What are the differences between Bitcoin Gold’s hard fork and SegWit2X’s hard fork?

The hard fork that gave birth to Bitcoin Gold and that has already occurred, does not look like the one that will take place around November 18 and is called SegWit2X.

The first was a clear separation from the original Bitcoin, and therefore created a new Altcoin. The aim was for Bitcoin Gold, to make the technology more efficient and thus solve the problem of centralization of minors and changing the proof of work.

The new proof of work should give users the opportunity to use their processor to mine.

For SegWit2X, the separation will not be as clear as for Bitcoin Gold or Cash and it’s not about creating a new Altcoin.

This is an update, the developers had to make technical choices and the separation may be less well and there may be losses of funds for example.

What is SegWit2X?

SegWit2X aims to double the block size of Bitcoin blockchain and it is this doubling that requires a hard fork that will take place around November 18th.

To better understand we need to analyze what Bitcoin is made of.

There are three big groups that make Bitcoin work:

Users, those who buy, sell or spend Bitcoins.

Developers who evolve and progress Bitcoin, but especially that ensure that the system is secure and flawless.

Minors who secure the network with their computing power.

But there is still a big group a little different, it’s the group of industries that have formed around Bitcoin.

This group is not a stakeholder in the Bitcoin protocol, but it is they who offer Bitcoin-related services such as portfolios or trading platforms for example. These are companies like Coinbase, Kraken or BitPay.

All of these groups have different visions and different interests.

Most of them want to make profits with Bitcoin, or, more simply, use crypto currencies as a PayPal system.

But others defend the idea of ​​changing the system and empowering people by changing the rules of the game, and making Bitcoin a real revolution. Make it a secure currency, without censorship and requiring no permission from anyone.

Who owns the consensus and who should decide?

Some think that it is the majority of minors, that is to say those who give its computing power to the network, who should decide.

Others think it’s the companies.

And still others want a majority of users to decide.

Three different visions.

For SegWit2X, it will be the companies and the miners who will decide, without the users, thus defending their own interests.

Among the miners, some have withdrawn from SegWit2X, among the companies too, but the majority of them will support the hard fork.

What problems will cause the SegWit2X?

The problem lies in the fact that the channel will not be clearly divided and will remain based on Bitcoin. Because of this, there will not be enough Replay protection, that is, replay.

It may be that a transaction made on one channel is replayed on the other channel.

In addition, mobile SPV portfolios will not be able to manage this dual network and at the time of the hard fork your Bitcoins on the original channel could be on the second channel. How? Because the wallet will go with the chain that will have the most power. It may be that at first it is the second chain that has the most power and then the original chain, and thus the currencies would pass from one channel to another several times!

Worse, the transaction could be played on both channels!

Another problem, there could be minors who would take advantage of the hard fork to lead an attack on the original Bitcoin network with a reorganization of the chain type 51%.

Thus, the advice to follow is that of prudence. If no technical solution is provided by November 18, which would be surprising given the pressure recently, it would be better not to make transactions at the time of the hard fork and keep its currencies on a wallet you have the private keys, waiting to see things evolve.