WSwslh·Nov 25, 2017
There is a test in the BTC1 repository to play with different blockchain scenarios here: https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/blob/segwit2x/qa/rpc-tests/b...
In Segwit2x Bugs Explainedbtc1
bitcoin
C++2017–2017
btc1 / bitcoin · Archived
bitcoin
btc1 project bitcoin implementation
13Distinct people
14Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
325GitHub stars
What to know before exploring
What it is
btc1 project bitcoin implementation
GitHub
Where it is used
No documented product use was verified in the last source check.
What people are saying
No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.
No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.
Also in these discussions
- bitcoin/bitcoin · linked in 2 of the same discussions
Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.
This week on Hacker News
Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 3:56:07 PM UTC.
No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.
Mentions over time
HN mentions by week14 dated mentions
Observed mentions: 2017-06-20 00:32:28 UTC to 2017-11-25 16:41:20 UTC. Weeks start Monday, UTC.
Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.
View mention counts and date ranges
| Period | Start (UTC) | End (exclusive, UTC) | Mentions | Submissions | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 19 | 2017-06-19 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-06-26 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Jun 26 | 2017-06-26 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-07-03 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jul 3 | 2017-07-03 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-07-10 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jul 10 | 2017-07-10 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-07-17 00:00:00 UTC | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| Jul 17 | 2017-07-17 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-07-24 00:00:00 UTC | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Jul 24 | 2017-07-24 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-07-31 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Jul 31 | 2017-07-31 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-08-07 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Aug 7 | 2017-08-07 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-08-14 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Aug 14 | 2017-08-14 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-08-21 00:00:00 UTC | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Aug 21 | 2017-08-21 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-08-28 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Aug 28 | 2017-08-28 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-09-04 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 4 | 2017-09-04 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-09-11 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 11 | 2017-09-11 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-09-18 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 18 | 2017-09-18 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-09-25 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 25 | 2017-09-25 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-10-02 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Oct 2 | 2017-10-02 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-10-09 00:00:00 UTC | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Oct 9 | 2017-10-09 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-10-16 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Oct 16 | 2017-10-16 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-10-23 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Oct 23 | 2017-10-23 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-10-30 00:00:00 UTC | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Oct 30 | 2017-10-30 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-11-06 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nov 6 | 2017-11-06 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-11-13 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nov 13 | 2017-11-13 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-11-20 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nov 20 | 2017-11-20 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-11-27 00:00:00 UTC | 2 | 0 | 2 |
What Hacker News says
14 sourcesFor a change of this magnitude you would expect some tests that actually verify these assumptions? Or am I missing something in this PR? [1]
[1] https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/pull/11/files
In Segwit2x Bugs ExplainedI did not think Core propaganda would have made its way to HN :-(
Segwit2x would not degrade security. People think it would because they assume larger blocks would reduce the absolute number of full nodes, but historically this is not what we have seen: https://twitter.com/zorinaq/status/918133693964865538
The "untested" claim is false. The BTC1 reference implementation has unit tests, and is currently run by at least ~700 nodes: https://coin.dance/nodes
The fact the BTC1 repo is currently based on Core 0.14.2 (released June 18, 2017) instead of Core 0.15.0.1 (released Sep 19, 2017) is not really much of a problem.
It has been explained numerous time why we do not want replay protection: to remove the need to upgrade millions of SPV wallets.
BTC1 nodes do not pretend to be Core nodes to "confuse" the network. They did it (https://github.
Read the rest
com/btc1/bitcoin/commit/28ebbdb1f4ab632a1500b...) in response to Bitcoin Core's hostile attempt to disconnect segwit2x nodes (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10982) which would have made the network less reliable between now and the HF, by intentionally disconnecting nodes just because they are not "liked".
This is important to note.
He is the main and, it can be argued, the only developer of the bitcoin segwit2x attack/upgrade (depending on which propaganda do you prefer).
https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/commits/segwit2x
In Bitcoin Pioneer Says New Coin to Work on Multiple BlockchainsThe main thesis of the article is outdated and now wrong - as someone pointed in its comments: https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/commit/a3c41256984bf11d95a56...
All the rest might be interesting to someone completely new to the subject - but it also contains many mistakes. One is confusing git forks of the source code with the blockchain forks. Another is his claim that "everyone agrees that the capacity of the Blockchain needs to be increased" - bitcoin needs capacity increases - but it does not need to be on-chain - there are proposals like Lightning Network that would do that off-chain.
In The Bitcoin Apocalypse Is Coming in Mid-NovemberOpt-in replay protection was merged in a few days ago. https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/commit/a3c41256984bf11d95a56...
In any case, if you believe Bitcoin's main value proposition is as a great store of value, then replay protection simply doesn't matter that much. You wouldn't be transacting enough to matter.
In The Bitcoin Apocalypse Is Coming in Mid-NovemberHe's the lead developer of the btc1 Bitcoin Reference client. Here are his recent commits: https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/tree/segwit2x
In Bitcoin Upgrade in November 2017 at Block 494,784He's currently the lead developer of the btc1 reference client: https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/tree/segwit2x
Here are his recent commits: https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/commits/segwit2x
In Bitcoin Upgrade in November 2017 at Block 494,784the third fork is https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin which combines segwit and large blocks, afaik they all support segwit - they just differ in how they reach consensus. I don't think anyone is pushing for no change since transaction fees and latency what they are it's pretty clear something has to change.
In Update for customers with Bitcoin stored on CoinbaseThis web site looks like a good dashboard! Although, I'm not up on the technical details of everything going on here, so some of it is confusing to me, because there's not as much background as I'd like.
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 size
Read the rest
s (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!
In btc1 there is not any replay protection right now, as the timeline didn't allow for development of this. It is an important feature request though, maybe follow along here:
https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/issues/34
In Bitcoin Is Having a Civil War as It Enters a Critical Month> Segwit2x is still yet to have a working ...
https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin
> ... and tested implementation.
It will go online on the testnet tomorrow
In Bitcoin – Potential Network Disruption on July 31st> Bitcoin also only has one client with one development team
Nope. See below.
https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/bitcoinclassic
https://github.com/BitcoinUnlimited/BitcoinUnlimited
https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/tree/segwit2x
In Move Over, Bitcoin. Ether Is the Digital Currency of the Moment