https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/fintech

SEC held a Fintech "Blockchain" conference back in November 2016 ... I'd say an ETF rule change is baked in at this point.

lolz ... always with those IT guys leaking crap out on their smartphones ... snapchatted a screenshot to his latest squeeze for the ego trip

$150 swing just to break the sled out of the ice ... wherever it's going it's a long way from here.

The Insiders got out-insidered by some inside-insiders ... whatta fucking shitshow these gubmint goons have created.

Seems suspiciously like it ...

Approved?

a single chinese fabricator of chips and mining is the "free market"? What fantasy land are you in?

Centralised mining control of bitcoin is the end, p2p is over, the TX counterparty is back. Decentralised money is no more. Pretty simple.

... or the BU hardfork signals the beginning of the end of the secular bull run.

I can't see the attraction of a monetary system controlled by commie chinese thugs. Time to start looking for the next improved iteration, at that point its failed experiment I think.

This first time hostile take over attempt by major miner, Wooo via Antpool, is a major attack vector bitcoin devs never really got to close since pooled mining became a thing ... BU idiots not only opened it wider but promoted it to the initially clueless chinese communist miners for their petty political 'governance' grievance ends. Nothing good comes from this except maybe prompting a response from a major western fab shop (AMD, Qualcomm?) that comes out with some competitive kit and diversifies control away from Woo. Where's Balaji and 21 at these days with mining kit?

One foot out the door ...

This is just pure wishful thinking totally unsupported by any analysis, experimental or calculable proof.

When BU forms a chain, it will take one, and only one, 'valid' malicious block to ruin that chain forever.  Any BUcoin will exist forever with that Sword of Damocles hanging over it. On that one fatal security flaw alone it is not a serious contender for solving capacity expansion for bitcoin.

Most Core developers understand this, it is not obstinacy that they will not 'compromise'. Any requests to 'compromise' is asking Core devs to acquiesce to the possible ruination of bitcoin, why would they sign off on opening bitcoin up to that? All they can do is put forward their solution and see if it is accepted. You cannot coerce or guilt-shame developers into writing code they know is risking the complete ruination of the project by opening it up to an obvious existential security flaw. If Core dev's proposed solution is maligned enough to be found unaccepted then all they can do is shrug and say, "we tried".

No security coder is going to write known compromised software voluntarily.

Thought you might like that, you're projecting your motives, as always ...


... more interested in bending language, pushing your barrow and promoting propaganda through deceptive sloganeering than discussing and analysing solutions and ideas.

What are all the BUcoin holders gonna do when satoshi dumps on their rogue chain from a great height? Promote Segwit with propaganda?

The dilettantes and sociopaths got butthurt when the engineers came up with a good working interim solution to avert short term capacity constraints without a dangerous hardfork ... so the dilettantes and sociopaths created a grand experiment in theoretical free market constructs and unleashed Unlimited Bitcoins "emergent consensus" hand-wavy, untested techno-anarchy. Chinese communist miners got butthurt when the dilettantes and sociopaths told them they were the most important bitcoiners in the world and then the engineers told them, actually they're not.

Up to speed now ...? I want to know why Satoshi didn't just make the blocksize a user-selectable parameter when he wrote v0.1, it just seems so simple and easy and elegant, he must have been such an idiot for messing that up?

Give it up with the propaganda, it's really sickening. You guys with your BU have shit the bed big time by trying to block natural open source development with political shennigans and now you don't know how to clean up the ugly mess. There were no reasonable "community demands" that could have been accommodated within the engineering constraints. Demanding that the 747 flies to moon on your way from NY to London is lovely but it's not happening in our lifetime. No one in Core is "being obstinate" they are simply saying it can't done like that.

Peter_R is a complete charlatan, I wouldn't let him design a doorlock let alone network system engineer a centralised monetary system.

Better yet, you should panic sell at the bottom.

more Woo BU FUD ... so yeah probably PBOC pulling their commie strings thing ... powerful people disappear all the time over there if they don't do what the People's Party asks them to.

Sideways consolidation after week of ATHs ... most excellent action. Bullish AF.

This BU Woo shit stinks or wtf?! Is that guy high on meglomania? Rogue majority miner is inviting some serious hurt to open up on his sorry ass.

Interesting to see the more bullish case there is a continuation of the current drive up to 1700-1800 region before a pullback late-March/early-April timeframe ...

It looks clear now that the ETF will be approved and there will be a pre-announcement in 3 days, this Wednesday after the market closes in NY. There is enough information floating around now from government employees that know someone who knows someone who knows something.

The pre-announcement will have just enough information to leave some doubt but will also be enough to bring the price closer to an equilibrium in the event of a full ETF approval announcement. The last thing a government fish-head wants is to be credited with spiking bitcoin by 200%, so pre-announcements and copious leaks is all part of the plan to get it priced in beforehand.

Thanks Elwar for being the go-between again, your help is appreciated.

If you buy chinese food with bitcoin that might be influencing it .... otherwise, nup.