Roger Ver, a very early bitcoin adopter and founder of bitcoin.com, stated yesterday that his website will list segwit2x as BTC. He said:
“Bitcoin.com will proudly list S2X, and we will list it as the default version of Bitcoin and will use the ticker BTC. (Along with 95% of the rest of the ecosystem)”
That statement was made just hours after Bitfinex said they will list it as B2X, with this contradictory labeling of the same chain in different entities suggesting we may be due for chaos.
Neither Bitfinex nor Ver clarify whether they will change those tickers if the circumstances suggest one chain is clearly the winner. Bitfinex says:
“The incumbent implementation (based on the existing Bitcoin consensus protocol) will continue to trade as BTC even if the B2X chain has more hashing power.”
Suggesting they are ignoring the longest chain rule if segwit1x does manage to continue operating once the chains split.
Coinbase said in a statement they will provide access to both chains, presumably if both chains survive, with Gdax largely reiterating the same announcement:
“Customers with bitcoin balances stored on Coinbase at the time of the fork will have access to bitcoin on both blockchains. There is no action required from customers and bitcoin can be securely stored on Coinbase before, during, and after the fork.”
However, they do not provide any information on how they are to label the two currencies and under which ticker the two chains will operate, with the exchange stating:
“In the coming weeks — nearer to the date of the fork — we will provide a more detailed plan for how Coinbase will approach naming the two Bitcoin blockchains.”
Presumably they want some more clarity to see how events develop in the next few weeks before making any determination, something that might apply to Bitfinex too when it comes to the actual implementation.
But bitcoin might also be facing a situation where some exchanges call the longest chain BTC, while others call it B2X, and vice versa with some exchanges calling the shorter chain as B2X while others call it BTC.
That’s if the two chains survive. Something that appears unlikely if matters do not change in the miners front, who are almost unanimously supporting segwit2x.
If 93% of miners upgrade to segwit2x, the chances of segwit1x surviving without protocol modifications are very close to zero, because there would be hours without any blocks, and eventually there would be no miners.
That’s if their decision continues to be so unanimous. In which case there would be no B2X or a confusion in tickers, because there would probably not be two chains.
Protocol level changes would probably require a new proof of work, which would make the chain vastly less secure, and therefore its network vastly lower in value. But, this is only the third controversial fork in a major currency, therefore we can’t be sure of much.