Back in the early days of bitcoin, its maker Satoshi put in a parameter called a block size limit, set to 1MB, as a component to decrease the likelihood of a spam-like attack. In bitcoin, one block is created about every 10 minutes and contains every one of the transactions processed in that time. By setting a block size cut off, the number of bitcoin transactions that can be handled in a given time is limited.
As bitcoin use has grown, that breaking point has been surpassed. This implies that some transactions are delayed, and that fees to get transactions processed rapidly have gone way up.
One would think that the simplest approach to settle this is to simply expand the block size, and that’s what many individuals have pushed. The lead developers for bitcoin’s most popular client, however, have been adamantly opposed to increasing the block size and rather offered a more complex and in some ways more thorough arrangement called Segwit. This builds capacity only for specific types of new transactions that will empower users to trade bitcoin “off-chain” through new channels run by individuals and organizations.
The Segwit redesign, however, never got anyplace close enough support from miners to imitate. Miners and businesses both were demanding on a block size increase to add regular capacity as well. So last May, a group representing most of the miners and many major bitcoin businesses got together and proposed a bargain. Initiate Segwit, and within three months additionally double the block size limit. This will give both on-chain and potential off-chain advantages to users. That bargain is called Segwit2x or the New York Agreement.
The main portion of the bargain was enacted in July, and Segwit was initiated as a major aspect of bitcoin in August. The second half is expected to be enacted in the not so distant future, multiplying the limit. The principal half went off easily, yet the engineers for the Bitcoin Core customer are as yet restricted to any limit increment, so the second 50% of the trade off is more quarrelsome. It might bring about a bitcoin with expanded limit however furious designers (B2X); it might come up short and leave bitcoin with its present limit and a bundle of irate miners and representatives (B1X), or it could cause an unexpected chain split with two contending forms of bitcoin where the main contrast is the exchange limit, without a doubt there will be significant system interruptions mid-November as this is playing out.
There is a lot of ego, silliness, trolling, propaganda, FUD, and other bad behavior by all sides in this debate, with people on both sides vilifying each other.
Note:
Please know that the plans for SegWit2x has been postponed to achieve a greater consensus in the community. This means that there's no more hard fork on 16 November.
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-segwit2x/2017-November/000685.html
This only proves that bitcoin has been a clear winner all out.