[Bitcoin-segwit2x] F2Pool backing out of NYA - Fork still happening?
cedrickperrigo at protonmail.com
Sat Oct 14 12:19:05 UTC 2017
What's the minimum hashrate for Core for it to consider segwit1x altcoin a failure? 50%? Has it already failed?
Do not use double standards, especially because this is not Core/Blockstream's mailing list.
Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-segwit2x] F2Pool backing out of NYA - Fork still happening?
> Local Time: October 14, 2017 8:15 PM
> UTC Time: October 14, 2017 12:15 PM
> From: office at lampesberger.net
> To: Cedrick Perrigo <cedrickperrigo at protonmail.com>
> Scott Roberts <wordsgalore at gmail.com>, bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org <bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Can we please tone down again this discussion?
> I still would like to get an answer what the minimum hashrate do you want to have, before you consider the fork to be delayed?
>> Am 14.10.2017 um 14:13 schrieb Cedrick Perrigo via Bitcoin-segwit2x <bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org>:
>> Wow. So "buyers and sellers of goods and services" exclude more than 10,000 merchants in the BitPay network, not counting others? I can use Segwit2x Bitcoin to buy games on Steam, products from Microsoft, goods from OpenBazzar and pay for my VPS. I cannot use segwit1x altcoin to do anything.
>> What kind of delusions do you live in.
>> No matter how long you spend arguing in this mailing list. No proof or data means you are a troll.
>> Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com/) Secure Email.
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-segwit2x] F2Pool backing out of NYA - Fork still happening?
>>> Local Time: October 14, 2017 8:03 PM
>>> UTC Time: October 14, 2017 12:03 PM
>>> From: bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>> To: bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>>>> if you think there"s more "users" supporting segwit1x altcoin. Show me the proof with their Bitcoin holding amounts.
>>> I defined users as "buyers and sellers of goods and services" and as
>>> the 99% (as opposed to the 1% hodlers). Probably 1% of the population
>>> will always hold 90% of bitcoin. They may start loaning it out at
>>> interest to gain an even higher percentage, decreasing the amount of
>>> coin in the marketplace even further, further increasing their percent
>>> ownership of society without effort. People (users) as workers
>>> contributing to society are notorious for not having enough savings,
>>> and democracy replaced other systems by protecting them against the
>>> 1%, be they lords, rentiers, monopolies, bankers, or hodlers trying to
>>> enforce a bitcoin monopoly.
>>> Tech is so advanced, the capital of hodling speculators that increased
>>> mining infrastructure was not needed except as a marketing tool to get
>>> capital the fastest to create the most hashpower. The shift to fees
>>> means the coin that pays the highest in total fees will be able to pay
>>> the most "protection money". So power will shift from hodlers to
>>> users. But meeting the demand of low fees per coin transferred for
>>> the users and high total fees for the miners leads to bigger blocks
>>> that lose security (if there is only one chain). So let chains
>>> flourish to the chagrin of hodlers in order to lower fees per coin
>>> transferred, increase security, eliminate the single-chain point of
>>> failure, and get closer to the ideal of a constant value currency.
>>> To what extent is hodler greed for a monopolistic coin the source of
>>> the bickering? (be they SegWit1x, SegWit2x, or both) Does anyone
>>> really have future users in mind since it means doing things hodlers
>>> will not like?
>>> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> Bitcoin-segwit2x mailing list
>> Bitcoin-segwit2x at lists.linuxfoundation.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Bitcoin-segwit2x