link2352 link2353 link2354 link2355 link2356 link2357 link2358 link2359 link2360 link2361 link2362 link2363 link2364 link2365 link2366 link2367 link2368 link2369 link2370 link2371 link2372 link2373 link2374 link2375 link2376 link2377 link2378 link2379 link2380 link2381 link2382 link2383 link2384 link2385 link2386 link2387 link2388 link2389 link2390 link2391 link2392 link2393 link2394 link2395 link2396 link2397 link2398 link2399 link2400 link2401 link2402 link2403 link2404 link2405 link2406 link2407 link2408 link2409 link2410 link2411 link2412 link2413 link2414 link2415 link2416 link2417 link2418 link2419 link2420 link2421 link2422 link2423 link2424 link2425 link2426 link2427 link2428 link2429 link2430 link2431 link2432 link2433 link2434 link2435 link2436 link2437 link2438 link2439 link2440 link2441 link2442 link2443 link2444 link2445 link2446 link2447 link2448 link2449 link2450 link2451 link2452 link2453 link2454 link2455 link2456 link2457 link2458 link2459 link2460 link2461 link2462 link2463 link2464 link2465 link2466 link2467 link2468 link2469 link2470 link2471 link2472 link2473 link2474 link2475 link2476 link2477 link2478 link2479 link2480 link2481 link2482 link2483 link2484 link2485 link2486 link2487 link2488 link2489 link2490 link2491 link2492 link2493 link2494 link2495 link2496 link2497 link2498

Bitcoin Mining Pool ViaBTC Says No toSegwit

Bitcoin Mining Pool ViaBTC Says
No to
Segwit

  

Following a previous announcement by F2Pool

that they are now to signal for segregated witnesses (segwit), ViaBTC has publicly reiterated they do not support segwit for a number of reasons.  The bitcoin mining pool says:

SegWit, which is a soft fork solution for malleability, cannot solve the capacity problem… Even if SegWit after activation can slightly scale up block size with new transaction formats, it’s still far behind the demand for the development of Bitcoin network.

Bitcoin has been running at full capacity for months with numerous proposals put forward and rejected by miners. The latest ones are segwit, currently at around 32% hashrate share, and Bitcoin Unlimited which stands just under 40%. Segwit’s main aim is to send transactions off-chain and onto second layers, such as the Lightning Network or sidechains. ViaBTC says such transactions “are NOT equal to Bitcoin’s peer-to-peer on-chain transactions” before adding that “LN will also lead to big payment “centers”, and this is against Bitcoin’s initial design as a peer-to-peer payment system.”

The main criticism against segwit is its use of a 1:4 ratio, which many suspect is a political decision that will bind bitcoin’s trajectory for decades to come regardless of technical factors. ViaBTC says: “SegWit lifts the block size limit to 4MB with 1MB base and 3MB witness block. However, from the current transaction data, the average effective block size will be less than 2MB even if all transactions upgrade to SegWit. This is a tremendous waste. If we want to double the capacity of Bitcoin, we’ll need to make sure the internet bandwidth to run full nodes can support at least 8MB blocks, instead of 2MB. This will make it even tougher to increase block size in the future.” Moreover, the decision to upgrade to segwit is irreversible, according to ViaBTC. So if something goes wrong, bitcoin might be stuck because:

“On technical terms, SegWit uses a transaction format that can be spent by those who don’t upgrade their nodes, with segregation of transaction data and signature data. This means SegWit is irrevocable once it’s activated, or all unspent transactions in SegWit formats will face the risk of being stolen.” Some 70% of miners have now made a decision on whether to support segwit or Bitcoin Unlimited, a proposal which simply increases the blocksize as set by nodes and miners. It’s not clear what the other 30% are waiting for, but it will be interesting to see what they do decide once they get around to exercising their duty.

Chuck Reynolds
Contributor

Alan Zibluk Markethive Founding Member