We are up 8.6% in the last 24 hours. I'm opening a short position. This thing is gonna dip. I will buy back in at 435, or maybe 420.
or you'll close your short at 475 and buy back in 485. |
|
|
|
I don't get what drives the price.
... free energy mostly and maybe a little negative entropy gradient from the increased information flux due to Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
This is exactly what I thought 21 would be developing. The future of stuff like this is almost limitless. Here we see a way to pay a machine for service with no salesperson required. The next iteration will be machines paying other machines for service, something no one has been able to reliably do using traditional money. I think this is big news.
... I'll have my machines contact your machines ... and we'll do lunch. |
|
|
|
|
Renamed thread: Wall of Worry observers ... keep climbing all you sold out bulls.
Remember bull markets are the simplest markets in the world to invest in ... buy the dips and hold.
Bitcoin has been a secular bull market since it's inception (around early 2010) and shows no long-term indications of abating.
|
|
|
|
People sold at 30, 50, 100 and are still waiting to get their coins back. At some point, people selling at 100, 200, 300, 400, will have the same fate. In other news: Bitcoin Difficulty: 79,102,380,900 Estimated Next Difficulty: 93,295,173,091 (+17.94%) https://bitcoinwisdom.com/bitcoin/difficultythe halvening is coming faster now, the miners can sense it and work away harder |
|
|
|
|
pump coming ... cut your looses
|
|
|
|
Understand this: we sell blockspace. ummm, wait, didn't you just say before that is was the one true P2P CASH system? Now it is a blockspace real estate bucket shop operation? As Andreas Antonopolis says, it's "the Internet of money". You apparently want to keep connections limited to 300 baud modems so only the most useful information is shared. Always resort to the casting of vague aspersions and unsubstantiated BS. You apparently have no clue what I want, neither what you want I suspect. It's by design a peer-to-peer electronic CASH system. your words. No wonder nobody takes you idiots seriously because you have no arguments just dumb half-baked economic theories, innuendo and then finally smearing and butthurt ragequit. But I also suspect this is not the real BJA but someone he sold his account to ... someone who is quite happy to troll endlessly on a seemingly divisive issue (but that in reality was settled long ago) to stir up the FUD and milk the confusion cow for as long as possible. |
|
|
|
Understand this: we sell blockspace. ummm, wait, didn't you just say before that is was the one true P2P CASH system? Now it is a blockspace real estate bucket shop operation? |
|
|
|
Anyone else have that strong sensation that we're going to have a nice Xmas gift of above 500?
dunno, looks like the derp army is pretty butthurt with Hearn's ragequit defection to the bankster darkside and subsequent total disintegration of the White Knight XT project ... they could crap the place up for quite some time with their butthurt herp-derp, more accumulation phase I guess until they fork off or accept the technical realities of the day ... tl;dr too many deflated bruised egos on display for a new constructive phase right now. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin has already demonstrated functionality with 2 of the 3 main uses of money;
1) medium of exchange (Bitcoin the value transfer network)
2) store of value (bitcoin the currency)
When the medium of exchangers are in the ascendancy the network gets abused, value goes down. When the store of valuers are dominating the network gets nurtured, value goes up.
Expect this to see-saw continually until the "unit of accounters" arrive on the scene.
|
|
|
|
I'm getting the impression that an emerging bull market isn't exactly a good influence on your ego. I'm half expecting risto to drop by any moment now, posting about his latest renovation projects.
in quite the judgemental mood today are we? ... do you mean the emerging bull market since 2010 that you missed the largest part of ... or something more recent? |
|
|
|
here comes Mike Hearn's little free shit peed-in-my-pants panic derp army ... sheesh, when will you guys ever get half a clue?  or how about posting some code to gihub with unit tests, math, simulations and well-reasoned arguments? ... nup, just we duh wunt mah-big-blocks massah. |
|
|
|
It's one thing too see a need and an opportunity to profit in meeting it. It's quite another to make everybody sick before selling them the cure. oh, i see you are in the conspiracy camp, I guess I should have known by your toxic tone on this issue. How about you are just slow to the punch in recognising the technical limitations that network operates inside of and others, how shall we say, weren't so slow? And now it just looks like ugly envy and sour grapes manifesting as a political power struggle. The limitations aren't technical. They're political. Why would I be envious of parasites? Bitcoin was supposed to free us from people like that. the limitations are technical ... run the numbers before your mouth. |
|
|
|
It's one thing too see a need and an opportunity to profit in meeting it. It's quite another to make everybody sick before selling them the cure. oh, i see you are in the conspiracy camp, I guess I should have known by your toxic tone on this issue. How about you are just slow to the punch in recognising the technical limitations that network operates inside of and others, how shall we say, weren't so slow? And now it just looks like ugly envy and sour grapes manifesting as a political power struggle. |
|
|
|
220,000 transactions in last 24 hours. To me this is the real indicator bitcoin is going mainstream.
To me this is an indicator that we're going to hit the 1 MB limit before resolving the scaling issue. We're over half maximum capacity. If the network bogs down, people on the exchanges will turn to the only exit left: fiat. It will be Gox in reverse. Worldwide on every exchange. Low fee transactions could take days to confirm. Zero fee xactions may never confirm. And what if some exchanges are running a fiat fractional reserve? They would have to liquidate BTC holdings to fill withdrawal requests, pushing prices down farther. Leveraged longs hit a margin call cascade. Miners forced to sell a larger percentage of mined coins to pay for electricity. Nothing's been fixed. Nothing. 600,000 xactions/day could create a backlog that will never clear. Companies with business models that depend on low fees could dump everything and cut their losses. You'd better pray we get the capacity up before we grow much more or we could crash so far that we lose first mover advantage and never recover. Don't think there aren't people waiting, wanting and actively working to make that happen. ... smells like a ripe opportunity, you should build a business to meet all this unmet demand you are predicting and make some serious bank. Say a lightning hub or sidechain for inter-exchange transactions? |
|
|
|
will 410 hold?
410?! ... I'm wondering where it will find some decent support above 1200 |
|
|
|
Over the rally from $350 to $425, the bid walls on bfx steadily grew from 35k to 41k. Now suddenly they are down to 31k. Speculations?
Wow! I'm walking among legends. lol, yes you are. |
|
|
|
So reduce the actual block limit to 500KByte? (effective max 2 MB).
I was thinking 1 MB normal blocks + 1 MB witness. Apparently most transactions are nowadays about 50% witness data, so we'd be able to pretty much fill up both the normal blocks and the "witness blocks". You're right that typical blocks would only fill 1-2 MB of witness data (2-3 MB total) with sipa's proposal, so maybe it's OK. But I'm not 100% sure yet. Yeah better wait until we see how it pans out. No need to give any titchety XTers aneurysms by mention things like block size limit reductions  |
|
|
|
Finally cleans up issues with signature TX malleability, makes fraud proofs viable for real SPV security and incidentally frees up some capacity breathing room for the near term (2-3MB per block), who could argue against it? Unless there is some truly objectionable security risk discovered it should be soft-forked in ASAP. A few niggles about 'cleanest' way to do that but hopefully that wont turn into too much slide-rule swinging.
One issue is that if the "effective max block size" with SW is 4 MB, then the maximum bandwidth that a full node will have to deal with is the same as if we had a hardfork to 4 MB blocks. With the current way that the network functions and is laid out, this might be too much bandwidth. Maybe this could be somewhat addressed with IBLT, weak blocks, and other tech, but that stuff doesn't exist yet. I think that there's basically agreement that 2 MB would be safe, though. So reduce the actual block limit to 500KByte? (effective max 2 MB). 4 MB effective is probably a tad too large for the current bandwidth tech. now but I'm skeptical how often it would be hit in the near term. It is a worst case assuming 1MB of TX data and maximum number of signature data associated (high number of multi-sig, etc) in a single block but needs to be tested out for security implications what effect such a nasty block would have on the system of course. |
|
|
|
If you follow bitcoin-dev mailing list segwit is being treated as a done deal. BIP within a month and soft fork soon after review. Finally cleans up issues with signature TX malleability, makes fraud proofs viable for real SPV security and incidentally frees up some capacity breathing room for the near term (2-3MB per block), who could argue against it? Unless there is some truly objectionable security risk discovered it should be soft-forked in ASAP. A few niggles about 'cleanest' way to do that but hopefully that wont turn into too much slide-rule swinging. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
