Neither 1 MB or 8 MB blocks is a solution to the problem as I outlined here:

Thought the anonymizer would find this interesting.  There's a doomsday collapse Russian guy named Dmitry Orlov who is also a writer-type person amongst characters like Kunstler:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Orlov_(writer)

His plan of action was to buy a live aboard sailboat and he's been living on one for the past 10 years.  He also seems to be an engineer of some type and decided to try and design the ultimate but cheap quasi-house/sailboat that you can live on ($50,000 or something as a DIY kit).  The boat is called the "Quidnon" and after a few years work just released a promo video for it the other day:

http://quidnon.blogspot.com/2017/06/a-short-promotional-video.html

Kind of an interesting boat in terms of design decisions and look.  It looks pretty ugly but has huge indoor room compared to normal boats and looks like it would instantly tip over in the ocean but he says he's tested them in simulation and it works good.

The predictable responses to it from the sailing community:

http://quidnon.blogspot.com/2017/05/a-boat-for-reluctant-sailor.html

Over 900 imaginary assets (including bitcoin itself) all have a value over 0.  Looks perfectly rational to me!

As I already explained, you don't need to control all the volume in the market.  All you have to do is initiate the move and other exchanges follow.

LOL, no.  All they can do in metals is naked short it down to cost of production.  As I've explained numerous times before, you can actually destroy Bitcoin with shorts since there is no real cost of production floor.  There is only a temporary, synthetic floor due to current mining hash rate.  If you just lump on some bitcoin shorts and constantly drop it below cost of production, all the miners (like KNC) will be forced to turn off, dropping it's synthetic price floor even lower.

Even if cost of production was once $10,000 per coin, this economic attack by shorts can drop the price floor down to barely anything.  There's no reason for anyone to buy your older $10,000 cost of production coins when they can now just mine new ones off the never ending block reward (from transaction fees), so the current synthetic price floor crashing also destroys value of all previously mined coins.  If the post-attack price floor is $100, that is now the value of your horded stash.

Bitcoin is far more vulnerable to economic warfare than metals are, and anyone who denies it is 100% lying.  This is why you need to be a complete fool if you haven't figured out the only way the bitcoin price can go up is if the government specifically sanctions to allow it, because it's ridiculously easy to kill it via shorts from the ESF.  The government (aka bankers) are allowing it to go up because they want you to buy this imaginary asset and not gold or silver.  You are being herded like dumb cattle out of real wealth and into imaginary wealth that can vaporize at any second.

The volume isn't what matters.  What matters is that usually when the price goes up or down, it's almost always from Bitfinex moving the market and other exchanges following.  This is how things have been all the way from $200 to now usually.  The few times when it's not is when there's a large amount of shorts on Okcoin and then someone (possibly the exact same entity) goes onto Okcoin to manipulate that market and squeeze them. There isn't a real market for bitcoin.  It's just whatever this scammer entity on Bitfinex manipulates it to.  He usually tries to manipulate upwards (just like Gox), but has attempted downwards before as well such as during Brexit.

And here we have Marcus accidentally admitting the Jewish criminal bankers want you buying bitcoins and not silver at all costs.  If you're buying something the bankers want you in, you are going to get demolished.

Bitfinex is a replica of MtGox

Zerohedge just posted a story in mainstream news about what I've been talking about for years now:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08-06/mysterious-trader-nearly-unlimited-bankroll-said-be-manipulating-bitcoin-price

I first wrote about how it appeared Bitfinex had someone with unlimited amounts of money that traded exactly the opposite way of anyone who would be trying to make a profit during the halving/brexit period.  My hypothesis was that Bitfinex owners were trading on their own exchange and got caught on the wrong side of the trade due to Brexit and rendered insolvent, so they then claimed they were "hacked" and lost all the bitcoins.

There's a link to my post and picture/commentary from over a year ago:



http://steemit.com/news/@r0achtheunsavory/bitfinex-is-lying-about-the-hack-and-i-can-tell-you-exactly-what-likely-happened

And another one of my posts from over a year ago right after they came back online:







https://steemit.com/money/@r0achtheunsavory/the-r0ach-report-vol-3-bitfinex-scamming-intensifies-and-more-on-the-silver-and-gold-markets

Comments on newest Molyneux video = right wing death squads imminent

Death by rough consensus attack.  Heil silver!

Bitcoin is a non-aggregate market that's been controlled almost entirely by a single entity on Bitfinex all the way from $200 to now so things like fib extensions mean all of jack shit.  This is why I call it a pump and dump.  If the price is controlled almost entirely by one entity, what the hell else would it be?  People make believe the price is moved by a bunch of small players....LOL.  The number of people who move this market up or down takes less than one hand to count.  It was like that when the price was $200 and it's the same way now.

Adam stole the $3200 number from me.  It was the max upside potential dump target before another halving occurs.  The earlier halvings have a large chance of increasing price, but the next ones are kind of a crapshoot when inflation is only 4% already.

This must be the make believe lightning network is a valid scaling solution rally when it won't work except in a centralized manner.

The goyim knowing level is increasing:

My view on block size issue and how it affects BTC vs BCH vs Mernero.  Mernero is technically the more "just" solution, but such a thing might not actually be beneficial if there is greater gain to be had by special interest groups backing the monopoly:

Here's my view on the blocksize issue:

What special interest groups neglected to tell you about the block size issue:

From an economics point of view, trying to force the entire planet onto a fixed block size with low scaling is a pro-usury extortion stance.  Small blocks are a synthetic monopoly.  If criminal banks believe they can take control of this monopoly, either through getting a large percent of the transaction validators, or by taking control of all services that facilitate off-chain transactions like Coinbase (or lightning) since on-chain transactions are too expensive to use, then the criminal banks would likely support small blocks over large ones.

The solution to the problem is not 1 MB or 8 MB blocks.  Any system with a fixed block size is going to inherently be a pro-usury extortion scheme due to synthetic monopoly.  You would need to use a dynamic, scaling block size like Monero to fix that.

A funny thing happened on the way to the bullion market:


Interestingly, you used to receive the max discount for using bitcoin on JM Bullion (same as paying with check or bank transfer), but now it's more expensive to pay with BTC there lol.  So bullion dealers no longer like people paying with BTC for whatever reason even though they stated people who purchased using bitcoin spent more money than normal customers.