SegWit2x will come in November. But what does this mean for the further development of the Bitcoin community? Will the New York Agreement hold or will there be another Hard Fork? BTC-ECHO will illuminate the political situation behind the 2x activation for you.
Crypto currencies, especially the Bitcoin, are currently experiencing a surge of recognition all over the world like never before. At the same time, this is also provoking critics from all sides who have repeatedly described the Bitcoin over the last few weeks as either a hoax or a bubble threatening to burst sooner or later. As to the Trotze the Bitcoin exceeded yesterday for the first time the marks of 5.000 US Dollar and lies in the meantime clearly over it, tendency rising. And the scaling debate, which has been smouldering for years, is hovering over all this.
In the midst of the current peak phase of the crypto currency, the solution to the Bitcoin scaling problem agreed upon in New York City in May now seems to soon become reality.
But what would that mean for the Bitcoin evolution?
Let’s first take a look back: Since the first days of Bitcoin, the scaling of the Bitcoin has been discussed. The reason for this is the Bitcoin evolution algorithm, which on the one hand limits the block size to 1MB, but on the other hand also ensures that a new block is added every 10 minutes. Since a transaction is about 250 bytes in size on average, there is a limit of about 7 transactions that the Bitcoin block chain can process per second – too little for the demands of the increased number of users.
In the course of this year, the scaling discussion has finally escalated into a real dispute. Part of the community supported the SegWit software update, which, among other improvements, can primarily relieve the blockchain by activating the Lightning Network. Instead, opponents of the innovation advocated a simple enlargement of the individual blocks to 2, 4 or even 8 MB in order to be able to process transactions faster.
The dispute reached its temporary climax in May, when the various interest groups were brought together to find a compromise in the general interest with the New York Agreement: SegWit2x. The solution found was in principle a combination of SegWit and an increase in block size, with the intention of first activating SegWit in the middle of the year and then increasing the block size to 2 MB towards the end of the year, 144*90 blocks later to be precise. (A more detailed technical analysis can be found here.
Hard Fork: Bitcoin evolution! Bitcoin Gold?
As we know today, this compromise has not been accepted by the entire Bitcoin evolution network, which is why a hard fork occurred on August 1st in the run-up to the SegWit activation, resulting in a spin-off of the new crypto currency Bitcoin Cash. A major reason for the separation was the rejection of SegWit by part of the community, which instead wanted to significantly increase the block size and targeted 8 MB instead of 2 MB.
While Bitcoin Cash has now stabilised at a certain level as its own new crypto currency, SegWit was also successfully activated on the Bitcoin blockchain at the end of August. But now the story could repeat itself. As agreed in New York, the 2x part of SegWit2x is on the agenda in November, a compromise originally designed to prevent the first hard fork in the Bitcoin network. Instead, another Bitcoin hard fork could be the result.
For example, the spin-off of Bitcoin Gold from part of the Bitcoin network has been announced for October 25, which seems to have already taken on relatively concrete forms. Bitcoin Holders, for example, are to be rewarded proportionately with Bitcoin Gold, as was the case with the first Hard Fork. You can find out exactly what Bitcoin Gold is all about in our video.
2x or NO2x?
However, the Bitcoin Gold initiators are only a group of those who reject the 2x part of SegWit. In fact, a large part of the community is critical of this new step. Nevertheless, there are good arguments in favor of a 2x extension.
For the supporters of 2x, increasing the block size is a decisive argument. Many of them see the Bitcoin primarily as a means of payment and thus weight the exchange function of money over its other functions. In order to fulfil this function sufficiently, faster and cheaper transactions are needed than is currently the case. According to this group, an improvement in the transaction conditions would benefit the entire network, as the Bitcoin adaptation would then continue to rise and the Bitcoi