"Bitcoin Jesus" Says Another Network Split Is Coming In November

Tyler Durden's picture

Since its current world-beating bull run began in late 2015, bitcoin has surmounted a series of pitfalls that were supposed to kill the market.  The list is remarkably long. The DAO hack. The PBOC crackdown. The ICO craze. The SEC’s rejection in March of two proposed bitcoin ETFs. And, most recently, the network split that spawned bitcoin cash. All were supposed to burst the roaring valuation bubble, yet in almost every example, a temporary pullback was followed by another leg higher.

Considering that it was the culmination of three years of acrimonious infighting among bitcoin core devs and the miners, the August split – particularly the market reaction – was surprisingly cavalier. Now, the faith of bitcoin investors is being tested once again as key players in the market are warning that another network split could create a third version of bitcoin as soon as November.

According to Bloomberg, bitcoin evangelist Roger Ver, better known as “Bitcoin Jesus,” said that some of the miners who supported the controversial software upgrade that triggered the split in August have withdrawn their support just as bitcoin core developers are preparing to implement the second step of the update. This could create a rift between what Ver calls “legacy bitcoin” and “the SegWit2x version of bitcoin.”

“There’s probably going to be another split between bitcoin legacy and SegWit2X version of bitcoin but that just gives me more coins that I can sell for the Bitcoin Cash version,” Ver said in an interview on Bloomberg Television at a conference organized by Bitkan in Hong Kong.

Ver was an early adopter of bitcoin. Since the split, he’s been a vocal supporter of bitcoin cash. Ver, who was born in the US but renounced his citizenship and is currently a citizen of Saint Kitts and Nevis, has also been denied visas to travel back to the states in the past. Of course, Ver has been badly wrong before. Back in the summer of 2013, he traveled to Tokyo to visit Mt. Gox shortly after customers started having issues withdrawing their funds, which the exchange attributed to unspecified "liquidity problems." Ver attested that Mt Gox CEO Mark Karpeles had shown him bank statements proving that the exchange's troubles were a result of being temporarily shut out of the traditional banking system, and that customers' assets were safe. Of course, this excuse was merely a ruse for a massive hack that resulted in the theft of tens of thousands of customer bitcoins.

To be sure, Ver isn’t alone in warning about another potential split. Samson Mow, chief strategy officer at blockchain startup Blockstream, also says a rift is likely as more miners and developers reject the pending upgrade to SegWit2X.

“Many developers, users, miners, and businesses have already stated they do not agree with the pointless 2x fork, so we’ll likely end up with three chains,” said Samson Mow, chief strategy officer at Blockstream, which has close associations with Core developers. “Long-term, only the main bitcoin chain which has the support of users and developers can survive.”

Bloomberg summarizes the circumstances that could lead to another split below:

“If another tear occurs in November, it would create a third version of the cryptocurrency and potentially further scatter capital and resources as three offshoots of bitcoin emerge.

 

SegWit2x refers to a compromise proposal developed to deal with the surge in transactions. In August, miners agreed to implement the first phase of the proposal, or SegWit. They were expected to increase the blocksize to two megabytes around November in a second phase.

 

Avoiding such a splinter requires miners to reach at least 92-percent consensus on supporting the second phase of SegWit2x, but that’s becoming increasingly unlikely, according to Wang Chun, co-owner and chief administrator of F2Pool, one of the world’s largest mining pools.

 

Even though SegWit2x garnered more than 93 percent support in July, miners and developers seem to be backing away from the proposal, a compromise that harbors characteristics disliked by extremists on both sides. Wang said he thinks the split will “happen, 100 percent.”

 

Many Core developers agree. Several have said they’d prefer to focus on writing code in the future for only the SegWit chain: currently the largest version of bitcoin at about $64 billion in market value.”

So, would the creation of a third iteration of bitcoin (and, we presume, the spontaneous generation of billions of dollars’ in “value”) be enough to trigger the great crash that naysayers like J.P. Morgan Chase & CO CEO Jamie Dimon and Bridgewater Associates founder Ray Dalio have warned is coming?

What say you?
 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Oswald did it's picture

Lets crucify that motherfucker

Dammit Walter's picture

What prevents Bitcoin from splitting ad infinitum?  (Hint: nothing really)

wulf's picture

You can also create your own neckbeard token without even knowing programming, just go to https://build-a-co.in/ , launch an ICO and sell your tokens to fellow neckbeards, and be rich!!

Why waste your time with 3 or 4 bitcoin varities and hundreds of other cryptos if you can build your own?

SafelyGraze's picture

the more versions of bitcoin there are, the more valuable each one becomes

that's just simple economics

 

tmosley's picture

Oh no! Won't someone save us, from all the free money?

eforce's picture

Another buy opportunity!

Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Say's Law: Supply creates its own demand.

Or: Nothing validates a good business idea like repetition.

virgule's picture

I used to think Bitcoin was an interesting idea. Recent developments make me see the light: they are nothing more than glorified tulips, with the uncanny property of NOT fading while traveling across borders. But they are nevertheless tulips.

It's possible to trade using tulips as a medium of exchange...as long as someone is willing to accept them!

Dammit Walter's picture

To be fair to Bitcoin, I took a deeper look into rationale to move to Bitcoin XT and it does make techinical sense... Bitcoin is becoming more popular and there is need to expand the block size to make processing the blocks more scalable to handle this expansion.  The coin miners vote on the change and they need 75% majority in favor of the change.  

* Improvments can be contentious but show that devs are actively maintaining the tech, which is good.

* A split (as I understand) does not create new coinage, so holders dont lose value (not like printing/counterfeit money, or new diluted shares as in stock split) -- this is good.  

* A service, either Bitcoin or similar, is a boon to folks that want to transport money from country A to country B without being asset-forfeited.  You don't need to bank your money in bitcoin, just use the transport service and avoid volatility by getting in and out quickly.  This is not all that different from currency.

* Tansactions are free, and not controlled/blocked by the state, so you can donate to causes to increase liberty like RPIP or Wikileaks (whereas this may be blocked with Visa).  This is the main reason why the state and banks hate Bitcoin.

Secret Weapon's picture

TM, I don't own any BC but if you become richer than Midas himself I will smile at your good fortune.  Best wishes always. 

tmosley's picture

Thanks! I hardly own any BTC either, mainly because I think it is obsolete garbage. Lots of better coins out there. I say own them all rather than trying to pick winners and losers.

lil dirtball's picture

> obsolete garbage

Lol. They're creating a third variety - and you don't even know what it can do/is for. I hear they're gonna store the blockchain in your DNA. It's gonna be huge and you're gonna look retarded.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_digital_data_storage

tmosley's picture

I'm going to look stupid for not holding something that we both agree isn't very good?

You peanutz and your tortuous "logic". 

Mementoil's picture

Wait, What???
The illustrious Crypto pumper Tmosley hardly owns any Bitcoin!?
Well, that's interesting.

Or am I confusing between all the various versions out there?

VD's picture

monetizing a ledger comprised of crypt0-muppets off a basic blockchain = idiocy.

 

it's sad to even comment on this bullshit...

 

(like buying and selling videogame "coins" -- incredible.)

tmosley's picture

Kikes can't STAND ledger money. It has defeated them before, and it will defeat them again, every time, now and forever. They just can't comprehend it, nor can they comprehend a way to defeat it, outside of starting central banks and printing enough judenfetzen to buy up said ledger money, as they did in the 1820's.

We can stop that from happening by recognizing that their confetti is worth nothing. Never trade ledger money for judenfetzen. EVER.

Archibald Buttle's picture

if you coinheads explain crypto to the "oldbugs" in the context of ledger money more often, i think you would make a little more headway with explaining why this is such a potential game changer. just my .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002 BTC ;-)

BallAndChained's picture

> ledger money

That says it all lol. An electronic version of paper and pen. Worthless.

lil dirtball's picture

> it's sad to even comment on this bullshit...

... except to comment on what bullshit it is.

And this is some pretty strong bullshit.

chubbyjjfong's picture

Just like tech stocks, right?

 

BallAndChained's picture

If bitcon is supposed to be decentralized, how come a few centralized developers and centralized miners control it?

If bitcon is immutable, how come the developers are changing it all the time, and the centralized miners continue to demand changes?

If bitcon is immutable, how come the Blockchain is so monstrously huge before people even use it as a currency?

If bitcon is scarce, how come the number of tokens continue to double overnight on forks? And bitcon clones continue to pop up out of thin air?

If bitcon is the future, how come it requires so many pumpers to prop up the Ponzi/Pyramid?

If bitcon is a currency, how come hardly anybody uses it to buy anything?

If bitcon is guaranteed get rich quick, you MUST buy it because it is going up, how come it dropped from $5000 to $3x00?

Mr 9x19's picture

the more versions of bitcoin there are, the more valuable each one becomes

fully disagree :

when you have a monopol, you fix the price you want. fuck those not buying.
when you have competitor, you set lower price to gain customers, you go to the cheapest., it is a natural drain of quality.

have you ever eared about devaluation ?

spliting to infinite will make it as any currency, it will become  worthless.

 

just like 2017 dollar compared to the 1913 one, to take a recent exemple.

 

 

starting your own would by now be common thinking to create extra commands in the system to generate for yourself as much as you want while others have to buy em. and  guess what it is looking like ? a printing press !? woohaa !

 

fuck that, at best, original BTC would have bring fractionnal banking to explode totally, in relaity, they are all jumping both feet inside to control it, and the mass once again will be ass fucked and say thank you.

people never learn, fucking 30sec memory fishs

 

Mr. Universe's picture

bu bu but...muh Bitcoin! 95% owned by 5% and now takes over $1,000 to produce one coin. The only way to get in early and reap the easy mining is to start your own. I can use it to build a Keynesian paradise, watch out for all thiose broken windows. That's winning!

VD's picture

crypt0-ponzi schemes abound!

HisNameIsRP's picture

Buy Shartcoin it's going from the lower left to the upper right

VD's picture

yes, but at least sharts are moist and stain your shorts. shartcoins not even that...

Dancing Disraeli's picture

It's only truly yours if you can hold it in your hands.

tmosley's picture

You can't hold land in your hands. All you can hold is a bit of dirt on it.

Does that mean you can't own land?

TheEndIsNear's picture

Yes, that's true. You cannot own land anymore. Allodial title is long gone. The county owns your land. Try not paying your annual tribute to the King, er I mean "county" in the form of so called "Property Taxes" and you will find out soon enough who owns your land.

kochevnik's picture

So no stocks, bonds, annuities, bank accounts, wills, titles, marriages, education, goals, dreams, software, energy, motion, air or ideas

0hedgefunds's picture

that stat is skewed because more than half of addresses only have dust in them and also because it doesn't exclude exchange wallets. but don't listen to me, statistics are the easiest way to fool less sophisticated who believe they actually understand something.

Mr. Universe's picture

Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics!

Schmuck Raker's picture

Why should there be such a thing?

I am a Man I am Forty's picture

People will likely stop buying the split and the split off crypto will decrease in "value."

Oswald did it's picture

I didn't even read the article, I just thought we should be crucify the Jesus

garypaul's picture

Everybody Wang Chun tonight!

EddieLomax's picture

There seem to be a vast number of smartly dressed kids earning obscene riches from doing things of no value, that does not bode well for the future.

zanza's picture

Praise Bitcoin Jesus.  Bitcoin Core = corporate Blockstream owned coin.

malek's picture

But as the number of tulipcoins is mathematically limited, nothing bad can happen to its scarcity value! /sarc

tmosley's picture

It is always like 6,000,000 shoahs when someone gives you free coins based on your ownership of other coins.

How many Holocausts must we Jews go through before you damned dirty goyim ban these fucking cryptocurrencies!!???

Buckaroo Banzai's picture

It's funny, nobody ever complains when a stock splits. But BitCoin splits, and everyone starts crying that the sky is falling.

malek's picture

Really.
Now tell us how a stock split leads to 'the spontaneous generation of billions of dollars in “value”'

tmosley's picture

People who can't afford a full share at the old price can buy what amounts to a fraction of a share at the new price.

Oh, did you not actually want me to answer that?

slyhill's picture

Your fallacy aint even straw-worthy.

tmosley's picture

What fallacy did I use? Be specific.