Right now we have:
- Core lying about spam.
- Knots lying about the success of BIP-110.
- Giacomo lying about Start9 despite not having even used it.
- All of Core's funding revolving around a psyop ...
Can you please explain why you think Knots is lying and how it's different from how it's different from what happened with the Segwit UASF threat below?
google/gemma-4-26b-a4b-qat
To answer your question clearly: SegWit (the soft fork) absolutely activated and is currently the foundation of the Bitcoin network.
However, the UASF (the threat/mechanism) did not "activate" as a piece of code; rather, it "activated" as a social movement that successfully forced the upgrade through.
Here is the detailed timeline of exactly what happened and how the conflict was resolved.
1. The Tension (Late 2016 – Early 2017)
For months, the community was in a stalemate. Developers had written the SegWit code, but miners (who actually add blocks to the chain) were refusing to implement it. The "Big Blockers" had a massive amount of mining power, meaning they could technically ignore SegWit indefinitely without the network noticing.
2. The "Nuclear Option": The UASF (Summer 2017)
The "Big Blockers" realized that the users (node operators) were moving toward SegWit. To counter this, the "Big Blockers" proposed Bitcoin Cash (BCH)—a new version of Bitcoin with much larger blocks.
The users responded with the UASF (User Activated Soft Fork). This was not a technical proposal for a new feature; it was a declaration of war.
The users essentially said: "If you (miners) do not activate SegWit by a certain date, we will implement the SegWit rules ourselves by updating our software. Any block you mine that doesn't include SegWit will be rejected by our computers as invalid."
3. The Turning Point: The "Check"
This created a "game theory" crisis for miners:
If miners didn't use SegWit: Their blocks would be rejected by the users' nodes. Their mining hardware would become useless because they would be mining on a "ghost chain" that no one uses.
If miners used SegWit: They would be doing what they didn't want to do, but they would remain profitable.
The UASF acted as a deadline. It stripped the miners of their monopoly on protocol changes. It proved that the users control the rules, even if the miners control the hardware.
4. The Actual Activation (August 24, 2017)
The standoff ended in a victory for the "Small Blockers" (the SegWit supporters).
The Date: On August 24, 2017, the Bitcoin network reached "activation depth." This is the point where, mathematically, it became impossible for a miner to mine a block without SegWit without being immediately rejected by the majority of the network nodes.
The Result: SegWit went live. Transactions became more efficient, malleability was fixed, and the door was opened for the Lightning Network.
Summary of what "Actually Happened"
The SegWit Code - A technical upgrade - Remained "dormant" because miners wouldn't use it.
The UASF - A social/governance threat - This is what actually "triggered" the change. It forced the miners' hand.
The Bitcoin Cash Split- A hard fork - Occurred shortly after (August 2017) because the "Big Blockers" lost the fight in the main Bitcoin network.
In short: SegWit the technology was waiting. The UASF the threat was the spark that forced the miners to finally press the button and turn SegWit on.
google/gemma-4-26b-a4b-qat
To answer your question clearly: SegWit (the soft fork) absolutely activated and is currently the foundation of the Bitcoin network.
However, the UASF (the threat/mechanism) did not "activate" as a piece of code; rather, it "activated" as a social movement that successfully forced the upgrade through.
Here is the detailed timeline of exactly what happened and how the conflict was resolved.
1. The Tension (Late 2016 – Early 2017)
For months, the community was in a stalemate. Developers had written the SegWit code, but miners (who actually add blocks to the chain) were refusing to implement it. The "Big Blockers" had a massive amount of mining power, meaning they could technically ignore SegWit indefinitely without the network noticing.
2. The "Nuclear Option": The UASF (Summer 2017)
The "Big Blockers" realized that the users (node operators) were moving toward SegWit. To counter this, the "Big Blockers" proposed Bitcoin Cash (BCH)—a new version of Bitcoin with much larger blocks.
The users responded with the UASF (User Activated Soft Fork). This was not a technical proposal for a new feature; it was a declaration of war.
The users essentially said: "If you (miners) do not activate SegWit by a certain date, we will implement the SegWit rules ourselves by updating our software. Any block you mine that doesn't include SegWit will be rejected by our computers as invalid."
3. The Turning Point: The "Check"
This created a "game theory" crisis for miners:
If miners didn't use SegWit: Their blocks would be rejected by the users' nodes. Their mining hardware would become useless because they would be mining on a "ghost chain" that no one uses.
If miners used SegWit: They would be doing what they didn't want to do, but they would remain profitable.
The UASF acted as a deadline. It stripped the miners of their monopoly on protocol changes. It proved that the users control the rules, even if the miners control the hardware.
4. The Actual Activation (August 24, 2017)
The standoff ended in a victory for the "Small Blockers" (the SegWit supporters).
The Date: On August 24, 2017, the Bitcoin network reached "activation depth." This is the point where, mathematically, it became impossible for a miner to mine a block without SegWit without being immediately rejected by the majority of the network nodes.
The Result: SegWit went live. Transactions became more efficient, malleability was fixed, and the door was opened for the Lightning Network.
Summary of what "Actually Happened"
The SegWit Code - A technical upgrade - Remained "dormant" because miners wouldn't use it.
The UASF - A social/governance threat - This is what actually "triggered" the change. It forced the miners' hand.
The Bitcoin Cash Split- A hard fork - Occurred shortly after (August 2017) because the "Big Blockers" lost the fight in the main Bitcoin network.
In short: SegWit the technology was waiting. The UASF the threat was the spark that forced the miners to finally press the button and turn SegWit on.
1👍1🤔1