Re:Bitcoin – Potential Network Disruption on July 31st
by shp0ngle on Thursday July 13, 2017 @06:43AM
(#14760182)
Segwit2x is sort-of-OK for me frankly.
I don't like the part where they rush to implement everything as fast as possible. And from apart (and I don't follow Segwit2x that much), the changeset seems too big from bitcoind.
And they say openly they plan hard-fork, not this UASF where the S is not really that S and is almost guaranteed to result in a split and confusion.
They signal Segwit in a compatible way, so it's OK. Just the timeline is crazy.
I don't like the part where they rush to implement everything as fast as possible. And from apart (and I don't follow Segwit2x that much), the changeset seems too big from bitcoind.
And they say openly they plan hard-fork, not this UASF where the S is not really that S and is almost guaranteed to result in a split and confusion.
They signal Segwit in a compatible way, so it's OK. Just the timeline is crazy.