Hot search keywords

Hot search keywords

Bitmain Is Suspected of Deliberately Preventing the Activation of Segwit on Litecoin

A dramatic overnight increase in hashrate is taking place in the Litecoin world. An insider told 8btc that the hashrate of LTC1BTC, a Litecoin pool, increased from less than 300 GH/S on April 17 to over 700 GH/S on April 18, while LTC TOP increased from 150 GH/S to 500G. With the rise of hashrate, support for Segwit dropped from 80 percent to a new low of 70 percent.

For Segwit to be fully activated on Litecoin, it needs over 75 percent support from miners during that two- week period. If it fails to maintain the 75% support threshold for 14 days, even if the initial threshold of 75 percent was met, Segwit will not be activated on Litecoin. As Litecoin is moving within 5 percent of its Segwit activation threshold, some doubt the intent behind the sudden increase is to prevent litecoin activating segwit.

Jiang Zhuoer, the owner of both LTC1BTC and LTC.TOP, claimed that he won’t upgrade to softfork SegWit, nor will primary Litecoin pools like LTC1BTC and LTC.TOP.

Bitcoin users at 8btc assumed that Bitmain should claim responsibility for the sudden hashrate increase in Litecoin.

On April 18, Bitmain announced that because of firmware bugs, the L3 +Order that should be shipped out around April 4.15-20 is delayed.

Bitmain delay announcement

But some users are not buying this, assuming that Bitmain is deliberately trying to stop Litecoin Segwit using L3’s hashrate. And on April 17, Bitmain’s mining pool Antpool’s hashrate abruptly surged by around 20 percent in a period of few hours, from 200 to nearly 500 GH/S. It could completely coincidental but insiders revealed that on April 13 about 1000 Bitmain L3 LTC mining machines were deployed at mining pools without being delivered to customers.

Litecoin’s Hashrate to Double?

On April 19, when be asked what the sudden increase was all about, Wang Chun said that was just a small spike.

bitmain hashrate

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

He also revealed what Wu Jihan has been up to.

F2Pool bitmain

 

 

 

 

 

 

If the chips are made into machines, will SegWit still be activated on Litecoin?

COMMENTS(109)

  • Doofus
    4 months ago Doofus

    A dramatic overnight increase in hashrate is taking place in Litecoin. Its hashrate increased 600G overnight on Tuesday. Its Segwit support dropped to 70%.At the same day, Bitmain’s mining pool Antpool’s hashrate abruptly surged by around 20 percent in a period of few hours, from 200 to nearly 500 GH/S. And to add more drama, Wang Chun, owner of F2Pool, said Bitmain is working on 2X current network hashrate. Is this coincidence or Bitmain just wants to stop SegWit on Litecoin?

  • gentlemand
    4 months ago gentlemand

    Quote from: Doofus on April 20, 2017, 09:39:53 AM
    Bitmain just wants to stop SegWit on Litecoin?

    Largely this. Anyone who thinks Litecoin would cheerfully sail towards Segwit without Bitcoin politics infecting it is on the naïve side. It’s nothing to do with LTC and everything to do with BTC. The more brazen they are the harder they’ll eventually fall. Everyone in LTC apart from the usual Chinese cartels wants Segwit.

  • lurker10
    4 months ago lurker10

    Why does LTC need Segwit apart from pleasing speculators?

  • OrangeP
    4 months ago OrangeP

    It’s time for the user activated soft fork. Everyone go and signal SegWit by adding -uacomment=UASF-SegWit-BIP148 as a command line parameter to your litecoin core wallet.

  • Doofus
    4 months ago Doofus

    Quote from: gentlemand on April 20, 2017, 09:56:06 AM

    Quote from: Doofus on April 20, 2017, 09:39:53 AM
    Bitmain just wants to stop SegWit on Litecoin?

    Largely this. Anyone who thinks Litecoin would cheerfully sail towards Segwit without Bitcoin politics infecting it is on the naïve side. It’s nothing to do with LTC and everything to do with BTC. The more brazen they are the harder they’ll eventually fall. Everyone in LTC apart from the usual Chinese cartels wants Segwit.
    Some btc users say about 1000 Bitmain litecoin mining machines are ready to ship out, but Bitmain deliberately delay them to stop litecoin’s segwit. you can get more details here, it’s really complicated .so much drama be going on. http://news.8btc.com/bitmain-is-suspected-of-deliberately-preventing-the-activation-of-segwit-on-litecoin

  • gentlemand
    4 months ago gentlemand

    Quote from: lurker10 on April 20, 2017, 10:10:40 AM
    Why does LTC need Segwit apart from pleasing speculators?

    Sounds like a sound enough reason. I presume it’s mainly attention by attracting all the developers who want to see their babies in action. Added functionality might mean more moneyz.

  • lurker10
    4 months ago lurker10

    Quote from: gentlemand on April 20, 2017, 10:17:41 AM

    Quote from: lurker10 on April 20, 2017, 10:10:40 AM
    Why does LTC need Segwit apart from pleasing speculators?

    Sounds like a sound enough reason. I presume it’s mainly attention by attracting all the developers who want to see their babies in action. Added functionality might mean more moneyz.

    Which functionality is enabled with Segwit that LTC is not able to provide today?I can understand somewhat the reasoning for Bitcoin, Segwit makes LN possible to scale Bitcoin. it can be argued whether larger blocks is better.Segwit makes no good sense for LTC, blocks aren’t filled and not going to be filled for years. So what functionality?Pleasing speculators sounds like pump and dump.

  • gentlemand
    4 months ago gentlemand

    Quote from: lurker10 on April 20, 2017, 10:19:28 AM
    Which functionality is enabled with Segwit that LTC is not able to provide today?I can understand somewhat the reasoning for Bitcoin, Segwit makes LN possible to scale Bitcoin. it can be argued whether larger blocks is better.Segwit makes no good sense for LTC, blocks aren’t filled and not going to be filled for years. So what functionality?

    It enables cross chain transactions so you could have fully decentralised exchanges, though I presume the other coins you’re exchanging would need it too. I believe dealing with the malleability thing also enables viable smart contracts. And even if there isn’t a capacity problem, a Lightning Network opens up possibilities with proper micropayments and maybe machine to machine stuff as well. Even a 1c fee and 2.5 minute wait is too much for some things. It would all still largely be pie in the sky stuff. I’m not convinced how many people would choose to trust a smart contract for anything beyond piffling things, and LNs might turn out to be a right mess, but at least the possibility would be out there.

  • Ayers
    4 months ago Ayers

    Quote from: OrangeP on April 20, 2017, 10:13:39 AM
    It’s time for the user activated soft fork. Everyone go and signal SegWit by adding -uacomment=UASF-SegWit-BIP148 as a command line parameter to your litecoin core wallet.

    does litecoin have UASF too? i don’t remember this for litecoin but only bitcoin, and i don’t think we can have a vote in consensus if we are just regular node, full node can’t vote as far as i know

  • lurker10
    4 months ago lurker10

    Quote from: gentlemand on April 20, 2017, 10:31:34 AM

    Quote from: lurker10 on April 20, 2017, 10:19:28 AM
    Which functionality is enabled with Segwit that LTC is not able to provide today?I can understand somewhat the reasoning for Bitcoin, Segwit makes LN possible to scale Bitcoin. it can be argued whether larger blocks is better.Segwit makes no good sense for LTC, blocks aren’t filled and not going to be filled for years. So what functionality?

    It enables cross chain transactions so you could have fully decentralised exchanges, though I presume the other coins you’re exchanging would need it too. I believe dealing with the malleability thing also enables viable smart contracts. And even if there isn’t a capacity problem, a Lightning Network opens up possibilities with proper micropayments and maybe machine to machine stuff as well. Even a 1c fee and 2.5 minute wait is too much for some things.

    None of these are requested by the market.Decentralized exchanges have existed for years. 95% of traders go to centralized websites to trade. This is a fact. Recent example is bitsquare, not really popular. Heck, most users prefer to keep coins on centralized exchanges and services, this is after numerous examples of goxxing and years of persuading them not to do it. They do not bother to download a wallet to keep private keys by themselves. It’s a joke. Nobody needs decentralized exchanges.Malleability is a small issue, most exchanges have learned to deal with it and have dealt with it for years with no large concerns. Smart contracts… LOL, they have been a marketing gimmick for Ethereum and they still haven’t got one useful case for them. Who wants them and why?Micropayments have existed for years too, tip bots is micropayments built on centralized services. Can’t say they are particularly popular or wanted by the market. Much less for LTC, nobody uses LTC.Bottom line. Segwit for LTC is a pump and dump job.

  • gentlemand
    4 months ago gentlemand

    Quote from: lurker10 on April 20, 2017, 10:42:35 AM
    None of these are requested by the market.

    Who ever said the market knows what’s good for it? It’s human nature to resist change, make a huge fuss, and when the change actually happens they quietly start using it until it becomes the greatest thing ever. If we only listened to the vested interests and followed the status quo then we’d still be living in trees.

  • lurker10
    4 months ago lurker10

    Quote from: gentlemand on April 20, 2017, 10:45:39 AM

    Quote from: lurker10 on April 20, 2017, 10:42:35 AM
    None of these are requested by the market.

    Who ever said the market knows what’s good for it? It’s human nature to resist change, make a huge fuss, and when the change actually happens they quietly start using it until it becomes the greatest thing ever.

    You develop to solve a current problem OR you create a new problem for users and develop to solve it. Either can work Which current or new problem are we talking about? This is what I am asking.

  • gentlemand
    4 months ago gentlemand

    Quote from: lurker10 on April 20, 2017, 10:48:14 AM
    You develop to solve a current problem OR you create a new problem for users and develop to solve it. Either can work Which current or new problem are we talking about? This is what I am asking.

    The main one for me would be a properly decentralised alt exchange. If I have a mountain of coin that I want to swap then I have to send Poloniex an explicit picture of me with my ID. They can also freeze me any time they like and they’ll no doubt get hacked again at some point. Then there’s site lag too or outages. If I try to do it on somewhere like here or the equivalent then I’m at risk of getting scammed or I have to dick around with escrows. Shapeshift.io is great but ultimately it’s still centralised and they could be shut down.

  • amacar2
    4 months ago amacar2

    Quote from: lurker10 on April 20, 2017, 10:10:40 AM
    Why does LTC need Segwit apart from pleasing speculators?

    If segwit will be activated on LTC it can act like test ground and if all goes well support for segwit on bitcoin may also grow significantly despite of all the politics going on.

  • lurker10
    4 months ago lurker10

    Quote from: gentlemand on April 20, 2017, 10:52:49 AM

    Quote from: lurker10 on April 20, 2017, 10:48:14 AM
    You develop to solve a current problem OR you create a new problem for users and develop to solve it. Either can work Which current or new problem are we talking about? This is what I am asking.

    The main one for me would be a properly decentralised alt exchange. If I have a mountain of coin that I want to swap then I have to send Poloniex an explicit picture of me with my ID. They can also freeze me any time they like and they’ll no doubt get hacked again at some point. Then there’s site lag too or outages. If I try to do it on somewhere like here or the equivalent then I’m at risk of getting scammed or I have to dick around with escrows. Shapeshift.io is great but ultimately it’s still centralised and they could be shut down.

    I’ve already explained very few people care about this. Poloniex allows withdrawals of up to $2000/day with no ID, don’t they? This is good for 99% of traders. What do you dislike about Bitsquare? It is decentralized. Decentralized always has more friction and Segwit can’t change this. It’s why people prefer centralized, for 95% of them centralized is not a problem.Solving scaling for BTC is a real problem today, Segwit might solve.For LTC there is no problem, it works perfect and will work for years before any scaling is necessary. Other problems simply do not exist.

  • deisik
    4 months ago deisik

    Quote from: gentlemand on April 20, 2017, 09:56:06 AM

    Quote from: Doofus on April 20, 2017, 09:39:53 AM
    Bitmain just wants to stop SegWit on Litecoin?

    Largely this. Anyone who thinks Litecoin would cheerfully sail towards Segwit without Bitcoin politics infecting it is on the naïve side. It’s nothing to do with LTC and everything to do with BTC. The more brazen they are the harder they’ll eventually fall. Everyone in LTC apart from the usual Chinese cartels wants Segwit
    I sincerely hope for that tooYou can prevent an avalanche by causing it to launch prematurely, but you can’t stop it once it gained enough power and might. If not Litecoin, then some other coin over which the Chinese mining cartel has no control will successfully implement SegWit. And after many coins start to aim at truly instant, ping-time transactions (which is what miners are most afraid of), these guys will look pretty lame and retard by hindering innovation. I remember the owners of horse stables were defaming the spread of first automobiles in the early 1900’s. Today this looks pathetic if not outright ridiculous but back then everyone and his dog were dead serious about that

  • deisik
    4 months ago deisik

    Quote from: lurker10 on April 20, 2017, 10:42:35 AM
    None of these are requested by the market.Decentralized exchanges have existed for years. 95% of traders go to centralized websites to trade. This is a fact. Recent example is bitsquare, not really popular. Heck, most users prefer to keep coins on centralized exchanges and services, this is after numerous examples of goxxing and years of persuading them not to do it. They do not bother to download a wallet to keep private keys by themselves. It’s a joke. Nobody needs decentralized exchanges

    I’m curious if you are really seriousOr just trying to confuse the issue. Decentralized exchanges are not popular due to lack of instant transactions. If truly instant transactions (with instant confirmations) kick off (like what Lightning Network is supposed to do), there will be a lot of interest in these exchanges. I’m trading through api’s at a few major exchanges (e.g. Bitfinex), and I know from the first-hand experience that the exchanges are adding artificial delays before placing or cancelling your orders since they earn by front-running the orders of their clients (this is a Wild, Wild West in this regard). With decentralized exchanges, which are an integral part of the network (blockchain), such delays make no sense, so they should in practice work even faster than regular, centralized exchanges

  • Xester
    4 months ago Xester

    Quote from: Doofus on April 20, 2017, 09:39:53 AM
    A dramatic overnight increase in hashrate is taking place in Litecoin. Its hashrate increased 600G overnight on Tuesday. Its Segwit support dropped to 70%.At the same day, Bitmain’s mining pool Antpool’s hashrate abruptly surged by around 20 percent in a period of few hours, from 200 to nearly 500 GH/S. And to add more drama, Wang Chun, owner of F2Pool, said Bitmain is working on 2X current network hashrate. Is this coincidence or Bitmain just wants to stop SegWit on Litecoin?

    The bitmains attempt to have a monopoly on bitcoin mining  by siding with bitcoin unlimited was a failure and that is why they will do in their power to stop segwit fro dominating in the litecoin mining. But with regards to litecoins I will side with bitmain since litecon doesnt need segwit to function well, though segwit may be good for bitcoin but litecoin doesnt need it.

  • franky1
    4 months ago franky1

    Quote from: Xester on April 20, 2017, 11:43:31 AM

    Quote from: Doofus on April 20, 2017, 09:39:53 AM
    A dramatic overnight increase in hashrate is taking place in Litecoin. Its hashrate increased 600G overnight on Tuesday. Its Segwit support dropped to 70%.At the same day, Bitmain’s mining pool Antpool’s hashrate abruptly surged by around 20 percent in a period of few hours, from 200 to nearly 500 GH/S. And to add more drama, Wang Chun, owner of F2Pool, said Bitmain is working on 2X current network hashrate. Is this coincidence or Bitmain just wants to stop SegWit on Litecoin?

    The bitmains attempt to have a monopoly on bitcoin mining  by siding with bitcoin unlimited was a failure and that is why they will do in their power to stop segwit fro dominating in the litecoin mining. But with regards to litecoins I will side with bitmain since litecon doesnt need segwit to function well, though segwit may be good for bitcoin but litecoin doesnt need it.

    lol bitmain does not have 69% control of mining.stop reading reddit. it has become worse than fox newsall the “bomb china” “jihan controls everything”.. do you even sit back and spend 5 minutes thinking rationally about the scripts you read

  • deisik
    4 months ago deisik

    Quote from: Xester on April 20, 2017, 11:43:31 AM

    Quote from: Doofus on April 20, 2017, 09:39:53 AM
    A dramatic overnight increase in hashrate is taking place in Litecoin. Its hashrate increased 600G overnight on Tuesday. Its Segwit support dropped to 70%.At the same day, Bitmain’s mining pool Antpool’s hashrate abruptly surged by around 20 percent in a period of few hours, from 200 to nearly 500 GH/S. And to add more drama, Wang Chun, owner of F2Pool, said Bitmain is working on 2X current network hashrate. Is this coincidence or Bitmain just wants to stop SegWit on Litecoin?

    The bitmains attempt to have a monopoly on bitcoin mining  by siding with bitcoin unlimited was a failure and that is why they will do in their power to stop segwit fro dominating in the litecoin mining. But with regards to litecoins I will side with bitmain since litecon doesnt need segwit to function well, though segwit may be good for bitcoin but litecoin doesnt need it

    You could just as well say that Litecoin itself is not neededLook, even just the rumor surfacing about activating SegWit in Litecoin caused the price of this coin almost triple within a week, and how can you then proceed to say that SegWit is not needed? Besides, while SegWit itself may in fact not provide any advantages to Litecoin, but as far as I know, it may still open doors to instant payments via Lightning Network, and that would be really beneficial to any coin giving it a competitive edge over the rest of the pack. Other than that, testing SegWit in Litecoin would be better than testing it in Bitcoin, especially if things go massively awry during the “test phase”

  • BitcoinAllBot
    4 months ago BitcoinAllBot

    Here is the link to the original comment thread. Or you can comment here to start a discussion. Author: 8btccom

  • nopara73
    4 months ago nopara73

    This is great news! For a moment I thought they won’t test UASF out for us. Thank you Jihan!

    • shadymess
      4 months ago shadymess

      Seems like you have some kind of perverse UASF fetish.

      • nopara73
        4 months ago nopara73

        Yes, I’m not completely on board with this miner overlord concept.

        • BitttBurger
          4 months ago BitttBurger

          You act like this wasn’t the way Bitcoin was made to work since day 1 or something.

          • CaptainOuzo
            4 months ago CaptainOuzo

            What we have here, with a single miner able to veto SegWit activation in two separate cryptocurrencies by virtue of having a near monopoly over ASIC manufacture (and “testing” their hardware instead of delivering it as promised) is, I’m pretty sure, not the way Bitcoin (or litecoin) was intended to work.

            What makes mesh networks powerful is that they route around problem nodes. We can extend that analogy to the social/political side of things as well. End users may elect to route around Jihan.

          • nynjawitay
            4 months ago nynjawitay

            Are they mining Litecoin with ASICs now?

          • CaptainOuzo
            4 months ago CaptainOuzo

            Yup. Bitmain has produced the Antminer L3+, sold it to a bunch of people, delayed delivery, and is rumored to now be using them themselves. The rumors are somewhat substantiated, since insider sources say he’s got something like 1000 of them running, and his hash rate went way up very suddenly.

            The reason for delayed shipping is supposedly a firmware problem. If so, it’s funny how he’s got all these L3+ miners mining litecoin for him while being simultaneously unable to delivery any of said units to paying customers due to technical issues. Riiiight.

            Rumors

          • Watada
            4 months ago Watada

            Bitcoin was designed to upgraded and fixed if needed.

          • BitttBurger
            4 months ago BitttBurger

            Cool!

            Back in the day, everyone here would’ve responded to that with: “Then go and make your own coin! This is how bitcoin was designed”.

            But I’m all for improving systems that need to be improved.

            Shoot. I was here five years ago telling everyone that the miners shouldn’t have so much power. And everybody told me to kick rocks if I didn’t like it.

            In fact I dare say it was some core developers that told me to kick rocks if I didn’t like it. It’s nice to see everyone finally coming around though…

          • Hitchslappy
            4 months ago Hitchslappy

            What part of decentralised don’t you understand?

          • BitttBurger
            4 months ago BitttBurger

            Are you asking me or Satoshi?

          • Hitchslappy
            4 months ago Hitchslappy

            What kind of a question is that?

            Feel free to invoke your lord and saviour – I don’t think he would be best pleased with the state of the current mining monopoly.

          • BitttBurger
            4 months ago BitttBurger

            He’s the one that designed the system. Not me. So why were you asking me?

            Also: it’s incredible that he’s referred to with such sarcastic disdain around here. And you guys wonder why people are freaked out, and dividing.

          • Hitchslappy
            4 months ago Hitchslappy

            He is, you’re right, but he’s not here now so Bitcoin belongs to, and exists to serve, us – everyone. That’s why I asked you.

            Also: if you can’t tell the difference between a disdain for appealing​ to authority, and a disdain for an individual, that’s not my problem. It does, however, mean I can’t be bothered with this conversation, because you make it difficult to believe you’re not just trolling.

            Also: I’m not “you guys”, nor am I uncertain as to why there’s so much strife in the community today.

          • BitttBurger
            4 months ago BitttBurger

            It’s the whole “Lord and Savior” snark. You guys are really alienating a lot of people when you make comments like that.

            Actually agree with you 100% that we need to fix the problem. But the Satoshi sarcasm probably should be avoided. If only because it doesn’t make sense in the first place.

            You’re not criticizing people for holding Satoshi in high esteem. You’re doing something completely different. You’re trying to point out that he gave us a system that can evolve.

            So the former really isn’t necessary to prove the latter. You are just going to cause a lot of people to think you are anti-Satoshi, which automatically would make you anti-Bitcoin in their minds.

        • shadymess
          4 months ago shadymess

          Let’s just pretend for a moment that there are only total 3 entities who are participants in the bitcoin economy. Could you tell me exactly how you would measure economic majority here? Would you see how much percent of total revenue between those 3 entities are supporting UASF? If exchange A has more revenue than exchange B and C combined will A have veto rights if most users are in favor of UASF? In this example let’s pretend that all usual users are for UASF

          • _High_Energy
            4 months ago _High_Energy

            Check the price after the UASF? Was that to complicated for you?

          • Explodicle
            4 months ago Explodicle

            Not complicated enough! We need fork synthetics ahead of time too.

          • shadymess
            4 months ago shadymess

            So you want to risk everything with UASF first then check the price?

      • satoshicoin
        4 months ago satoshicoin

        There’s nothing perverse about trying to poke the economic majority into action.

      • Sugartits31
        4 months ago Sugartits31

        Everyone needs a hobby.

  • hgmichna
    4 months ago hgmichna

    Why do some miners go to such lengths to prevent SegWit against the majority?

    It looks like AsicBoost or something similar. Otherwise it just would not make sense.

    • xyu337
      4 months ago xyu337

      AiscBoost is not that important.

      Jihan is a very forward looking businessman, you can’t be shortsighted yet become so successful at bitcoin mining.

      The reason for Jihan’s fondness of large blocks lie in the very nature of mining businesses– it is naturally centralizing. A mining node runs in a dominating mining pool is much more efficient than a node of same configuration but runs remotely, because of network latency.

      If PoW algorithm does not change, large mining pools will kill off smaller ones on a long run, larger blocks will speed up this process, because it’s slower to propagate larger blocks on network.

      Jihan’s advandatge in asic making is temporary, where will be bigger players come into this market, producing similar or better asics. Jihan is very worried about this and he wants to kill off other mines right now, and get total domination. In his view, losing the edge is equal to losing every thing.

      Jihan is not against SW or LN, he just want big blocks asap, but if LN came out and works, the need for big blocks will die out, this is the reason behind.

      • LitwinP
        4 months ago LitwinP

        Looks like it.

      • StrictlyOffTheRecord
        4 months ago StrictlyOffTheRecord

        The answer is, as always, follow the money.

      • jaydoors
        4 months ago jaydoors

        No, this has been possible forever. Mining has always been optimally efficient in one big pool – but of course that would be a threat to bitcoin and it’s price, so miners and pools have always naturally sorted themselves out to avoid this level of centralization. It does not explain Bitmain’s opposition to SW.

        • xyu337
          4 months ago xyu337

          If miners wanted to avoid centralization we would be still mining with PCs. Miners always wanted power and domination.

          Bitmain want large blocks to kill other miners. If sw and LN is successful, it will kill the need for large blocks , hence they oppose sw.

          If there is a solution of sw+big blocks, they will support it.

      • Carlscrazyidea
        4 months ago Carlscrazyidea

        I am an American living in the Philippines and I watched a Chinese business owner who took a loss for 6 months just to kill his competition.

      • Lite_Coin_Guy
        4 months ago Lite_Coin_Guy

        PBoC might be part of the problem too. LN will deliever more privacy features and they hate it.

        • xyu337
          4 months ago xyu337

          I don’t think so. I lived in China for more than 30 years, experience tells me if pboc want ban some thing they will just ban it out right. They are not so sophisticated to play tricks like this.

      • CaptainOuzo
        4 months ago CaptainOuzo

        If Jihan or anyone else gets total domination, I will be leaving the bitcoin space and won’t be the only one.

        Jihan isn’t particularly forward thinking if he’s doing things that undermine the entire point of bitcoin.

        • xyu337
          4 months ago xyu337

          Being king of a not so successful coin is better than being nobody.

          If bitcoin is centralized, it won’t just die, you see, there are plenty of people investing in “governed coins” like eth or dash.

      • earonesty
        4 months ago earonesty

        Segwit is large blocks. Jihan prevents them. You sir are a lying shil.

        • xyu337
          4 months ago xyu337

          Not large enough. And likely stop further effort to make larger blocks. I don’t know nothing for certain, if you have a better guess than mine please share it.

          • earonesty
            4 months ago earonesty

            Segwit enables future larger increases by specifically addressing quadradic hashing attacks. Without segwit, a hard fork to larger block sizes will render bitcoin vulnerable to DOS attacks.

            The only reason Jihan is blocking segwit is to keep block small, fees high and asicboost enabled…. this is making him rich. Why would he vote to stop the money coming in?

        • stravant
          4 months ago stravant

          So provide a better answer?

          Given how successful he is, I refuse to the believe than the answer is that “He’s an idiot”. Clearly there is some well thought out net benefit to himself to take the actions that he is. It’s not like he’s just blocking for shits and giggles.

      • JustSomeBadAdvice
        4 months ago JustSomeBadAdvice

        The reason for Jihan’s fondness of large blocks lie in the very nature of mining businesses– it is naturally centralizing.

        No, because bigger blocks mean more usability and adoption, which means higher price.

        A lot of people are fond of larger blocks in one way or another, and a lot of people are highly opposed to them.

        The fundamental question causing the rifts is simply how to balance the negatives of:

        High node operational costs
        High transaction fees
        Lower Bitcoin prices (through lower adoption, leading to the rise of serious altcoin contenders)

        Lightning won’t solve this problem; Lightning users will eventually find that if they participate as a peering node without 100% uptime, they’ll lose coins they didn’t even spend. Horror stories will spread and people will stop peering unless they are a hub. Hubs will centralize due to risk and overhead costs; If they get big enough as a percentage of btc blocksize, someone will eventually perform a tx/s bottleneck attack defaulting against either the clients en-masse or the hubs en-masse. Lightning is cool and has potential for rapid trustless settlement in certain conditions, but it is no scaling magic bullet, especially without continual blocksize increases as adoption/price grow.

    • Abell68
      4 months ago Abell68

      Cus usa vs china

    • zomgitsduke
      4 months ago zomgitsduke

      They want to prevent it because they know it will turbocharge the price of litecoin. From there, it’s only a matter of time before every other crypto tries for it.

      When you want control, and you get a dumb shortsighted idea in your head, you’ll stop at nothing to achieve it.

    • Symphonic_Rainboom
      4 months ago Symphonic_Rainboom

      If you are the majority, you aren’t preventing it against the majority.

    • zcashcowboy
      4 months ago zcashcowboy

      In Bitcoin it is a fair portion of the mining community for reasons I can at least understand. In Litecoin it’s simply spite from that retard Jihan. He can truly fuck his mother.

  • _jstanley
    4 months ago _jstanley

    Antpool’s hashrate abruptly surged by around 20 percent in a period of few hours, from 200 to nearly 500 GH/S

    Eh? That’s 150%.

    • arcrad
      4 months ago arcrad

      Perhaps they mean as a percent of total network hashrate?

    • Leaky_gland
      4 months ago Leaky_gland

      https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/litecoin-hashrate.html#3m

      Roughly 20% shown here

      • _jstanley
        4 months ago _jstanley

        So they meant to say:

        Antpool’s proportion of the total hashrate abruptly surged by around 20%.

        Because Antpool’s hashrate “abruptly surged” by around 150%.

        • roadtrain4eg
          4 months ago roadtrain4eg

          Even better! When speaking about proportion it’s usually percentage points, not %. =)

  • autotldr
    4 months ago autotldr

    This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 70%. (I’m a bot)

    As Litecoin is moving within 5 percent of its Segwit activation threshold, some doubt the intent behind the sudden increase is to prevent litecoin activating segwit.

    Jiang Zhuoer, the owner of both LTC1BTC and LTC.TOP, claimed that he won’t upgrade to softfork SegWit, nor will primary Litecoin pools like LTC1BTC and LTC.TOP. Bitcoin users at 8btc assumed that Bitmain should claim responsibility for the sudden hashrate increase in Litecoin.

    Some users are not buying this, assuming that Bitmain is deliberately trying to stop Litecoin Segwit using L3’s hashrate.

    Extended Summary | FAQ | Theory | Feedback | Top keywords: Litecoin#1Segwit#2April#3percent#4hashrate#5

  • Patn3m
    4 months ago Patn3m

    Love the alien graphics _

  • Djulius
    4 months ago Djulius

    Tenemos show para rato.

  • wachtwoord33
    4 months ago wachtwoord33

    “suspected”

    • gotamd
      4 months ago gotamd

      The sky is suspected of being blue, too.

  • andonevris
    4 months ago andonevris

    Jihad’s getting a LOT of bad press

    • jay45678
      4 months ago jay45678

      And even more money!

    • Gristledorf
      4 months ago Gristledorf

      I’ll be excited when Chinese authorities start pressing his balls in a vice.

  • Sukarti
    4 months ago Sukarti

    Well obviously he deliberately blocked it. This recent ploy is just buying time so he can permanently block segwit by getting his next generation of miners online on his customers dime.

    UASF should happen sooner than later.

  • Hitchslappy
    4 months ago Hitchslappy

    God I hate this company so much…

    • fuyuasha
      4 months ago fuyuasha

      You should complain in the strongest terms to the CEO

    • ctrlbreak
      4 months ago ctrlbreak

      I know I’ll never order anything from them again. I hope Jihan goes to prison for the fraud he’s currently suspected of committing. Against customers who have purchased and paid for scrypt miners he’s not currently delivering.

      • earonesty
        4 months ago earonesty

        Yep, I’m done with antminer

  • sirpask
    4 months ago sirpask

    A mi me han pillao con el carrito del helao… y no digo mas, que este foro es de Bitcoin ….

    Si antes no me gustaba el puto chino… ahora mucho menos.

  • CryptoInvestor
    4 months ago CryptoInvestor

    The information in this article is wrong. It doesn’t need to be at 75% for 14 days – just 75% of the blocks mined in that period. So it can drop below 70%, as long as 6048 segwit blocks are mined over the period it doesn’t matter.

  • xeroc
    4 months ago xeroc

    … and there is nothing you can do about it because, well neither bitcoin nor litecoin have a governance system that gives the power to the people, but it gives it to the greedy miners…

    • Explodicle
      4 months ago Explodicle

      Sure they do, those people can buy whichever coins or forks they want.

  • webitcoiners
    4 months ago webitcoiners

    It’s not “suspected”. It’s the fact. Everyone knows that.

    Also, Jihan and his mates will tell endless lies to impede SegWit, such as “I like SW, but….”

    They want to maintain the centralization status in mining rigs.

    • ctrlbreak
      4 months ago ctrlbreak

      They are now attempting to get Charlie Lee to China for a ‘Litecoin roundtable’ meeting. He hasn’t learned yet he must kowtow to the mining cartel. Fuck EVERYTHING about those guys.

      • webitcoiners
        4 months ago webitcoiners

        ‘Litecoin roundtable’

        So they want to replace LTC devs with ‘Litecoin roundtable’, even after they purchased Ltc unlimited domains?

        • ctrlbreak
          4 months ago ctrlbreak

          Yup. It’s absolutely infuriating. They now appear to be holding activation at about 72%. This is not how things should be and every goddamn sane person in the community knows it.

  • freetrade
    4 months ago freetrade

    Submissions that are mostly about some other cryptocurrency belong elsewhere. For example, /r/CryptoCurrency is a good place to discuss all cryptocurrencies.

  • Halperwire
    4 months ago Halperwire

    I think the mentality needs to be changed with respect to miners and nodes. Miners are paid to perform a service. Why are they given the power to dictate all rules on the network? They will obviously have a conflict of interest at some point. Also as we are now seeing, companies which produce asics have a monopoly with production and mining which gives them an unfair market advantage. Nodes do not have this unfair production attribute and users are not rewarded for running them hence no conflict of interests.

    With this being said I think UASF or UAHF are the way bitcoin will need to process future upgrades and let mining hash power follow if they wish to get paid.

  • SDCrypto
    4 months ago SDCrypto

    You say that as if it’s a bad thing.

    • ctrlbreak
      4 months ago ctrlbreak

      It absolutely is. Especially when a completely overwhelming amount of the community wants it to activate.

      He’s also defrauding hardware customers who have already paid for scrypt mining hardware that he is apparently delaying shipment of and using himself to prevent SegWit from activating.

    • ronnnumber
      4 months ago ronnnumber

      Not really up on this debate, but it looks like unfair practices that, unchecked, would ultimately lead to the monopoly of a single miner would result in a network no one wants, including said miner.

  • BitcoinMichi
    4 months ago BitcoinMichi

    We all can agree that Jihan needs to be decentralized.

    DECENTRALIZE Jihan!

  • CAPTIVE_AMIGA
    4 months ago CAPTIVE_AMIGA

    That God burns Jihan Wu

  • ctrlbreak
    4 months ago ctrlbreak

    Oh look! A few new pools with familiar sounding names have decided that they only now have an interest in Litecoin! Amazing coincidence!

    https://imgur.com/a/DoFmg

  • 2ndEntropy
    4 months ago 2ndEntropy

    It is their hashpower they are allowed to use it as they wish that is the point of proof of work based blockchains.

  • knight222
    4 months ago knight222

    Suspected? They openly admitting it.

    • chris101sb
      4 months ago chris101sb

      They prevent progress. They are the enemy of the people.

      • knight222
        4 months ago knight222

        Assuming SW is progress. Which is not.

      • FaceDeer
        4 months ago FaceDeer

        I guess more bad things have been done in the name of progress than any other. I myself have been guilty of this. When I was a teenager, I stole a car and drove it out into the desert and set it on fire. When the police showed up, I just shrugged and said, “Hey, progress.” Boy, did I have a lot to learn.

        — Jack Handey, Deep Thoughts

      • highintensitycanada
        4 months ago highintensitycanada

        They stop bad ideas, is the progress?

  • moleccc
    4 months ago moleccc

    “suspected”?!? “deliberately”?!? As if it was a crime of some sort…

    In other news, voters are suspected of deliberately voting for the opposition!

  • Shmullus_Zimmerman
    4 months ago Shmullus_Zimmerman

    I hate the verbal games on this sub sometimes.

    I’m a supporter of SegWit. It provides throughput increase, some protocol fixes, etc. IT will provide the ability for L2 solutions to increase the velocity of money using Bitcoin.

    But I’m sorry, its an activation process that is voluntary. In my opinion the threshold was set too high, but its a voluntary process.

    The title of this thread would be akin to saying “A bunch of Trump voters are suspected of deliberately preventing Hillary’s election.” As if those Trump voters had otherwise an obligation to vote for Hillary.

  • B4kSAj
    4 months ago B4kSAj

    wow, my tweet to Wang Chun is quoted in this article, im famous 🙂

  • stravant
    4 months ago stravant

    I don’t understand what you’re getting at with this post.

    What do you mean “deliberately”? What, as opposed to accidentally?

    He’s well within his rights to point his hash power at a pool that doesn’t support. That’s the whole point of having the voting in the first place: People can vote against it.

  • JordyCA
    4 months ago JordyCA

    Suspected? Lol

  • CryptoResearcher88
    4 months ago CryptoResearcher88

    Lol, he is definitely doing that.

  • 800pm
    4 months ago 800pm

    Nah man, just accidentally added all that hash to the network.
    Slipped and plugged in all those L3 miners.

Please sign in first