|
101
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: August 19, 2015, 02:43:45 PM
|
XT'ers shouldn't be lobbying miners directly. They should first lobby the node operators, then the exchanges and payment processors. If they win those two battles the miners will follow.
Many mining pools have already indicated they want bigger blocks. That doesn't necessarily mean we'll see a switch to XT but if we start seeing the higher block version numbers increasing in number, it could start a rush to XT. Or a half decent solution come out of the core team that addresses the need for bigger blocks but doesn't fork the network, raise the block size so large the spam bloat on the chain will render it humongous or move us from a team of core devs to two mavericks. |
|
|
|
|
102
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: August 19, 2015, 12:22:50 PM
|
you got that wrong my friend, if the miners switch to the new client, exchanges wont have any other choice but to follow, because the old chain will be dead..
Not really, because new miners can jump in and resurrect the old chain. There was a recent case of an altcoin, I don't remember which one, which tried to hard fork but couldn't because the one exchange it traded on stubbornly refused to go along. That might be an issue for a small network, where one player may have the power to do so, but as Phil Potter from Bitfinex said, "we will see what our competitors are doing, if there is a consensus, we will follow it' And that's why imo the fork won't happen. The majority of players like Finex don't mind either way *that* much. They just want to stay in business. Therefore there will be a lot of looking around and waiting for other people to make the move which is why it wont happen. As Gregory Maxwell has said, consensus is very hard to get in btc and there's good reason for it. It should be hard to make big changes to Bitcoin and the very large majority should be in favor of it to do so. |
|
|
|
|
103
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: August 19, 2015, 12:17:29 PM
|
In the end the client will be decided by the exchanges not the miners.
What miner is going to mine a coin that then can't be sold on an exchange?
you got that wrong my friend, if the miners switch to the new client, exchanges wont have any other choice but to follow, because the old chain will be dead... don't forget, miners are the sole of the network, Bitcoin rely on POW, so having X% of the mining power means controlling X% of the voting power in Bitcoin's network Well its not quite that simple. Whats the point in having an alive chain and nowhere to sell them if exchanges stubbornly refuse to switch. Its very chicken and egg. Anyway I doubt it will ever get that far. Agreements will be made long before the network actually splits. Dont forget an exchange actually owns 13.5% of the mining power as it is with btchina. |
|
|
|
|
104
|
Economy / Exchanges / Re: [OFFICIAL]Bitfinex.com first Bitcoin P2P lending platform for leverage trading
|
on: August 19, 2015, 11:55:12 AM
|
That is not a free market.
When one person or a small group of individuals have too much power over the market it distorts the price discovery mechanism.
The fools who dumped so much should be investigated whether they have a history of doing this. If so, they should be banned from Bitfinex.
Yes it is, that is exactly a free market. 'Investigating' people and banning them for market participation is not a free market. I'm guessing you lost money. If so, take it on the chin. Holding and trading bitcoin is a risky business and you knew what you signed up for. These fools you speak of were people being margin called and legitimate big sells. The only thing they are guilty of being foolish about is going long on margin and holding until they were liquidated. |
|
|
|
|
105
|
Economy / Exchanges / Re: [OFFICIAL]Bitfinex.com first Bitcoin P2P lending platform for leverage trading
|
on: August 19, 2015, 11:46:12 AM
|
Bitfinex should investigate who those retards were that caused the dump to 162.
They may have had malicious intend (price manipulation).
Why? It's a free market. Phil has already said that it was legitimate selling as well as some large margin calls. Are you attempting to say that people should be blocked from pressing the sell button ? If you want to know who those 'retards' were, you should probably look at all the people taking part in contributing to $30mill in longs. |
|
|
|
|
110
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: August 18, 2015, 04:03:30 PM
|
I find the honesty refreshing and don't see him selling some of his stash as a conflict of interest unless he is planning to buy them back lower.
Game, set and match.
How could you ever know this. Hence conflict of interest.What a ridiculous argument. Now he is a liar too as well as bad PR ... proof? I'm outta here - this thread is turning into a witchhunt. Good luck ! Good bye, you clearly don't get it. There's no need to prove it, that's the EXACT reason why you don't talk speculation in his position because you can't prove either way. That's why you keep your mouth shut and don't give anybody a reason to think what your saying has any hidden agenda. Therefore your arguments for anything to do with the project are clear of any financial conflict of interest. I have no problem with what he does with his coins. Hell he could be short his whole stash and I wouldn't care but in the position he's in it's not something you do as PR for your project, end of. |
|
|
|
|
111
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: August 18, 2015, 03:46:00 PM
|
LOL! That article is from 6 months ago. Gavin has always been very clear that his major concern was the scalability of BTC, which remains to be proven.
As for divesting some of his BTC as he is not interested in being 'filthy rich' (his owrds) and still holds enough to be seriously wealthy, what exactly is the problem with this? Sensible move. Once you have made 'enough' do you seriously expect any sane person to leave it all on black or red? (I know there is not so much sanity in here, so I can understand why it is perceived differently ...)
Talk about missing the point. Not sure why the age of the article matters. He has a massive conflict of interest as chief scientist speaking to the media. He shouldn't be talking speculation end of. Imagine if the ceo of an up and coming company was speaking to the media and said "I believe in this company and I'm putting my all into it, however I'm also selling stocks of my company and investing in others". Sure, that's prudent. That's also what most big share holders would do but you just don't say that. As I said PR nightmare and a massive conflict of interest. |
|
|
|
|
112
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: August 18, 2015, 03:08:14 PM
|
From the article --- “If bitcoin is wildly successful, I’m still holding on to a good chunk of bitcoin. It could be worth tens of millions of dollars, but it could be worth zero. It doesn’t make sense to hold more than that amount. I don’t have a desire to be a multi-billionaire. That’s not what motivates me, I have no desire to be filthy rich.”
Sounds to me like he is merely taking profits on a portion of his coins and diversifying into other things. Sounds prudent to me. I also hold stocks which I think all people should if they have the funds.
You make it sound more dire than it is.
Any of you out there that bought coins below 100 and never have sold any are crazy in my book. Taking profits on a portion of your gains is prudent...not reckless.
He's a scientist and engineer not a financial adviser. When speaking to the media or other organizations (which he shouldn't be doing as he's terrible at it, lets not forget why Satoshi left) it is not good PR for your project to say 'this is a project to upstage the current financial system and I will be putting my life into making it succeed. But, oh, I'm also cashing out of what I perceive as a new financial system and investing in the old one' Advising caution is fine, he shouldn't be saying anything about what he's doing with his coins though especially if it doesn't show much confidence in it. As chief scientist he shouldn't be talking to the media about any of his speculative positions, it's a HUGE conflict of interest. |
|
|
|
|
116
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: August 18, 2015, 12:46:24 PM
|
There has been nothing but constant selling since 317. But... but...we were told the Greeks would be gobbling up these coins?!?!??  There's still much room to go down, notice our permabulls have been pretty quiet over the last week. With the fork shit having no real end in sight and 32 MILLION in longs this could get a lot lot uglier before it gets better. (Still short from 280, sold off the bits I bought in the 260's for a small loss at ~ 262) |
|
|
|
|
117
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Speculation (Altcoins) / Re: [XMR] Monero Speculation
|
on: August 18, 2015, 12:44:22 PM
|
My backups are on two identical cds (yes, compact disks) in pdf form created with Moo's offline wallet generator. I also have the seed written down with 3 words randomly added in that only I'd know don't belong.
We are a bit OT but I wouldn't trust the CD's for very long- they deteriorate over time - you must recopy every year. oh, and I wouldn't tell anybody how many random words you used ( or that you did it at all) to anybody  Aren't there supposed to be some 100 year CD-Rs? I probably wouldn't trust the literal 100-year marketing claim but maybe for more than most other digital media? I'm still going to say paper is best though. Just don't make the same mistake I did and use a thermal printer. Hand write the seed words. And definitely don't do what I did and hide your seed inside a book that you then accidentally give to charity. 95% of my XMR gone  |
|
|
|
|
118
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: August 17, 2015, 11:00:57 PM
|
Nodes, not miners. (?)
From what I read, the threshold is 75% of the previous 1000 blocks mined by XT-compatible miners, but in January 2016 at the earliest Kinda, The trigger to allow larger blocks is dependant solely on miners. Activation is achieved when 750 of 1,000 consecutive blocks in the best chain have a version number with bits 3 and 14 set (0x20000004 in hex). The activation time will be the timestamp of the 750'th block plus a two week (1,209,600 second) grace period to give any remaining miners or services time to upgrade to support larger blocks. If a supermajority is achieved more than two weeks before 2016-01-11 00:00:00 UTC, the activation time will be 2016-01-11 00:00:00 UTC. Of course, as we've seen recently, the rules that the miners pretend to follow, and the rules they actually follow, are two different things. Also, if the blocks created by the miners are not accepted by a similar "supermajority" of the clients, then those rewards from creating the blocks will be difficult to spend. It's gonna be a big, hot, mess. Add into that prorogation time of the conflicting clients, ie if the vast majority of clients are running core and not relating bigger blocks then propagation of xt blocks would be slower and there is the chance that they wont be relayed before a core block is propogated and begun to built upon. |
|
|
|
|
120
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: List of reasons we do not need bigger block sizes
|
on: August 17, 2015, 02:35:01 PM
|
|
Accepting and producing bigger blocks will lead to more centralization than using off chain transactions. The rate at which the chain can grow and be spam bloated with larger blocks is a serious issue and almost nobody will run their own node.
Lets not forget there are only around 6000 full nodes as it is right now.
However, Satoshi did foresee a future where the chain was so large that people would only use 'client only mode' (spv wallets).
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
