Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[mmitech]

...
if the technical part of Bitcoin stay as it is today, then simply Bitcoin wont survive for 20 years... and this is for sure.

You are bullish, in this case I'll only give it 4 - 5 years.

apart from the obvious answer to extend functionality would any of you care to elaborate why.
And please give concrete technical reasons

Even if you cant figure for your self half of the challenges Bitcoin is facing, there is a wiki for that... take some time and read about it here  


Edit: for some reason they didn't include the Block size limit and blockchain size problem (could be in the future)

[1715108947]

1715108947

[1715108947]

1715108947

[1715108947]

1715108947

[1715108947]

1715108947

[telemaco]

it means the mission to infest bitcointalk and sway it into a bitcoin-negative site is working ... Jorge and the team will get their bonuses from Uncle Sam

I wonder why it turns out this way. Initially it was such a quality forum.

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/

Thanks, very interesting. Sure many parties try to shape the bitcoin community, from the small investor (bear/bull) to stronger parties. Your post only encourages criticism when reading other's opinions that is good most of the time.

[paul2000]

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Dummy text to reach page 8888 to ccmf

[justusranvier]

http://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm

[Torque]

...
if the technical part of Bitcoin stay as it is today, then simply Bitcoin wont survive for 20 years... and this is for sure.

You are bullish, in this case I'll only give it 4 - 5 years.

apart from the obvious answer to extend functionality would any of you care to elaborate why.
And please give concrete technical reasons

Even if you cant figure for your self half of the challenges Bitcoin is facing, there is a wiki for that... take some time and read about it here  


Edit: for some reason they didn't include the Block size limit and blockchain size problem (could be in the future)

mmitech - Condescending savvy forum users who to him apparently didn't read the Bitcoin wikis from like years ago^TM  

[prophetx]

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Dummy text to reach page 8888 to ccmf

i second that motion

[mooncake]

http://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm

You have let the cat out. I wonder how the trolls will respond.

[yokosan]

Dunno why he locked it but adams bitmovements is spot on.

[raid_n]

...
if the technical part of Bitcoin stay as it is today, then simply Bitcoin wont survive for 20 years... and this is for sure.

You are bullish, in this case I'll only give it 4 - 5 years.

apart from the obvious answer to extend functionality would any of you care to elaborate why.
And please give concrete technical reasons

Even if you cant figure for your self half of the challenges Bitcoin is facing, there is a wiki for that... take some time and read about it here 

This is exactly what annoys me about your attitude. You pretend to know it all yet when someone posts an embedded image in a quote you have no idea what is going on.
A lot of the presented attacks in that wiki are known weaknesses or potential attack vectors, yet many require focussed effort and a lot of financial power to be executed properly.

While your statement is totally true (any code that survives 20 years without any modification is either very basic and hence easy to prove fully correct or its effects are so neglectible that there is no real point in focussing attention on it) it was made to throw a bad light on the current status quo of the core protocol code.

Show me any complex software or service that will work for 20 years if external factors change.

"if the technical part of Google search stay as it is today, then simply Google search wont survive for 20 years... and this is for sure.

Statements like your original one just make you look like a fool

[justusranvier]

You have let the cat out. I wonder how the trolls will respond.

When you're observing reactions consider that I haven't made any comments at all directed at any specific post or forum member's behaviour.

[mooncake]

Dunno why he locked it but adams bitmovements is spot on.

Because he does not want trolls to dilute the content. 

[mmitech]

...
if the technical part of Bitcoin stay as it is today, then simply Bitcoin wont survive for 20 years... and this is for sure.

You are bullish, in this case I'll only give it 4 - 5 years.

apart from the obvious answer to extend functionality would any of you care to elaborate why.
And please give concrete technical reasons

Even if you cant figure for your self half of the challenges Bitcoin is facing, there is a wiki for that... take some time and read about it here  

This is exactly what annoys me about your attitude. You pretend to know it all yet when someone posts an embedded image in a quote you have no idea what is going on.
A lot of the presented attacks in that wiki are known weaknesses or potential attack vectors, yet many require focussed effort and a lot of financial power to be executed properly.

While your statement is totally true (any code that survives 20 years without any modification is either very basic and hence easy to prove fully correct or its effects are so neglectible that there is no real point in focussing attention on it) it was made to throw a bad light on the current status quo of the core protocol code.

Show me any complex software or service that will work for 20 years if external factors change.

"if the technical part of Google search stay as it is today, then simply Google search wont survive for 20 years... and this is for sure.

Statements like your original one just make you look like a fool

well I think most of you Bitcoin cultists refuse to be objective, and considering the fact that most of you call Bitcoin the most important innovation after internet, I would just like to point out that TCP/IP protocol didn't change much in a decade or so.... and no, Google is very very bad example in this case, we are talking about protocols that we can build on..

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[raid_n]

well I think most of you Bitcoin cultists refuse to be objective, and considering the fact that most of you call Bitcoin the most important innovation after internet, I would just like to point out that TCP/IP protocol didn't change much in a decade or so.... and no, Google is very very bad example in this case, we are talking about protocols that we can build on..

But this is where you are mistaken. Bitcoin is a protocol, that is true. Yet you fail to understand what it does.

Bitcoin forms probabilistic consensus on a ledger of units where ownership is proven through digital signatures.
The value lies in the ledger and that consensus is formed on it. Not on the concrete protocol specification

[edit] To place an analogy. See bitcoin as the concept of sorting a list and the protocol as a concrete sorting implementation. It does not matter if you use quicksort or some weird randomized approach, the result is what matters.

[wachtwoord]

well I think most of you Bitcoin cultists refuse to be objective, and considering the fact that most of you call Bitcoin the most important innovation after internet, I would just like to point out that TCP/IP protocol didn't change much in a decade or so.... and no, Google is very very bad example in this case, we are talking about protocols that we can build on..

I would say Bitcoin is a larger innovation than the internet really (of course it is dependent on it).

[mmitech]

well I think most of you Bitcoin cultists refuse to be objective, and considering the fact that most of you call Bitcoin the most important innovation after internet, I would just like to point out that TCP/IP protocol didn't change much in a decade or so.... and no, Google is very very bad example in this case, we are talking about protocols that we can build on..

But this is where you are mistaken. Bitcoin is a protocol, that is true. Yet you fail to understand what it does.

Bitcoin forms probabilistic consensus on a ledger of units where ownership is proven through digital signatures.
The value lies in the ledger and that consensus is formed on it. Not on the concrete protocol specification

See, I know exactly what is Bitcoin, and everything I wrote above has a simple yet a deep meaning to it, now if you fail to see that, this simply means that you are way too much invested (blindly invested) into Bitcoin, and I honestly have no energy to argue or explain that to you.

It is my opinion on this matter, consider me wrong with the possibility of being right, also all you said above doesn't argue or solve the real known issues, so I don't see any value with arguing further with you.

[njcarlos]

I would say Bitcoin is a larger innovation than the internet really (of course it is dependent on it).

Hah!

[mmitech]

well I think most of you Bitcoin cultists refuse to be objective, and considering the fact that most of you call Bitcoin the most important innovation after internet, I would just like to point out that TCP/IP protocol didn't change much in a decade or so.... and no, Google is very very bad example in this case, we are talking about protocols that we can build on..

I would say Bitcoin is a larger innovation than the internet really (of course it is dependent on it).

how can it be larger than it if it is dependent on it, where you came up with this logic ? listen to your self really.

[prophetx]

only willy bot can save us

[raid_n]

well I think most of you Bitcoin cultists refuse to be objective, and considering the fact that most of you call Bitcoin the most important innovation after internet, I would just like to point out that TCP/IP protocol didn't change much in a decade or so.... and no, Google is very very bad example in this case, we are talking about protocols that we can build on..

But this is where you are mistaken. Bitcoin is a protocol, that is true. Yet you fail to understand what it does.

Bitcoin forms probabilistic consensus on a ledger of units where ownership is proven through digital signatures.
The value lies in the ledger and that consensus is formed on it. Not on the concrete protocol specification

See, I know exactly what is Bitcoin, and everything I wrote above has a simple yet a deep meaning to it, now if you fail to see that, this simply means that you are way too much invested (blindly invested) into Bitcoin, and I honestly have no energy to argue or explain that to you.

It is my opinion on this matter, consider me wrong with the possibility of being right, also all you said above doesn't argue or solve the real known issues, so I don't see any value with arguing further with you.

This is you just backing out of the argument. I would love to get into specifics. Btw I am not heavily invested in bitcoin. I have a few but even if the bullish prediction of the vinklevii comes true it won't really change my life.

I am however massively excited about the possibilities provided by cryptocurrencies.
You know I don't have to subscribe to bitcoin as the winning ledger (yes, ledger not protocol) to believe in cryptos.