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

[tarmi]

go usd swaps, go bitcoin, go bulls!

wanna see 300 stable and 24 mil of longs!

[empowering]

If devs decided to make this change,  miners and nodes would then have the option to follow or not, essentially what you are suggesting would be a fork/ hard fork, saying it ain't so ^^ is semantics.

You can test your theory, create a hard fork of BTC now, increase the limit to 42 million and convince all of the nodes and miners to follow you.

I will give you my vote now.

NO

Its not a theory. Its there in the code.... 

Ah ok, simple then.

Off you pop then, get cracking,  let me know how it goes.

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

Whats the point of arguing the semantics anyway. It's not gonna happen, FUD or whatever you are doing is a little pathetic.

You are confusing an attack by a rogue client and an accepted consensus. Im talking about an ageement o change the cap being possible. If it was accepted by the community, then there is no difficulty in raising the cap.

As an aside, coins are not numbered. There is no serial number. They simply exist as the inputs and outputs of a transaction. Your line about "introducing the 210000001st coin" leads me to believe you dont actually understand this.

Any Fear is purely your own. Im only stating some points about the 21m cap that was mentioned earlier.

[aztecminer]

If someone was to change this "one line of code" if definitely would be considered a "hard fork", regardless of consensus from the core devs.

Definition of hard fork is:

A hard fork is any change to a protocol that is not backwards compatible.

This would very definitely be backwards compatible. A

So how exactly would the current version of Bitcoin accept the creation of the 21000001st bitcoin?

Yes, you can easily change the code to modify the coin-introduction function.

However, if you did, all your blocks would be ignored by people that use the original client, and more importably, you'd ignore theirs, effectively separating you in a different network with all those who run your modified client.

What guarantees are there that the supply will be limited? The fact that the community has agreed on accepting bitcoin's rules, which dictate how many coins are introduced.

Whats the point of arguing the semantics anyway. It's not gonna happen, FUD or whatever you are doing is a little pathetic.

because watching bitcoin @300 is like watching blue bars of microsoft installs ..

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

Ah ok, simple then.

Off you pop then, get cracking,  let me know how it goes.

So thats it then? No killer argument to put me in my place? No clusterbomb of a nuggett from the White Paper to show that the 21M cap is sacricant and can never be changed?  

[empowering]

Ah ok, simple then.

Off you pop then, get cracking,  let me know how it goes.

So thats it then? No killer argument to put me in my place? No clusterbomb of a nuggett from the White Paper to show that the 21M cap is sacricant and can never be changed?  

No... because I can ignore the obvious too, just like you.

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

Ah ok, simple then.

Off you pop then, get cracking,  let me know how it goes.

So thats it then? No killer argument to put me in my place? No clusterbomb of a nuggett from the White Paper to show that the 21M cap is sacricant and can never be changed?  

No... because I can ignore the obvious too, just like you.

Okay, I no longer want to ignore the obvious. Enlighten me.  And Im not being smart, If there is an axiom that states that 21M is the oncrete limit, then I want to know.
You owe that to me and other bitcoiners. For our future....

[D05GTO]

Ah ok, simple then.

Off you pop then, get cracking,  let me know how it goes.

So thats it then? No killer argument to put me in my place? No clusterbomb of a nuggett from the White Paper to show that the 21M cap is sacricant and can never be changed?  

It'll be the same as coming to a consensus to fire all nukes in inventory.  MAD.   Sure all the buttons are there ready to be pushed so it's possible.  Just dumb to even go down that road.

[plasticAiredale]

Whats the point of arguing the semantics anyway. It's not gonna happen, FUD or whatever you are doing is a little pathetic.

You are confusing an attack by a rogue client and an accepted consensus. Im talking about an ageement o change the cap being possible. If it was accepted by the community, then there is no difficulty in raising the cap.

As an aside, coins are not numbered. There is no serial number. They simply exist as the inputs and outputs of a transaction. Your line about "introducing the 210000001st coin" leads me to believe you dont actually understand this.

Any Fear is purely your own. Im only stating some points about the 21m cap that was mentioned earlier.

Ughhh, I hate that I got suckered into feeding a troll. 

Of course if there is community consensus to change the cap it would happen, it could also go the other way down to a 18 million cap, they could do anything with community acceptance. Its a pointless point to make.

As far as not understanding how bitcoin works, I don't have any desire to prove this to you, you can believe whatever you want.

If you can't get the answer you are looking for from the Pieter Wuille quote I included, you are being deliberately obtuse, and I have no need to interact with you further.

[empowering]

Ah ok, simple then.

Off you pop then, get cracking,  let me know how it goes.

So thats it then? No killer argument to put me in my place? No clusterbomb of a nuggett from the White Paper to show that the 21M cap is sacricant and can never be changed?  

No... because I can ignore the obvious too, just like you.

Okay, I no longer want to ignore the obvious. Enlighten me.  And Im not being smart, If there is an axiom that states that 21M is the oncrete limit, then I want to know.
You owe that to me and other bitcoiners. For our future....

I am a bit busy to explain it to you... I just noticed that there is nothing in the laws of my country, to stop the heads of state declaring tomorrow that they have decided to change the laws, and that all ginger people and fat people are no longer allowed on gods green earth, so therefore they have decided all of the non ginger and non fat people need to decide via a referendum today, and then once they have voted "DIE", the fat ginger pigs need to be frog marched at gunpoint to gas chambers by this weekend, men, women and children alike.

Sounds plausible....  let us not let reality get in the way of a good idea.

(reductio ad absurdum)

(like I said, two can play at this game)

[testerman]

i sense $300 in a couple days,

3d macd proves this.

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

Ughhh, I hate that I got suckered into feeding a troll. 

Of course if there is community consensus to change the cap it would happen, it could also go the other way down to a 18 million cap, they could do anything with community acceptance. Its a pointless point to make.

As far as not understanding how bitcoin works, I don't have any desire to prove this to you, you can believe whatever you want.

If you can't get the answer you are looking for from the Pieter Wuille quote I included, you are being deliberately obtuse, and I have no need to interact with you further.

Troll being anyone who has a different view to you?  

My point all along is that the cap is NOT concrete - which you have now agreed with. Yet many of the predictions of grand wealth with bitcoins are predicated on this fallacy.

The Pieter Wuille quote was irrelevant for the reason I stated - He is talking about rogue attacks, Im talking about consensual change.

You have already proven you have at best a sketchy understanding of how it works with your "21 millionth bitcoin" statement.

 

[soullyG]

Gah, sorry for stirring up the troll-pot

[aztecminer]

Ah ok, simple then.

Off you pop then, get cracking,  let me know how it goes.

So thats it then? No killer argument to put me in my place? No clusterbomb of a nuggett from the White Paper to show that the 21M cap is sacricant and can never be changed?  

No... because I can ignore the obvious too, just like you.

Okay, I no longer want to ignore the obvious. Enlighten me.  And Im not being smart, If there is an axiom that states that 21M is the oncrete limit, then I want to know.
You owe that to me and other bitcoiners. For our future....

very simple bud: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/575046156692094976

[gizmoh]

go usd swaps, go bitcoin, go bulls!

wanna see 300 stable and 24 mil of longs!

Momentum fading, Great time to short if you ask me 

[empowering]

Ughhh, I hate that I got suckered into feeding a troll.  

Of course if there is community consensus to change the cap it would happen, it could also go the other way down to a 18 million cap, they could do anything with community acceptance. Its a pointless point to make.

As far as not understanding how bitcoin works, I don't have any desire to prove this to you, you can believe whatever you want.

If you can't get the answer you are looking for from the Pieter Wuille quote I included, you are being deliberately obtuse, and I have no need to interact with you further.

Troll being anyone who has a different view to you?  

My point all along is that the cap is NOT concrete - which you have now agreed with. Yet many of the predictions of grand wealth with bitcoins are predicated on this fallacy.

The Pieter Wuille quote was irrelevant for the reason I stated - He is talking about rogue attacks, Im talking about consensual change.

You have already proven you have at best a sketchy understanding of how it works with your "21 millionth bitcoin" statement.

 

I have had a better idea....  instead of miners receiving Bitcoin for their work, they simply get "thank you" notes + links to youtube rickrolls

Totally doable.

Make it so.




 

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

Gah, sorry for stirring up the troll-pot

Why the apology? You made a perfectly valid post, I was just questioning one of the fundamental tenets of that post.

And apart from being called a troll, nobody has actually proved me wrong yet.

[empowering]

Gah, sorry for stirring up the troll-pot

Why the apology? You made a perfectly valid post, I was just questioning one of the fundamental tenets of that post.

And apart from being called a troll, nobody has actually proved me wrong yet.

Not wrong, just pointless.

Here is a video that will explain what you are missing.

https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

Ughhh, I hate that I got suckered into feeding a troll.  

Of course if there is community consensus to change the cap it would happen, it could also go the other way down to a 18 million cap, they could do anything with community acceptance. Its a pointless point to make.

As far as not understanding how bitcoin works, I don't have any desire to prove this to you, you can believe whatever you want.

If you can't get the answer you are looking for from the Pieter Wuille quote I included, you are being deliberately obtuse, and I have no need to interact with you further.

Troll being anyone who has a different view to you?  

My point all along is that the cap is NOT concrete - which you have now agreed with. Yet many of the predictions of grand wealth with bitcoins are predicated on this fallacy.

The Pieter Wuille quote was irrelevant for the reason I stated - He is talking about rogue attacks, Im talking about consensual change.

You have already proven you have at best a sketchy understanding of how it works with your "21 millionth bitcoin" statement.

 

I have had a better idea....  instead of miners receiving Bitcoin for their work, they simply get "thank you" notes + links to youtube rickrolls

Totally doable.

Make it so.

...aaaannddd Still nothing.