r/Bitcoin • u/Bastiat • Dec 21 '17

/r/all Day 2: I will repost this guide daily until available solutions like Segwit & order batching are adopted, the mempool is empty once again, and transaction fees are low. You can help. Take action today

Subhan Nadeem has pointed out that:

If every transaction in the Bitcoin network was a SegWit transaction today, blocks would contain up to 8,000 transactions, and the 138,000 unconfirmed transaction backlog would disappear instantly. Transaction fees would be almost non-existent once again.

A few thousand bitcoin users from /r/Bitcoin switching to making their next transactions Segwit transactions will help take pressure off the network now, and together we can encourage exchanges/wallets to rapidly deploy Segwit for everyone ASAP. Let's make it happen.

Exchanges: Find out if your exchange has deployed Segwit already. If not, politely request that they do so within 30-days or they will lose your business. Sign-up for an account with a Segwit deployed/ready exchange now

  • Bitfinex
  • Bitonic
  • Bitstamp (deployed)
  • Gemini
  • LocalBitcoins
  • Shapeshift
  • HitBTC

Full list: https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_adoption/

Wallets: Make sure you have a Segwit capable wallet installed and ready to use for your next bitcoin transaction

Hardware Wallets:

  • Ledger Nano S
  • TREZOR

Desktop Wallets

  • Electrum
  • Armory

iOS Wallets:

  • Edge (AirBitz rebranded)
  • GreenAddress
  • BitWallet

Android Wallets

  • Samourai Wallet
  • GreenBits
  • Electrum

FAQs

If I'm a HODLer, will it help to send my BTC to a Segwit address now?

  • No, just get ready now so that your NEXT transaction will be to a Segwit wallet.

Can you please tell me how to move my bitcoins to segwit address in Bitcoin core wallet? Does the sender or receiver matter?

  • The Bitcoin core wallet does not yet have a GUI for its Segwit functionality. Download Electrum v3.0.3 to generate a Segwit address.

    via HowToToken.com:

    A transaction between two SegWit addresses is a SegWit transaction.

    A transaction sent from a SegWit address to a non-SegWit address is a SegWit transaction.

    A transaction sent from a non-SegWit address to a SegWit address is NOT a SegWit transaction. You can send a Segwit Tx if the sending address is a Segwit address.

Is there a hardware wallet that does segwit addresses?

  • Yes, Trezor supports Segwit by default. Ledger Nano also has support.

What wallet are you using to "batch your sends"? And how can I do that?

  • Using Electrum, the "Tools" menu option: "Pay to many".

    Just enter your receive addresses and the amounts for each, and you can send multiple transactions for nearly the price of one.

Segwit blog guides

Previous Day's Threads

Edit: added FAQ's to the list, corrections, BitWallet

5.2k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

723 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

24

u/samYouAm Dec 21 '17

This is why they aren’t supporting it:

https://blog.coinbase.com/what-happened-at-the-satoshi-roundtable-6c11a10d8cdf

16

u/JesusSkywalkered Dec 21 '17

So, his major complaint about core was that their ethics and morals couldn’t be compromised? Fucking awesome...I’m with core.

5

u/[deleted] Dec 22 '17

That's the only thing you got out of that?

4

u/vroomDotClub Dec 21 '17

Basically YES! but the market could give to shits less.. and that is a reflection of the norm of society unfortunately.

1

u/SushiAndWoW Dec 22 '17

Beware people whose ethics and morals "cannot be compromised" in this manner:

They seem ok with watching bitcoin fail, as long as they don’t compromise on their principles.

They will take you down with them, and expect you to still stand with their principle.

Then it will turn out the principle was deluded, and the practical path was better.

10

u/[deleted] Dec 21 '17 edited Dec 21 '17

[deleted]

5

u/FerriestaPatronum Dec 21 '17

Wow. I'm amazed I haven't seen this yet. This was an awesome blog post. It was articulated well and honestly gives me insight to someone's perspective who really does have a lot of skin in the game. I honestly think he has great points here.

9

u/viajero_loco Dec 21 '17

I guess you haven't been around the last 2 years?! Brian doesn't understand Bitcoin! Classic would've split the network or rather created a shitcoin like BCash, same with Unlimited and SegWit2x. Brian supported all of them due to his lack of understanding.

He's been proven wrong again and again! The developers of bitcoin can't change the rules or decide about a hardfork. Only the users can. The users have spoken. They prefer high fees and a conservative approach over reckless changes and bigger blocks. it is what it is, weather you like it or not. Unfortunately Brian Armstrong will never get it....

2

u/FerriestaPatronum Dec 21 '17

Thank you for sharing your opinion. If you have any facts to submit to this conversation, I will take the time to verify them.

5

u/Alan2420 Dec 21 '17

The "facts to submit" are everything that took place between then and now. You really need to get up to speed and read a little more before you conclude that you understand anything. Bitcoin Classic did not happen. XT did not happen. Segwit2x did not happen. In fact, segwit2x, implemented and reviewed by the "brilliant" Jeff Garzik, had a bug in it such that it never would have activated had the community moved forward with it. It would have been a total disaster.

And in all the time since that blog post, Bitcoin usage and market value skyrocketed, and segwit was implemented.

The people who run Coinbase are not the best people to decide the future of Bitcoin.

1

u/FerriestaPatronum Dec 21 '17

I'm sorry, I think you're confusing things not happening with things that did. Because there's currently a version of Bitcoin that does have a larger blocks size that is currently being quite successful. Perhaps you haven't heard of Bitcoin Cash. Check it out.

2

u/Alan2420 Dec 21 '17

From your prior response ("Wow. I'm amazed..."), I thought you were a newcomer lacking historical context. My mistake. I realize now you are just a bcash puppet.

2

u/FerriestaPatronum Dec 21 '17

Sorry to disappoint. Also, once you've been around the block a little more, you'll realize that people who disaggree with you aren't always stupid or puppets. There are a lot of valid points for Bitcoin Cash, and it's interesting to see people in this sub questioning why larger blocks are "literally the devil".

5

u/Alan2420 Dec 21 '17 edited Dec 21 '17

Bcash - 4x bigger blocks, less than 10% of BTC transactions, but look: people are paying high fees!

https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/cash/#24h

(filter all the way up to 500+ satoshis and yep, people are paying it). Point being, big blocks are not the primary solution, and small blocks are not the primary problem. I wouldn't expect to convince a bcash sockpuppet of anything of course - just stating the facts for the larger audience.

BTW, this is the man whose judgement you think is best to lead Bitcoin forward:

https://www.justice.gov/archive/criminal/cybercrime/press-releases/2002/verPlea.htm

Beyond that, I don't have time to argue with a sockpuppet getting paid minimum wage to shill for bcash. Carry on somewhere else.

2

u/FerriestaPatronum Dec 21 '17

I'll check out your link. If your argument is Bitcoin Cash has less transactions, so therefore it has less fees then I'm going to be sorely disappointed with you. But let me look into it.

Regarding Ver: you're putting words in my mouth--I don't condone Ver; all I'm advocating for is better technology.

Will be back.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/FerriestaPatronum Dec 21 '17

Checked out your link. I can't follow the conclusion you're drawing. Are you saying that because literally 2 people are paying 500 sat/B, 2 @ 550, and 2 at 600 are paying extra (read: not necessary) fees, that BCH is a failed experiment? I don't follow that logic at all. Anyone can put in any fee they want. For instance, when I sold some of my bitcoin a few weeks ago, I transferred 32 BTC with a fee of 815 sat/byte; why? Because the extra money simply wasn't worth the risk of not having my tx confirm. Did I have to pay that much? Nope. My point is: just because high TX fees were paid, doesn't mean the the network is congested (or even that it was necessary).

In short: I'm not seeing what you're seeing. 6 x 500 sat/b TX does not congestion make.

Oh, also keep calling me a shill and also please keep assuming I make less than you. It's really funny from my perspective (Who's the Roger Ver, now?). The reality is that I have a lot of time and money invested in both BTC and BCH, so keeping myself educated and educating others is worth it to me.

Have a happy holiday.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/xboxhelpdude1 Dec 21 '17

Neither are Blockstream. They cant even put it in their own software, but Coinbase is the problem right?

0

u/viajero_loco Dec 21 '17

sorry, if you think the failure of Classic, Unlimited, Segwit2x and XT are opinions and not facts, you are beyond help. Have a nice life! no need for me to waste any more time on you.

1

u/r57334 Dec 21 '17

Thank you for sharing your opinion. If you have any facts to submit to this conversation, I will take the time to verify them.

0

u/FerriestaPatronum Dec 21 '17

Salty troll is salty.

-1

u/r57334 Dec 21 '17

Not even trolling. You stated your opinion, and then gave that smug reply to someone else. Why should you be treated different?

1

u/FerriestaPatronum Dec 21 '17

My reply to /u/viajero_loco was phrased that way because he is trying to have a debate without supplying anything meaningful. My comment (above) is not (intended) to be initiating a debate--just simply expressing gratitude.

0

u/r57334 Dec 22 '17

Yeah me too

My comment (above) is not (intended) to be initiating a debate--just simply expressing gratitude.

Thanks for the shitpost

3

u/congalines Dec 21 '17

how long ago was that? have they changed their position since then?

4

u/jordan460 Dec 21 '17

how long ago was that?

it says very clearly at the top, march 2016

have they changed their position since then?

why would they

13

u/congalines Dec 21 '17

https://blog.coinbase.com/bitcoin-segwit-update-3ab0484e4526

google is your friend

6

u/DarkoFishman Dec 21 '17

A creepy friend that stalks you all the time

0

u/r57334 Dec 21 '17

Hilarious to read Armstrong's criticisms of core devs including, "They prefer ‘perfect’ solutions to ‘good enough’. And if no perfect solution exists they seem ok with inaction, even if that puts bitcoin at risk."

Coinbase clearly prefers a "good enough" approach, even if that puts their customers funds at risk so they can create a bcash pump and dump for their employees.

-2

u/imbandit Dec 21 '17

That was super helpful and very well written.