All signs point to a smooth activation of SegWit. Miners overwhelmingly indicating intention to activate it via SegWit2X, UASF nodes steadily increasing. Huge majority of remaining nodes SegWit capable. Remaining nodes protected by SegWit’s backwards compatibility.

I've been getting a lot worried and pessimistic comments on my posts lately but I have to believe that those are from very misinformed people or intentional trolls.

To see miner support go to the bottom of https://coin.dance/blocks and note that over 99% of blocks are either signalling for segwit already or have indicated they are on board with SegWit2X, meaning they will shortly begin to signal for segwit and reject blocks that don't signal for segwit. So it doesn't look like there will be any chain split that lasts more than one block given that overwhelming support, and those are totally normal splits that get reorganized away all the time.

At https://uasf.saltylemon.org you will see that UASF nodes are steadily on the increase. These nodes will not diverge from SegWit2X miners if those miners simply follow through on their statements.

At https://bitnodes.21.co/dashboard/ you can see that well over 80% of nodes are running Bitcoin 0.13 or higher which means that they will also activate SegWit natively when the rest of the network activates it.

And of course 100% of nodes are going to continue to function fine because SegWit does not break legacy clients.

Oh, and also transactions are all clearing quickly at very reasonable fees.

Network uptime remains at 100% with no interruptions.

It's almost as if sensationalist reports and alarmism get a disproportionately high share of voice.

submitted by /u/logical
[link] [comments]
Bitcoin

We’re getting to the point where a the cost of not having segwit is lower than the risk of doing a UASF

Yesterday we had fee estimation algorithms showing 430 sat/byte (!!!!)

That's a huge price for block space. I remember being impressed when it got to 50 sat/b. This is something else entirely. And there's no sign of stopping, fee rates could easily reach 500 sat/b, then 1000 sat/b then 2000 sat/b and who knows where else.

Bitcoin is a swiss bank account in your pocket, allowing you to store value away from the prying eyes and hands of any possible enemy. That is well worth paying for, so make no mistake that fee rates won't climb higher.


You have to realize that businesses are hurt most by this. Because they receive many small coin payments and must create large-sized transaction to combine them all up into one large coin.

These businesses are rapidly being presented with a choice, they can:

  1. Go out of business

  2. Enforce a user-activated-soft-fork for segwit block size increase

We can talk about the details: whether we want to UASF segwit or kill asicboost or both at the same time. Whether we want to do it by BIP148 or BIP149 or some other method. These can be figured out but by far the most important thing is agreeing to actually do it. UASF works when a large part of the economic majority says they will reject blocks that don't follow the rules they want. As long as enough of the economy agrees to do it together, and doesn't back down, the miners have to fall in line.

We know that UASF worked on other altcoins. Litecoiners were ready to do a UASF and it resulted in them getting segwit. UASF also delivered the goods for Vertcoin


Some of the businesses most affected by high fees have already nailed their colours to the mast of UASF.

Bitrefill is a site that sells mobile phone credit for bitcoin worldwide, they claim to do 15000 transactions per months and they are willing, able and eager for UASF.

Abra is a global money transfer site that uses bitcoin, and they too support UASF.

BitKong is a bitcoin casino who supports UASF.

Bitrated is a bitcoin consumer protection site that allows bitcoin commerce with escrow, and it fully supports UASF.

My fellow bitcoiners, ask not what bitcoin can do for you, ask how many pro-UASF dank memes you can post every 24 hours.

edit: yes the title is screwed up, should be "higher". got it wrong in my excitement and you know what i mean

submitted by /u/belcher_
[link] [comments]
Bitcoin