[Bitcoin-segwit2x] Strong 2-Way Replay Protection

Marcel Jamin marcel at jamin.net
Mon Oct 9 10:00:06 UTC 2017


On 9 October 2017 at 11:25, bitPico <bitpico at icloud.com> wrote:
> This is a Bitcoin 2x Base Block Size technical discussion list not for speculative or other discussions.

The post I replied to wasn't technical to begin with. It feels like
the off-topic card is played rather selectively.

Also, to be technical, there is no base block size. This list
discusses raising the MAX_BLOCK_WEIGHT from 4M to 8M.

>
> Thank You
>
>> On Oct 9, 2017, at 4:46 AM, Marcel Jamin via Bitcoin-segwit2x <bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 9 October 2017 at 05:46, Mike Belshe via Bitcoin-segwit2x
>> <bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>>> BitGo serves its customers; we'll handle both chains.
>>> I still hope everyone decides to vote for bigger blocks - its taken a long
>>> time to get here, and we have a great opportunity!
>>
>> The block limit effectively doubled recently. You say that's because
>> of the NYA, others say it's because of the UASF ultimatum. Personally
>> I believe the pro-hardfork side saw a chance to get their pound of
>> flesh with the NYA and BIP91 caught them by surprise. But the UASF
>> deadline provided the pressure.
>>
>> In any case, it already doubled and you want to double it *again*.
>>
>>> No reason to support two chains except pride.
>>
>> The new chain will be run by a forked off client maintained by a new
>> and much smaller set of developers willing to give in to business (and
>> presumably government) pressure.
>>
>> The original chain will keep the most if not all of the developer
>> talent that helped bitcoin flourish over the past years and follow a
>> more rational and less political approach to decision making.
>>
>> I see plenty of reason to support the original chain and can't fathom
>> how anyone (except some CEOs perhaps) would value the former higher
>> than the latter. Early results on Bitfinex tend to agree with me here.
>> This valuation will be an issue for you and the mining support you
>> currently think you have. Understand that hashpower is a value add,
>> not the core value proposition. Even with 1000x the hashpower, there's
>> nothing secure about a corporately run version of bitcoin.
>>
>>
>> - Marcel
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 8:43 PM, Chris Stewart <chris at suredbits.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> No.
>>>>
>>>> Ok. Thanks for the candid answer Mike. I look forward to an official
>>>> update from bitgo of how they will handle this chain split wrt to bitcoin
>>>> and segwit2x.
>>>>
>>>> -Chris
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 10:38 PM, Mike Belshe <mike at bitgo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Chris Stewart via Bitcoin-segwit2x
>>>>> <bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So just so this is clear to the rest of the world, Segwit2x believes
>>>>>> there will be no chain split?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No.
>>>>>
>>>>> Although the design goal was to not create a split, that doesn't mean
>>>>> that there won't be one. Since you can never get 100.000% agreement, I
>>>>> suppose you could say that means there must be a split - the question is
>>>>> just how big.
>>>>>
>>>>> From the beginning, the segwit2x crew tried to garner as much support as
>>>>> possible and make the code as simple and unobtrusive as possible. They
>>>>> certainly accomplished a lot - getting more miner support than ever in
>>>>> history, and getting segwit itself activated.  With regard to the 2MB
>>>>> upgrade, it does seem that many are against it.  But if you look at the node
>>>>> counts of SPV and full nodes, its easy to see that this group is incredibly
>>>>> small - likely 0.5% or less of all deployed wallets.
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand, adding "replay protection" and orphaning the SPV
>>>>> wallets would clearly create a massive chain split.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Chris
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 5:57 PM, bitPico <bitpico at icloud.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://blockchain.info/charts/nya-support
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ~95-96%
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do the math on how long it would take to solve a 1x (deprecated) block
>>>>>>> with only 4-5% network hash power.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is no HACK in place to drop the difficulty either so it’s a dead
>>>>>>> blockchain. :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Oct 8, 2017, at 6:46 PM, Chris Stewart via Bitcoin-segwit2x
>>>>>>> <bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So just to be clear, segwit2x no longer believes there will not be a
>>>>>>> chain split come November?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Chris
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list
>>>>>> Bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>>>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-segwit2x
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike Belshe
>>>>> CEO, BitGo, Inc
>>>>> 408-718-6885
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Mike Belshe
>>> CEO, BitGo, Inc
>>> 408-718-6885
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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


More information about the Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list