SegWit2x rejects non-SegWit blocks. So with the majority it has it can't cause a fork in the chain (until the HF 3 months later), and neither will BIP148.
So with the rather safe assumption SegWit2X reaches its threshold in the next few days, the only expected fork in the chain by August will be Bitcoin Cash (Bitcoin ABC/BU/big blocks) on one chain and Segwit on the other.
However, the twist is that Blockstream gets Segwit first, while the 2x block size increase is 3 months away. During that time I expect Blockstream to be screaming to everyone that will listen to try to stop the block size increase from actually happening. They will likely not be successful but it will sadly continue to be a contentious issue until at least the end of October.
Many people want larger blocks, we want on-chain transactions scaled way up. I'm yet to hear a good argument against large blocks. Storage is dirt cheap. Connections between servers are generally at least 1Gbps.
https://luke.dashjr.org/programs/kycpoll/answers.php
> Connections between servers are generally at least 1Gbps
So much for peer to peer electronic cash, then...
That's what happens when you're in a bubble. Your echo-chamber reflects the same ideas back to you.
And don't get me wrong, I'm not against Segwit at all, as long as the blocks are increased. So if someone wants to take their transactions off the chain, go right ahead.
> So much for peer to peer electronic cash, then...
Bitcoin is not peer to peer in the traditional sense, the money goes through the network of servers (nodes). It's called peer-to-peer, because there's no central bank, nor any authority that can stop the money flow.
SegWit2X, which is about to activate is a compromise that gives both Segwit (improving off-chain) and a slight increase.
There is however uncertainty among big blockers about the increase as it is three months later, so it could still fail resulting in SegWit only.
The Bitcoin Cash (ABC) fork is addressing this by forking non-SegWit and bigger blocks, though its support is rather uncertain at this point.
Is that 2x increase enough to appease the big blockers? As in, does it settle the discussion or this will happen again in 12 months?
Just to clarify a bit more, this is the original Bitcoin client that Satoshi and Hal Finney created, and which has been the canonical client from the beginning. Bitcoin Core develops this client, and they invented SegWit, so it definitely supports it.
I've spent some time reading around, and here is my guess as to what the site is describing:
Behind the scenes, achow101 (https://github.com/achow101) is running four Bitcoin clients:
* `Bitcoin Core` is running the client from https://bitcoin.org/en/ (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin) (https://bitcoincore.org). This client does not support Segregated Witness, and it does not support larger block sizes (so blocks larger than 1 MB are ignored).
* `UASF (BIP 148)` is running the client from https://bitcoinuasf.org (https://github.com/UASF/bitcoin). This client supports Segregated Witness. This client does not support larger block sizes (so blocks larger than 1 MB are ignored).
* `btc1 (segwit2x)` is running the client from https://segwit2x.github.io (https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin). This client supports Segregated Witness, as well as changing the block size to 2 MB (blocks larger than 2 MB are ignored).
* `Bitcoin ABC (UAHF)` is running the client from https://www.bitcoinabc.org (https://github.com/Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-abc). It supports blocks of <8 MB in size (initially defaulting to 2 MB). This client does not support Segregated Witness.
As I understand things, right now there are two events which have hard-coded dates:
* At midnight UTC on August 1, the `UASF (BIP 148)` client will fork, in that it will start ignoring new mined blocks which do not support Segregated Witness.
* At 12:20 UTC on August 1, the `Bitcoin ABC (UAHF)` client might fork. I say might because the fork will be triggered by someone mining a larger-than-1-MB block (the "trigger block") on or after 12:20 UTC. (1 MB is the largest block that the `Bitcoin Core` and `UASF (BIP 148)` clients will recognize). At that point, `Bitcoin ABC (UAHF)` nodes will treat the "trigger block" as valid, and the fork has occurred.
Also, there is another event which may take place, depending on various conditions:
* If—sometime soon (before midnight UTC on August 1), and for a long-enough period—enough people indicate support, then the `btc1 (segwit2x)` node will fork with the `UASF (BIP 148)` node (in that both nodes will start supporting Segregated Witness). Sometime after that fork, the `btc1 (segwit2x)` node will fork off into its own fork, which will have support for 2 MB blocks.
And of course, there is one event which will happen at some point:
* `Bitcoin Core` will release a new version, adding support for Segregated Witness, or for a different block size, or both. `Bitcoin Core` nodes, when they upgrade, will then join one of the forks.
Anyway, I _think_ that's right, but this has gotten really complicated, and I'm trying to skip over the specific details, and the rationale (since, as tempay mentioned, that's been discussed recently).
If I misunderstood something, please let me know!