SegWit2x Bitcoin Hard Fork cancellation consequences


Crypto markets were looking forward to the 16th November, awaiting the Segwit2x hard fork. Yet, the even did not take place. What are the SegWit2x Bitcoin Hard Fork cancellation consequences?

20 November, AtoZForex According to the industry analysts, the SegWit2x Bitcoin Hard Fork will not take place. In fact, some reports suggest that SegWit2x has been officially called off. Nevertheless, Coindance data suggests that 100 nodes are still running the "btc1" software as of press time.

Why was SegWit2x Bitcoin Hard Fork Cancelled?

The current situation is somewhat confusing; taking into the consideration the effort of the 2x fork was dispersed on the 8th of November. Numerous startups, community supporters, and miners have fought to expand the transaction capacity on the Bitcoin network.

97/100
Multibank Review
Visit Site
96/100
Capital.com Review
Visit Site
96/100
Markets.com Review
Visit Site

The attempt was disbanded following the email that has appeared on the project’s mailing list. However, in spite of the case, dozens of nodes still continue to operate on the btc1 software release.

The stagnation on the block appears to be caused by an error in the code that has prevented miners from producing a larger than the original block size. This would push nodes running SegWit2x into its own chain. As the growing speculation in the project’s Slack channel took place, developer Jeff Garzik has released a patch. This patch has been aiming to ease the creation of a bigger transaction block.

SegWit2x Bitcoin Hard Fork cancellation consequences

Even though the Segwit2x hard fork will not move forward by itself, today’s stagnation has appeared as a trigger of debates between supporters of the effort and those, who opposed it. One certain point of disagreement is the exact block at which the fork was supposed to take place.

Some of the past reports suggest that this block should have been 494,784. This has caused critics to claim that developer Garzik has experienced as "off-by-one" error. The critique also included that in case the Segwit2x has taken place, the nodes planning to fork would have been left in uncertainty. However, Garzik has stated that the code operates as planned in the absence of significant hashing power.

In addition, we will need to see whether some of the nodes in question will have their software changed. So, unless we will witness the bigger than original size block arrival, the nodes running the software will need to wait.

Think we missed something? Let us know in the comments section below.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.