Author: Chris Stewart 2017-04-14 17:36:34
Published on: 2017-04-14T17:36:34+00:00
The email conversation revolves around the activation of SegWit on the Bitcoin network. One person is criticizing the 148 proposal for SegWit activation without suggesting a specific alternative, while another person disagrees and claims that alternatives are not necessary to criticize a technical proposal. They also express concern about pushing through the activation of SegWit in an unsafe manner. The discussion moves on to the possibility of orphaning and forking caused by 148, but the other person believes that this wouldn't matter in the long term, as non-SegWit miners would quickly give up their orphans once they realize the benefits of non-mutable TX IDs. They suggest rejecting only blocks that do not signal SegWit but contain SegWit transactions, rather than rejecting all pre-SegWit transaction blocks. A proposal is made for Core to develop a solid/reliable date/height-based activation to allow miners to create SegWit block candidates and having nodes fully verify them. While the Praxeology Guy agrees that 148 is not ideal, he believes it to be the most practical and reliable method available at present. He maintains that it is time to activate SegWit as it has undergone enough testing.
Updated on: 2023-06-12T00:12:11.630773+00:00