seemed like a distant mirage with only 30% support among miners.
>> Segwit2x found its first success in August, as it broke the deadlock and
>> quickly led to Segwit’s successful activation. Since that time, the team
>> shifted its efforts to phase two of the project - a 2MB blocksize increase.
>>
>> Our goal has always been a smooth upgrade for Bitcoin.  Although we
>> strongly believe in the need for a larger blocksize, there is something we
>> believe is even more important: keeping the community together.
>> Unfortunately, it is clear that we have not built sufficient consensus for
>> a clean blocksize upgrade at this time. Continuing on the current path
>> could divide the community and be a setback to Bitcoin’s growth. This was
>> never the goal of Segwit2x.
>>
>> As fees rise on the blockchain, we believe it will eventually become
>> obvious that on-chain capacity increases are necessary. When that happens,
>> we hope the community will come together and find a solution, possibly with
>> a blocksize increase. Until then, we are suspending our plans for the
>> upcoming 2MB upgrade.
>>
>> We want to thank everyone that contributed constructively to Segwit2x,
>> whether you were in favor or against. Your efforts are what makes Bitcoin
>> great. Bitcoin remains the greatest form of money mankind has ever seen,
>> and we remain dedicated to protecting and fostering its growth worldwide.
>>
>>
>> Mike Belshe, Wences Casares, Jihan Wu, Jeff Garzik, Peter Smith and Erik
>> Voorhees
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> *Mike Belshe*
>> *CEO, BitGo, Inc*
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list
>> Bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list
>> Bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list
> Bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-segwit2x/attachments/20171112/3ead4cfa/attachment.html>