And my question — my question is if you have ever been in doubt about Bitcoin or future of Bitcoin? If thats the case the surprise of the first initiative is already lost, or not? Post as a guest Name. Log in or sign up in seconds. And the problem is that they may lose and losing on a decision that says Bitcoin is protected speech is much worse than the status quo which is kind of gray. I try not to make predictions in Bitcoin exceeding 30, 40 days into the future because the best way to be correct is to make a prediction because the future is very harsh when it comes to predictions. For some reason my ad-blocker hostsblock is blocking the fitvidsjs domain.
This was videos security measure, designed to prevent potential DoS attacks scaling hackers creating blocks youtube huge, or even infinite size videos broadcasting them across the network in order to youtube it. I was running a bitcoin that was intelligent between its transaction calculations but what happens in the aftermath of this capacity grudge? Patent law bitcoin slow down Bitcoin companies but it cannot slow down Bitcoin because Bitcoin not a company. SegWit looks like the favorite in the race but Bitcoin Unlimited has managed to take over scaling times in the past. For example, submissions like "Buying BTC" or "Selling my computer for bitcoins" do not belong here.
A good exchange since Bitcointalk backup if offline - Bitcoin Foundation Italia - Blog: Hero Member Offline Posts: Hero Member Offline Activity: Is there someone who actionally knows how its gonna happen? Last thing i understood segwit will automaticly split-off bitcoin cash.
But this can't be tru right? Bitcoin cash cant suddenly left behind as some softfork looks it also needs to be hard forked. So we have 3 coins very soon, today or tommorow? And also the segwit 2x next month?
If thats the case the surprise of the first initiative is already lost, or not? Uncertainty over bitcoin's future has caused the price to decline in recent weeks.
Bitcoin fell about 12 percent on Sunday morning, due to these concerns. Several members of the community have rallied around a solution called BIP This would involve a "user-activated soft fork", where bitcoin users would force the blockchain to split by rejecting any block of bitcoins that did not signal support for SegWit.
BIP was due to come into force on August 1 and if the majority of developers didn't agree on the proposal, the blockchain could split. One in which SegWit is active and one in which it is not," explained Charles Hayter, chief executive and founder of digital currency comparison website CryptoCompare, told CNBC via email.
This may be one of the main factors behind the explosive support behind BIP BIP 91 only requires 80 percent support, rather than 95 percent, to be locked in and would introduce the Segregated Witness system. Each block, in turn, is a cryptographically sealed collection of all transactions which have happened in the network over the past ten minutes.
Every new block is permanently added to the end of the Blockchain so that every user can always check that each specific transaction has indeed taken place. Back in , Nakamoto introduced a block size limit of 1mb, meaning that blocks over the size of 1 megabyte would be automatically rejected by the network as invalid.
This was a security measure, designed to prevent potential DoS attacks by hackers creating blocks of huge, or even infinite size and broadcasting them across the network in order to paralyze it.
That decision, however, has had an adverse long-term effect on the transaction capacity of the network. Each transaction consists of important data: That data takes some space, which is quite insignificant when talking about a single transaction. But it adds up when there are hundreds of transactions taking place every minute. The current size limit of one megabyte per block can realistically support three to seven Bitcoin transactions per second. The problem here is that for the network of the current proportions that is already not enough.
The increase in average transaction times and fees. Basically, Bitcoin is gradually turning into a functional analog of wire transfers. On a regular day, the Bitcoin network is still able to operate normally. Many users have been reporting wait times of several hours or even days on their transactions. This creates a market of transaction fees: In the early days, the commissions were measured in mere fractions of a cent.
Today, however, if you want to send the coins fast, you will have to pay a fee worth several cents or even dollars. Both the transaction times and the fee sizes have been gradually increasing for the past several months, making Bitcoin look more like a functional counterpart to bank transfers. That is an existential threat to the cryptocurrency: There have been many proposed ways to solve it, none of which have been realized as of today.
The scaling problem has been under scrutiny for quite a while. They were introduced in by the Bitcoin core developers Jeff Garzik and Gavin Andresen respectively.
Both were aimed at increasing the block size limit and both were hard-fork solutions, meaning that if they got implemented, older versions of Bitcoin software would become incompatible with the new network.
The difference between them was that BIP was about making the block size limit adjustable by the decision of miners, whereas BIP was a straightforward one-time increase from 1mb to 8mb. In regards to which proposal should be implemented, there were heated debates throughout the Bitcoin community for the most part of Still, it proved fruitless.
History seems to repeat itself and today there are again two different solutions competing for approval by the community: Bitcoin Unlimited and SegWit. Bitcoin Unlimited aims to remove the block size limit altogether, thereby allowing the miners to reach a consensus on their own.
SegWit offers a moderate increase of the block size to up to 4 megabytes moving some non-critical data out of the blocks.