This is an article on 8btc, the site founded by Jihan Wu before Bitmain. He posted a link to it on his Weibo account:
Without translating the entire article, it frames the hard fork conflict purely as a battle for transaction fees, and claims miners will never allow 2nd layer protocols to undermine their revenue stream. It barely mentions block size:
分叉双方的利益冲突和根本矛盾 Explaining the conflicting views of each party to the hard fork
"If 2nd layer protocols become a reality, many bitcoin transactions will go through 2nd layer networks and not via miners. Miners won't receive transaction fees for them. The mining community obviously feel unhappy about this."
The malleability loophole is what's preventing change from happening. This bug inadvertently became the main obstacle preventing developers from creating new functions. Without removing this bug, 2nd layer protocols are difficult to implement. And to fix this bug, that is to implement segregated witness or other similar proposals, the support of the mining community is required.
It's only natural to defend one's interests. And supporters of 2nd layer protocols, so as to gain the confidence of users, have exaggerated the performance and features of LN and omitted to mention its weaknesses and limitations. This has further increased fears among miners.
To solve the problem, we need to get serious and talk interests. In dividing up according to interests we can reach compromise. Miners must not venture to consider throttling the way in which new features are developed. Researchers working on new features must consider protecting the interests of miners. This is the only way Bitcoin can achieve its ultimate goals.
It's not clear to what degree he endorses the content, but:
- It seems like an offer from Jihan Wu to find a compromise;
- It seems like Jihan Wu sees the hard fork as primarily a battle for transaction fees between Bitmain and Lightning Network;
- It seems like support of Bitcoin Unlimited is viewed as a way to block the development of 2nd layer protocols.
Edit: translation improved, thanks u/snruxxns
Edit: u/beijingbitcoins can't post here but since he's been in touch with Jihan and can speak on the subject, I thought it'd be worth sending on his reply when asked about the translation:
I know that Jihan really likes Lightning Network (not even as an idea only, but actively follows it), but I also don't think he's interested in finding compromise with Core at this point. Core needs to compromise with the rest of the Bitcoin community, we've all moved on and it's not fair to let Core hold everything back and demand a "compromise" that involves all take and no give from Core.
u/beijingbitcoins is in touch with Jihan on a regular basis and thought he wouldn't mind if I shared these positive things he said about Lightning Network in their chats:
We supported LN too
We really like the team at LN
And also we sincerely support them.
Originally, Bitcoin was conceived to be exchanged anonymously. However, that changed along the way as several experts and private companies …
Google Alert – bitcoin
Because the latest version of Bitcoin Unlimited is running some faulty code, in order for miners running BU to avoid mining invalid blocks, they need to manually set their max block size to a lower amount.
"The workaround, which can be inserted "live" is for miners to set their max block size to 999000. ./bitcoin-cli setminingmaxblock 999000"
I would like to keep the latest 512 MB of blocks on my SSD (using pruning?) and the rest of the blockchain on an external non-SSD hard-drive. Is there a way to do this already, or do I need to write a script to accomplish this?