[Open Letter from Jiang Zhuoer] Why haven’t I voted for LTC’s SW yet?

English Ver: https://medium.com/@zhangsanbtc/why-i-am-still-not-voting-for-segwit-37b0970f6919

Recently, the debate over LTC's SW voting has intensified. Many people have asked why the Litecoin Mining Pool has not voted for SW yet. This makes me feel that it is necessary to write an open letter to explain the whole story:

1. The expansionists never oppose SW, but only oppose SW without large blocks

Since Core used the complexity of technology to confuse people on asicboost, conspiracy theories such as "miners oppose SW because of interests" have become more and more outrageous. If miners oppose SW because of interests, why would miners sign the Hong Kong consensus?

In the Hong Kong consensus, as long as Core guarantees that there will be large blocks in the future (adding an expansion to 2M in the code), all miners agree to activate SW first and then vote for 2M one year later. Why are miners not opposed to SW at this time and are willing to activate SW first? Instead, it is Core that opposes the Hong Kong consensus?

In fact, the expansionists have never opposed SW, but only SW without big blocks. No big blocks = kill the main chain = kill Bitcoin. After the new coin reward was halved, Satoshi Nakamoto designed transaction fee income for miners to maintain the security protection of miners. If there are no big blocks in the future and miners do not have enough transaction fee income, there will inevitably be a Bitcoin with a market value of 100 billion and a mining industry with a market value of 1 billion. Anyone can buy 51% of the computing power with only a few hundred million, and then attack the Bitcoin with a market value of 100 billion.

Core could have avoided years of struggle, united the community, and gotten Bitcoin moving again by simply adding future large block size increases to the code, or by making plans for large blocks clear in the roadmap. But Core is still unwilling to do so, and that’s what’s really puzzling .

2. Our efforts on LTC - LTC Roundtable

When the community's attention was still on the BTC expansion dispute, a mysterious new developer Shaolinfry appeared on LTC. He was very familiar with SW and helped LTC develop the SW version in a short period of time. Later, he proposed UASF to BTC as an LTC developer. After UASF caused an uproar, he proposed UASF on LTC again, attempting to use Charlie Lee's identity as the founder of LTC to force the promotion of UASF.

We don’t want to speculate who Shaolinfry is, but it’s clear that LTC has been dragged into the BTC debate by Core . This makes us start to think about a deeper question: How does a decentralized digital currency decide on development disputes?

The answer is well known: community consensus. But what is community consensus? Fortunately, the LTC community is not large, and we quickly found a solution: invite all LTC-related companies, including miners, mining pools, and exchanges, to join the roundtable meeting. All parties participating in the roundtable meeting need to promise to give up the right to act alone on protocol upgrades and obey the decision of the collective vote .

Here we would like to thank PZ, the elder of the Chinese Litecoin community. PZ invited Professor Chen from Wuhan University to design a perfect deliberation and voting mechanism for the roundtable meeting, and as a contact person, he made great efforts in the formation of the roundtable meeting. It is always difficult to ask others to give up power, but after 3 months of hard work, we successfully invited all domestic LTC-related companies to join the roundtable meeting.

III. Development and stagnation of the roundtable conference

A roundtable meeting with only enterprises but no developers is meaningless, but we encountered difficulties in inviting developers. Since LTC is less used, most of the participating enterprises are miners and mining pools. Asking developers to give up the right to act alone after joining will indeed make developers have concerns. The distrust between the two sides has brought the roundtable meeting to a standstill.

However, in the process of communication and exchange, the community eliminated some fundamental contradictions. After the controversy over "firing miners", Li Qiwei promised not to modify the POW algorithm unless there was an extreme situation such as a 51% attack. After being invited by the roundtable meeting, Li Qiwei agreed to come to China in June to discuss the implementation of SW with the roundtable participants.

4. Changes driven by market conditions

However, changes are always faster than planned. With the long-term deadlock in BTC expansion, more and more funds began to flow into competing coins, including Dash on February 24, ETH on the 26th, XEM on March 1, XMR on the 3rd, PIVX on the 13th, ETC on the 14th, Zcash on the 18th, and Ripple on the 24th. Have you noticed? Except for LTC, the top ten competing coins in terms of market value have all begun to surge . As expected, LTC also began to surge on March 30th.

After the price surged, mining pools began to face pressure from users and miners: Why don’t you support SW? In the eyes of most people, “reaching consensus in the right way and avoiding disputes” is far less important than “hurrying up to SW to give the price of the coin another reason to rise.” Two days later, F2Pool was the first to turn to SW.

On April 4, Charlie Lee issued an open letter promising that "if the block is full, Litecoin developers and I will use a hard fork to increase Litecoin's block size", eliminating the last obstacle between the two parties. I very much hope that Core can also ensure that the block size will be increased in the future through similar commitments or codes to resolve the expansion dispute that has caused the community to suffer huge losses for several years. I don't know why Core has been reluctant to do this.

5. A sudden attack

On April 10, OKcoin and Huobi completed the internal process, signed and stamped to join the roundtable meeting, but Charlie Lee had already started to push UASF (User Activated Soft Fork) urgently. UASF is harmful to the community ecology. The hash rate vote has gone through the legal voting process anyway, but UASF has not gone through any voting process. The developer simply dictatorially selected an activation date - this has nothing to do with UASF, but DASF (Developer Activated Soft Fork).

The further damage of UASF (DASF) is that users are defined by developers, which can easily evolve into: only those who support development are users, and those who do not support are not users. If you support SW, then you are a user; if you support large blocks, then you are not a user. As long as some companies control a few developments, they can influence the development of BTC .

On April 11, something even worse happened. Antpool, LTC1BTC, and BW mining pools, which had not yet voted for SW, were all attacked by DDoS. After BW was attacked overnight, it voted for SW under pressure the next day. This shocked me greatly. If LTC SW was "voted" through like this, LTC would be nailed to the pillar of shame forever - the first soft fork passed based on PoD (Proof of DDoS) .

On April 13, Wang Chun, who had voted for SW on LTC, tweeted that " SW is a disaster, I will not support SW on BTC because I am a BTC holder. " A few hours later, the pool was attacked by DDoS. Afterwards, Wang Chun launched a vote on Twitter and said, "According to the results of the vote, vote for SW on both BTC and LTC."

Once you understand the above, I can answer the question: "Why haven't I voted for LTC's SW yet?"

Although I have reservations about SW (I am a LTC holder), I am not against SW at the request of users. But I firmly oppose the use of UASF (DASF) or even DDoS attacks to force the adoption of SW. If the attackers who attempt to pass SW on BTC are given the experience that these methods work, BTC and LTC will become a violent world where gangs run rampant .

So, I added enough computing power to ensure two things:

1. Ensure that SW will not be passed by PoD (Proof of DDoS).

2. We will pass the decision to upgrade SW as soon as possible at the LTC roundtable in the form of industry consensus.

In addition, like antpool, LTC1BTC will mine a few SW blocks to test the SW of the mining pool to express goodwill. Please do not interpret it as market manipulation.

The expansion dispute is a very complex issue, involving a lot of technical content, which leads to the first reaction of everyone when seeing this issue: chaos, and no one knows what the two sides of the expansion dispute are arguing about. This lecture uses language that ordinary users can understand to make an objective and comprehensive explanation of the expansion dispute and the views of both sides.

If you have questions about the following:
1. Why did Satoshi Nakamoto set the block size at 33.5M at the beginning and later added a temporary 1M limit?

2. Satoshi Nakamoto gave the plan and code to remove the temporary 1M in the future. What is the reason why Core does not expand according to Satoshi Nakamoto’s plan?

3. What is Core's expansion plan? Why does Core think hard fork expansion is risky? How does the Lightning Network work?

4. Why do the expansionists oppose transforming Bitcoin into a settlement network of "1M+Lightning Network"?

5. What is the root of the disagreement between the expansionists and the Core group behind the apparent block size debate?

6. What kind of compromise process did the expansionists and Core members go through, and how did they eventually part ways?
What are the mutual accusations and conspiracy theories on both sides?

7. Why do the expansionists want a hard fork? What will happen if there is no hard fork?
Why does the hard fork not split into two coins as ordinary users speculate?

8. After the hard fork, what impact will it have on users, miners, exchanges, and wallets, and what measures should be taken?

9. What impact does the hard fork have on prices? What should investors do?

Welcome to listen to the lecture to get the most comprehensive understanding of the expansion dispute :)

"[Recording + Text Outline] Huobi Everyone Says "Jiang Zhuoer: Bitcoin Expansion and Its Impact on Prices""
《MR JIANG ZHUO ER's talk on Huobi forum about bitcoin scaling problem》

Welcome to follow my Weibo to get the most timely and in-depth analysis:
http://weibo.com/ltc1btc

Expansion & Bull Market Series:

January 22, 2016: [Bitcoin faces a critical choice] We urge all holders to support the 2MB expansion.]
March 11, 2016: [Basic Science] Can Bitcoin support all human transactions?
June 26, 2016: "4,000 yuan is the beginning of the Bitcoin bull market"
October 15, 2016:
[Completely end the debate between soft and hard forks] A safe hard fork is a soft fork expansion
"Ending the Soft/Hard Fork Debate】 A Safe Hard Fork is the same as a Soft Fork"
October 20, 2016: "On the Correct Approach to Bitcoin Upgrading (and Refuting ahr999's "Consensus Rules")"
October 29, 2016: "Pouring cold water on Zcash - With Deep Black, does the market really need Pure Black?"
November 4, 2016: "Beware of Exchange Risks Under Tightened Foreign Exchange Regulation"
22 November 2016:
"Why do we firmly oppose Core's soft fork segregated witness? Jiang Zhuoer, who has invested tens of millions of real money in the mining industry, will tell you the answer!"
"Why We Must Oppose Core's Segwit Soft Fork, Bitcoin Miner Jiang Zhuo'er Tells You Why!"
December 22, 2016: Weibo: "Update of the bubble index and other data in "Also on 4,000 yuan is the beginning of the Bitcoin bull market""
December 31, 2016: Weibo post: "Telling you something that is extremely scary when you think about it carefully"
January 4, 2017: Weibo: "This may be the last time that the bubble bull market can soar 10 times"
January 11, 2017: Weibo: "The central bank has finally completed the task of deflating the bubble. This round of bull market has a habit of correcting 40% after each new high."
January 13, 2017: [Basic Science] How to use a mobile wallet to safely store Bitcoin (and talk about the recent situation)
January 13, 2017: "Happy to hear that BTCC and Huobi have stopped margin trading, OK has reduced leverage to 1x, and all fake coins in the market have been wiped out"
February 5, 2017: [Bitcoin Economics] Discussing the long-term impact of financing, currency lending and handling fees on currency prices
February 10, 2017: "On the central bank's dilemma regarding Bitcoin"
February 13, 2017: "The market over-interpreted Haobtc's closure of RMB recharge"
February 15, 2017: "Focus Interview Interpretation: Bitcoin's important regulatory shoe has landed, and exchanges are no longer at risk of being closed or suspended from deposits"
March 7, 2017: [The Truth] Coin holders vote: 90% of coins support large block size expansion and oppose the Core roadmap]
March 9, 2017: "Why Satoshi Nakamoto is not worried about "big blocks blowing up the computers of losers""
March 14, 2017: "Dr. Chang Yong: Why do people support BU expansion and oppose Core and its SW?"
March 22, 2017: [The Truth] Why won’t Bitcoin hard fork split into two coins?

March 29, 2017:
"[Recording + Text Outline] Huobi Everyone Says "Jiang Zhuoer: Bitcoin Expansion and Its Impact on Prices""
《MR JIANG ZHUO ER's talk on Huobi forum about bitcoin scaling problem》
April 15, 2017: [Basic Science] A Simple Comparison between Extended Blockchain Expansion (EXTBLK) and SW