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

[billyjoeallen]

The urgency isn't even in block size or scalability. The urgency is in fixing the goddamn decision-making process among the core devs.  You think Hearn was wrong about that?

From an objective standpoint, looking at Hearn's contributions as a whole (the database change that caused the first fork, the redlisting coins proposal, and XT in particular) I think one could come to the logical conclusion that Hearn has been compromised by the NSA or some other three letter agency, likely recruited while he was still with Google.

You're not answering my question. Has the decision making process broken down or not? Has their even been a joint statement among the core devs regarding this controversy been issued? No, of course not. It's fucking embarrassing. Give us a time frame on when the block size patch will be implemented. something.

The beauty of Bitcoin is that we don't have to trust Hearn or Gavin or anybody. We trust the code. We trust a valid argument, no matter who makes it. Core devs need to get their shit together toot sweet. If it takes a hard fork to make that happen, so be it.

[1714283823]

1714283823

[1714283823]

1714283823

[1714283823]

1714283823

[1714283823]

1714283823

[marcus_of_augustus]

The urgency isn't even in block size or scalability. The urgency is in fixing the goddamn decision-making process among the core devs.  You think Hearn was wrong about that?

From an objective standpoint, looking at Hearn's contributions as a whole (the database change that caused the first fork, the redlisting coins proposal, and XT in particular) I think one could come to the logical conclusion that Hearn has been compromised by the NSA or some other three letter agency, likely recruited while he was still with Google.

You're not answering my question. Has the decision making process broken down or not? Has their even been a joint statement among the core devs regarding this controversy been issued? No, of course not. It's fucking embarrassing. Give us a time frame on when the block size patch will be implemented. something.

The beauty of Bitcoin is that we don't have to trust Hearn or Gavin or anybody. We trust the code. We trust a valid argument, no matter who makes it. Core devs need to get their shit together toot sweet. If it takes a hard fork to make that happen, so be it.

they're all getting together for a talk-fest, kumbay-aaah session and maybe a group hug at the end before satisfying your demands for releasing a joint statement ... and then they'll delay some more and have another talk-fest in Hong Kong in December ... no panic, no rush, just some measured think-sessions by the thought leaders.

[JayJuanGee]

BTC gonna jump up to $315?

When?

[Andre#]

We are going down from 280$ to 220$ in less than 10 days because two shills want to prove their might by forking bitcoin?

The answer from community is clear now, Gavin & Mike ?

I think Gavin & Mike are quite content seeing that the uptake of XT among nodes passed 13% in just 4 days, and that two blocks have already been mined with it. That's a clear answer from the community so far.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[Chef Ramsay]

stop with the FUD and sloganeering ... bitcoin can scale just fine without the induced faux panic and manufactured fork missile crises circus (as much fun as the drama is).

Personally, I'm hoping the bargain price remains until about next month, September 26th. Until then, I'm very happy to see low prices. I'm saving money to place an order, soon. I'll be adding another 0.4 BTC to my wallet, maybe. Yes, I am that poor  but I'm doing fine, putting a little into bitcoin at a time.

That .4 will be a lion's share in the future, just keep that in mind. You should be very proud of that addition. Your wealth will be the envy of everyone that you know that has no idea nor concept of what the next wave up that bitcoin can offer. It's coming, so chill and reap it.

[marcus_of_augustus]

We are going down from 280$ to 220$ in less than 10 days because two shills want to prove their might by forking bitcoin?

The answer from community is clear now, Gavin & Mike ?

I think Gavin & Mike are quite content seeing that the uptake of XT among nodes passed 13% in just 4 days, and that two blocks have already been mined with it. That's a clear answer from the community so far.

yeah, the answer from the "community" has so far mostly been FO! with your fud

[Chef Ramsay]

Many of us hope that cheap prices remain until a later date and the later date is becoming nearer and nearer. That means the good times will come sooner so it's high time to load up on the coin. Cheers!

[btccashacc]

Many of us hope that cheap prices remain until a later date and the later date is becoming nearer and nearer. That means the good times will come sooner so it's high time to load up on the coin. Cheers!

are you sure with it ?

[pleaseexplainagain]

We are going down from 280$ to 220$ in less than 10 days because two shills want to prove their might by forking bitcoin?

The answer from community is clear now, Gavin & Mike ?

I think Gavin & Mike are quite content seeing that the uptake of XT among nodes passed 13% in just 4 days, and that two blocks have already been mined with it. That's a clear answer from the community so far.

I think these two points of view sum up the gap between the viewpoints nicely.

Comment 1 is talking about store of value ie they may or may not actually prefer core over xt but certainly do not like it when the prospect of moving to one option lowers their wealth.

Comment 2 is saying that the community will decide and the resulting effect longer term on the price is a "cost" that has to be borne as the community decides things not wealth movements.

While comment 2 is "purer' in bitcoin terms than comment 1, comment 1 reflects more where bitcoin has got to after 6? years ie that changes cannot be now seen in isolation. For example I would say this core/xt argument is not only hurting the price but will lead to no new merchant acceptance.

I am not sure these two viewpoints are easily reconciled and will rise much more frequently from now on in all things to do with bitcoin

[billyjoeallen]

The beauty of Bitcoin is that we don't have to trust Hearn or Gavin or anybody. We trust the code. We trust a valid argument, no matter who makes it. Core devs need to get their shit together toot sweet. If it takes a hard fork to make that happen, so be it.

they're all getting together for a talk-fest, kumbay-aaah session and maybe a group hug at the end before satisfying your demands for releasing a joint statement ... and then they'll delay some more and have another talk-fest in Hong Kong in December ... no panic, no rush, just some measured think-sessions by the thought leaders.

So far I haven't seen any leadership among these "thought leaders". A time frame for a joint statement about a time frame does not exactly instill confidence. Last time we really had an urgent problem (backwards compatibility), Gavin took the reins and it got handled. If we had a similar crises, who would have the street cred to pull that off now?

If Gox taught us anything it's that no news is bad news. Miners want higher transaction fees and they will end up with a bigger slice of a smaller pie if this continues. They can't win but they can make us all lose. By opposing a block size increase for whatever reason, they limit the value of the coins they sell and I as one of their main customers will shop elsewhere.

[hdbuck]

The urgency isn't even in block size or scalability. The urgency is in fixing the goddamn decision-making process among the core devs.  You think Hearn was wrong about that?

From an objective standpoint, looking at Hearn's contributions as a whole (the database change that caused the first fork, the redlisting coins proposal, and XT in particular) I think one could come to the logical conclusion that Hearn has been compromised by the NSA or some other three letter agency, likely recruited while he was still with Google.

You're not answering my question. Has the decision making process broken down or not? Has their even been a joint statement among the core devs regarding this controversy been issued? No, of course not. It's fucking embarrassing. Give us a time frame on when the block size patch will be implemented. something.

The beauty of Bitcoin is that we don't have to trust Hearn or Gavin or anybody. We trust the code. We trust a valid argument, no matter who makes it. Core devs need to get their shit together toot sweet. If it takes a hard fork to make that happen, so be it.

they're all getting together for a talk-fest, kumbay-aaah session and maybe a group hug at the end before satisfying your demands for releasing a joint statement ... and then they'll delay some more and have another talk-fest in Hong Kong in December ... no panic, no rush, just some measured think-sessions by the thought leaders.

https://scalingbitcoin.org/montreal2015/

[kehtolo]

Double bottom on Stamp..

[billyjoeallen]

https://scalingbitcoin.org/montreal2015/

Are any decisions made at the workshop?
Absolutely no decisions are made at workshops, as this would run the risk of being rushed and unfair to the global community unable to attend in person. The workshop is about raising awareness of issues and proposals, finding common ground, and encouraging public discussion within the existing mechanism of technical progress through the Bitcoin Improvement Proposal process.

gimme a fuckin break.  How many nodes will be running bitcoinXT by then do you think? Morons.

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

stop with the FUD and sloganeering ... bitcoin can scale just fine without the induced...  blah blah blah.

So what yer sayin' there fella is Bitcoin can scale fine as long as we dont scale it...

Maybe you would like to sit down, perhaps have a nice cup of tea, and maybe think about that one for a while.  

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

The urgency isn't even in block size or scalability. The urgency is in fixing the goddamn decision-making process among the core devs.  You think Hearn was wrong about that?

From an objective standpoint, looking at Hearn's contributions as a whole (the database change that caused the first fork, the redlisting coins proposal, and XT in particular) I think one could come to the logical conclusion that Hearn has been compromised by the NSA or some other three letter agency, likely recruited while he was still with Google.

Oh get real. Insisting on personalising the debate is childish - just stick to the technical and practical issues that we are discussing.

And keep your ludicrous tin hat theories for you're evenings in your fallout shelter, counting your ammo and tins of spam with your militia buddies.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[luckygenough56]

220 still strong, last test dump is fail

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation