Tag Archives: block size debate

A new proposal for the Bitcoin block size debate: UASF

Amid the Bitcoin block size debate, an anomymous developer recently talked about a project related to a new solution called UASF or user-activated soft fork.

Many in the community are skeptical about this proposal, but there are enough circumstantial evidences to back it up, and a new movement is growing in the hopes of pushing through the change that miners are now being accused of blocking.

Usually, miners are tasked with pushing through a similar fix. But some in the bitcoin community are calling for a different (and older) method of making a change to bitcoin based on support of the known “economic majority”, instead of miner support.

Coinkite founder Rodolfo Novak, an advocate for this new born movement, explained that it aims at correcting perceived inequities that used to dominate the scaling debate.

“Miners trying to centralize bitcoin is an unacceptable thing. It goes against what bitcoin is supposed to be. This UASF is really like saying, ‘No, we control bitcoin, not you.'”

However, UASF-related support seems to be increasing.

Even if the code is not safe yet, a few users are now supporting it with their nodes.

Node support for this change has grown to 4.8%, or by about six times.

“On a technical level, signaling it that way does absolutely nothing, it does however help the case on a social level and prevents users from running an outdated version of the code when enforcing starts,” developer Damian Mee commented.

Due to UASF system, it might be necessary to have an explicit support from the “economic majority,” or exchanges, wallets, and other bitcoin players.

This support is so far at about 6% since the BIP was put out on March 12th.

However, a sizable percentage of bitcoin nodes are running Bitcoin Core, and SegWit, which Mee thinks is a good indicator that the so-called “economic majority” supports SegWit, and the UASF version.

The code is backwards-compatible, so the 80% of nodes that are now ready for SegWit.

That said, we have to tell that the code implementation hasn’t already fully tested or reviewed.

The original activation for SegWit was put at October 1st, 2017, but recently it was moved to August 1st.

Updates: UASF proposal has been changed. Click here to read more about it.

Open your free digital wallet here to store your cryptocurrencies in a safe place.

Amelia Tomasicchio
bitcoin block size

Bitcoin block size: UASF updates its proposal

A controversial Bitcoin block size proposal has been upgraded.

UASF, in fact, is a new idea proposed by a pseudonymous contributor called Shaolingfry.

She/he wants to solve the bitcoin block size debate with a user activated soft fork (UASF), a possible method arount the actual deadlock over the Segregated Witness (Segwit) solution.

Right now, the need for a majority consensus in order to make a decision means  that any mining pool with enough hashing power has the veto power over any proposal; this might be the reason why SegWit is tardy to arrive.

Conversely, UASF wants to bypass the veto power and put the decision only into the hands of bitcoin’s users.

After a first general UASF proposal, Shaolinfry suggested a change – BIP148 – in order to moving the power out of the miners’ decision and give it to the “economic majority”.

Gregory Maxwell and other bitcoin developers refused this proposal because it could undermine the bitcoin blockchain stability.

“We should use the least disruptive mechanisms available and the BIP148 proposal does not meet that test,” he wrote

For this reason, Shaolinfry announced he/she is working on a redraft of the proposal to address some of the concerns suggested by Maxwell and other developers.

Shaolinfry published an announcement post saying that the reason for this changes is related to technical criticisms of how UASF would upgrade the network.

“BIP 148 is certainly not what a normal UASF would or should look like. While support for BIP 148 is surprisingly high, there are definitely important players who support UASF in general but do not like BIP148 approach.”

This revised proposal suggests the use of BIP8, but this concerns how soft forks are implemented.

Segwit and BIP8

Right now, if the 95% hashrate support for the Segregated Witness option is not reached by November 15th, the proposal will be discarded by default.

Anyway, the technical changes made in a proposal (BIP8) would be automatically locked in at the end of the time period, even if they could be adopted sooner.

Shaolinfry’s idea is that after the November 15th, a UASF SegWit proposal will be edited according to the BIP8 changes.

This means that the bitcoin community would have 1 year to prepare the upgrading of a UASF, removing the possible destabilizing effect of a short-term.

“I believe this approach would satisfy the more measured approach expected for bitcoin and does not have the issues Maxwell brought up about BIP148.”

 

Open your free digital wallet here to store your cryptocurrencies in a safe place.

Amelia Tomasicchio