In the fight over the activation of Segregated Witness it’s clear that many people don't understand the true reason why the actors who are against it are doing what they are doing.
They are filibustering.
In the US Senate (for example) a filibuster is used to block the opposition from passing a motion. It means standing up for hours in an extemporised address, using the rules of the house to prevent other members from carrying on with legitimate business.
Senator Rand Paul’s recent filibuster is a good example. He spoke for almost thirteen hours straight.
Rand Paul pulls plug on nearly 13-hour filibuster_Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul staged the longest talking filibuster in recent Senate memory from Wednesday into early…_www.politico.com
I ran a poll on Twitter, exploring what the inevitable outcome of Bitcoin Core adding new functions to the reference client would be, given that Segregated Witness (SegWit) would be included in all future releases of their client. I reasoned that if SegWit is in all future reference clients, and it is set to signal by virtue of you running it, eventually, since Core has the best developers and is doing all the improvements and extensions and the majority of users are running it, SegWit will activate by default.
Logically, if this is right, then all we have to do is wait till everyone is several versions along with the Reference Client, and SegWit will activate. It doesn't matter how long it takes, in fact, it’s better if it takes longer, because it gives companies more time to roll out software for this fantastic, game changing, genius addition to the Bitcoin protocol.
There is a small problem with this conclusion. It’s wrong. No matter how many people are running the Reference Client, it makes no difference to SegWit activation.
After reading this, I went to the documentation. I then went through our bitcoin.conf to find the line where you can turn SegWit signalling on or off. You would expect to find it it there, like everything else to control the Reference Client. There is no parameter there. Wait, what?!
And it gets worse. And this brings us to the title of this piece.
It appears that if SegWit is not activated by the 15th of November 2017 it will become “ineligible” for activation. Which I take to mean it dies. I could be wrong of course, just as I was wrong in assuming that SegWit would inevitably be activated by attrition.
From the Bitcoin Core Site on the latest Reference Client
Obviously, the people who do not want SegWit to activate, were aware of this vulnerability, and understood that if they filibustered activation for long enough, SegWit would simply die. They could then argue that there was no community support for SegWit, and so therefore, an 8 megabyte block size should be immediately imposed, since SegWit has been rejected.
Anyone who wants Bitcoin to remain decentralized understands that raising the block size parameter is a bad idea
The Bitcoin Gauntlet_The Facts_medium.com
the people pushing for a block size increase are doing so for several reasons:
- They want a centralized, tame Bitcoin
- They do not want to re-write their software
- They want to gain control of all future development by displacing Core
- They want Bitcoin to “fail” so their own coin can supplant it
All of these are reasonable assumptions. They may be wrong. What do you think?
One thing we can say for sure is this. Bitcoin Core are extremely professional, and absolutely ethical. If I have this right, and SegWit can expire, they have deliberately created an activation system that kills their extraordinary improvement, that very few really understand, because other people who are less skilled than them and with motivations that do not align with Bitcoin do not want it. They are accommodating everyone, to their own detriment. What they have done is worked very hard, without compensation, and given this innovation free of charge, and whilst they could have imposed it and forced activation slowly over time, chose instead to have total respect for everyone, even Bitcoin’s enemies, by using this time limited signalling system.
These men are unselfish, very patient and clearly have the best interests of Bitcoin and it’s ethos at heart. They also do not want to exclude anyone’s ideas or needs. They offer their solutions for the constituency to reject or accept as they wish, without any pressure of any kind. They are manifestly not dictators nor bad guys.
As for the users who want SegWit and it’s incredible benefits
They are at the mercy of the people who can either decide to signal SegWit by setting a special bit in their software or not. If all Bitcoin user’s incentives were aligned, SegWit would already be activated, but they are not, because there are people who do not like Bitcoin for political reasons, business reasons, petty and infantile personal reasons, reasons of inertia and some who are just computer illiterate.
This business at the protocol level is very complicated, and just as you must trust the Linux Kernel developers not to be evil, people who are not qualified shouldn't attempt to go where the curly brace monsters are. Influence in techincal matters should be exerted only by people who are peers. A used car salesman doesn't go to Mercedes asking, no, demanding that they make engineering changes. By all means you can ask, if your approach is correct, but you must be ready to be told you are wrong, and not double down, but accept it and be grateful you have a kind teacher.
I have no way of knowing whether or not SegWit will activate. Judging by what I understand on a synopsis level, it’s an absolute no brainer. Bitcoin Core have bent over backwards to accommodate everyone, and no one will be harmed by it activating. The incredible increase in throughput in SegWit will change everything. And that is an understatement.
All countdown sites numbering the SegWit signalling services should include a deadline of the 15th of November, because after that, SegWit will become ineligible for activation.
If you have fingernails say goodbye to them.
T-Bone, medium, fries, house red↴
14rtDb46NQJkuqFJuHqZG3o6uAWwGbV58z