The correction to a slightly lower price is alright (still above $360, so that's nice) ... but I'm going to go ahead and blame reddit for the crash.
always dumps when the big blocker rektors go on another rampage. |
|
|
|
|
so much doubt, worry and fear ... this place has the stench of imminent upside explosion all around
take a look at the set-up, it is classic (and manipulator just got buttrekt)
|
|
|
|
I would have serious doubts that bitstamp even runs one single full node of their own ... probably outsourced.
you *seriously* beleive that a major bitcoin exchange does not operate thier own node? Something that can be achieved for <$100 with a standalone device and uses <64GB of storage? get real. you can buy a 1TB harddrive for $50 today and store BIP101-enabled blockchain onto it for years to come. then pay $50 more for a 4TB drive to handle a few more years of growth. or are you still using the same computer you owned in 1999 with its 1.6GHz singlecore, 512MB ram, and 60GB HDD (all cutting edge)? I know of several large bitcoin trading institutions that outsource btc operations to API providers ... or worse. It has nothing to do with hardware, they can't be bothered with the IT sysadmin overhead which for them is incomprehensible geek-speak, they are purely money-shufflers. |
|
|
|
...
Wrong, wrong and more wrong.
The 1MB limit was put in place in 2010, not 2008. Actual bitcoin network upload speed (the real bottleneck) measurements show upload bandwidth for nodes at edge of network is growing at closer to 17-25%. (This disregards data caps for total bandwidth available also).
So you have made a case for 8 MB rather than 1 MB. Check your math ... at the top-end 25%, 1.25^5 * 1MB = 3MB Are you intentionally high-balling or your figures just always happily err on your side of the argument? (2008 =/= 2010, 50%=/=25%, 8MB=/=3MB, etc, etc). The rest of your non-arguments about your residential connection is one ad-hoc data point and the stuff about chinese vertical integration of ASIC (lolwtf?) is simply pure speculation. Decentralisation will be seriously challenged by bigger blocks, it is already and the data points to that not getting any better any time soon. |
|
|
|
...
As per Satoshi's "Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System": P2P is a 'prerequisite' for the system to 'enable' electronic cash.
It does not work the other way around.
But these spammers dont even care about decentralization, so boring.
The decentralization argument is bogus since it ignores Nielsen's law, Moore's law etc. http://www.nngroup.com/articles/law-of-bandwidth/ 1MB in 2008 when Bitcoin was first announced is actually equivalent to 17 MB today. (50% compounded per year for 7 years). Wrong, wrong and more wrong. The 1MB limit was put in place in 2010, not 2008. Actual bitcoin network upload speed (the real bottleneck) measurements show upload bandwidth for nodes at edge of network is growing at closer to 17-25%. (This disregards data caps for total bandwidth available also). |
|
|
|
price is rising too much? seems coincidental that the last "Big Blockers" storms were whipped up when price rises were getting a head of steam also ... but who knows? The BearSwamp is net short, by definition, they are a bitcoin deposit institution, and they know that every time price rises people remove large quantities of bitcoin from exchange deposits for safe-holding ... and one day if they are unable to meet those floods of withdraw requests into a wall of rising prices, well it is gonna be a bad day to be a BearSwamp customer, investor or employee. Btw, is Mike Hearn still doing the bitcoin holding audits for the BitSwamp? |
|
|
|
|
BJA stopped posting after I asked him if he could confirm or deny he was being paid to post on various memes/topics (shilling) ... his reply was evasive, imho.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting ... can't decide if fun or substantial yet.
|
|
|
|
|
Why now BearSwamp?
I think they are net short BTC and looking at some serious losses if bitcoin breaks out above $400 ... everytime bitcoin price gets a run on we get yet another "Big Block yesterday!" controversy whipped up by a single article followed by legions of vote brigading and the usual suspects and useful idiots running around like headless chooks.
The original GavinHearn XT fork was released as the price was challenging $300 on an upswing ...
|
|
|
|
|
I would have serious doubts that bitstamp even runs one single full node of their own ... probably outsourced.
Who cares what the crooked bearswamp wants, they have been allowing some seriously crappy stuff to happen on their "exchange" since mid-2014? Not much of it good for bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
what did jorge do to get a perma there? o.O who cares ... best thing is he is pre-occupied with his new cult and not here  |
|
|
|
how i feel having sold at 345  buttrekt sold-out bull ... wait you could go short here and win it back when it drops back to 312 .. it must, tarmi said it would? |
|
|
|
Adam's trade is cryptography mathematics, there is zero wiggle room for half-truths, obfuscation, falsehoods or lies in mathematics. |
|
|
|
|
dunno know guys ... if this sucker is breaking out then things could get violent and volatile quite quickly until it gets back into the 550-600 range that was supported before the breakdown (mid-2014).
order books are thin and the atmosphere seems exceedingly febrile ... there is a tingle of anticipation in the air ... be prepared for anything.
|
|
|
|
Spent the entire weekend getting drunk and watching football... what happened?
football and drinking. |
|
|
|
Looks like whale-wars at the moment.
Sounds like a series on the Discovery channel.  Is it on tonight?  Could be.  They sort of look like Bitcoiners. naaah, they look like broke leftist enviro-warriors. We could changetip them a shark fin or two. |
|
|
|
|
traders: when you book profits are you accounting in bitcoin or fiat?
who has the coinz makes the rulez.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
