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

[cbeast]

if  Core implements the smallest block size increase, BOOM XT is history and the network will upgrade right away.

Bitcoin XT is not a thing that can go away because it's the idea that the free market is stronger than politics. The BIP Congress is gridlocked, but the market wants progress. Maybe it won't be the blocksize next time. The BIP Congress better get its shit together or some altcoin is gonna leave Bitcoin in the grease pit forever.

Free Markets is not so free. It is subject to manipulations just as any other market.

Core devs are way more qualified to weight any upgrade and especially those that so drastically changes bitcoin's fondamentales. They should not be subject to any propaganda.

Their consensus was status quo. If you dont like it please feel free to move on to some other altcoin.

poeple are saying Core is going to implement an increased block size its just a matter of how much bigger and exactly how to roll it out.

if true, Bullish as fuck.

That's fine if it's enough to satisfy the market. Personally, I think they chose 8 so core would settle for 4. It's a classic negotiating trick.

fuck id be good with 2MB

At 6 tps, Bitcoin will still be laughed at by PayPal.

[1714266152]

1714266152

[1714266152]

1714266152

[1714266152]

1714266152

[1714266152]

1714266152

[adamstgBit]

if  Core implements the smallest block size increase, BOOM XT is history and the network will upgrade right away.

Bitcoin XT is not a thing that can go away because it's the idea that the free market is stronger than politics. The BIP Congress is gridlocked, but the market wants progress. Maybe it won't be the blocksize next time. The BIP Congress better get its shit together or some altcoin is gonna leave Bitcoin in the grease pit forever.

Free Markets is not so free. It is subject to manipulations just as any other market.

Core devs are way more qualified to weight any upgrade and especially those that so drastically changes bitcoin's fondamentales. They should not be subject to any propaganda.

Their consensus was status quo. If you dont like it please feel free to move on to some other altcoin.

poeple are saying Core is going to implement an increased block size its just a matter of how much bigger and exactly how to roll it out.

if true, Bullish as fuck.

That's fine if it's enough to satisfy the market. Personally, I think they chose 8 so core would settle for 4. It's a classic negotiating trick.

fuck id be good with 2MB

At 6 tps, Bitcoin will still be laughed at by PayPal.

ultimately blockstream and or sidechain will solve this problem once and for all we just need to kick the can down the road a little further to buy some time.

[hdbuck]

if  Core implements the smallest block size increase, BOOM XT is history and the network will upgrade right away.

Bitcoin XT is not a thing that can go away because it's the idea that the free market is stronger than politics. The BIP Congress is gridlocked, but the market wants progress. Maybe it won't be the blocksize next time. The BIP Congress better get its shit together or some altcoin is gonna leave Bitcoin in the grease pit forever.

Free Markets is not so free. It is subject to manipulations just as any other market.

Core devs are way more qualified to weight any upgrade and especially those that so drastically changes bitcoin's fondamentales. They should not be subject to any propaganda.

Their consensus was status quo. If you dont like it please move on to some other altcoin.

You don't have a gun to force me or anyone else to choose what you want, so no.

Im not forcing anyone. Its the Gavin shills that are forcing the rest of the core devs to so something risky, controversial, but nevertheless totally fully researched and discussed by the core devs. Its not the Time, thats it. We need the fee market to settle, especially considering the halving approaching.

People that want a bloatchain now, free from fees, faster transactions etc better migrate to some altcoin that suits their needs, or even ripple if they dont care about miners or centralisation. Thats free market.

[adamstgBit]

poeple are saying Core is going to implement an increased block size its just a matter of how much bigger and exactly how to roll it out.

if true, Bullish as fuck.

So we should expect V. 0.12 in a couple of years?  
Bullish as fuck if true.

LOL
hopefully a few weeks...
my guess is if XT starts to gain support, Core will have to act fast.

[hdbuck]

poeple are saying Core is going to implement an increased block size its just a matter of how much bigger and exactly how to roll it out.

if true, Bullish as fuck.

So we should expect V. 0.12 in a couple of years?  
Bullish as fuck if true.

+ there is an upgrade that should prevent spam attacks to be released within next version too. Apparently.

[bassclef]

I've said it before, but doing something that has a 0% to undermine the network (which is nothing) is better than doing something with 0.5% or even 0.1% chance to harm the network (XT) in the long term.

Miners are ultimately incentivized to secure and protect the network, not improve it with risky upgrades that cause market participants to panic sell, devaluing their network's token. I predict they will simply not adopt XT.

If they don't, the market will find a bottom in the next few weeks as people slowly realize that XT is stillborn, and a strong rally will result. Definitely a golden buying opportunity.

As far as trading though, it's wait and see. The market is always with us.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[Fatman3001]

Miners are ultimately incentivized to secure and protect the network, not improve it with risky upgrades that cause market participants to panic sell, devaluing their network's token. I predict they will simply not adopt XT.

Some good news in mainstream press. Finally!

"Federal Reserve deeply split. Renegade group of board members to create separate American dollar"

"Despite all the sound and fury, a genuine split is still unlikely. Like doves and hawks at an old-fashioned central bank, the two sides will probably agree on some sort of compromise, perhaps at two fun-sounding “Bitcoin Scalability Workshops” scheduled for later this year. And even if miners get to decide by using the version they like, this would probably not lead to a Bitcoin split. Once it becomes clear which version is likely to prevail, all miners will have an incentive to join the winning side. Already, 13% of nodes have jumped on the dissident XT bandwagon, albeit few miners. Whether majority rule is the best way to run a system with Bitcoin’s pretensions is an entirely different question."

You know the debate is going off the rails when lambie is the voice of reason.

[Andre#]

I've said it before, but doing something that has a 0% to undermine the network (which is nothing) is better than doing something with 0.5% or even 0.1% chance to harm the network (XT) in the long term.

0% chance of undermining the network? Really?

"If the cap is not raised to some higher limit; allowing a larger number of users to maintain direct access, then individuals will be priced out of the blockchain. When that happens Bitcoin becomes yet another network with no direct (peer) access; like FedWire, SWIFT, and other private closed transfer networks.  There is no realistic scenario where a network capped permanently at 1MB can have meaningful adoption whilst still maintaining direct access to the blockchain by individuals. To be clear, by ‘direct access’ I mean both parties transacting directly on-chain without relying on an intermediary or trusted third party."

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=946236.0

[Fakhoury]

poeple are saying Core is going to implement an increased block size its just a matter of how much bigger and exactly how to roll it out.

if true, Bullish as fuck.

So we should expect V. 0.12 in a couple of years?  
Bullish as fuck if true.

LOL
hopefully a few weeks...
my guess is if XT starts to gain support, Core will have to act fast.

I see your guessing makes sense and I agree with bassclef as well.

[TerraMaster]

I say either way "damned if we do and damned if we don't"  bitcoin will never be able to meet high volume demands if block size isn't increased. To keep things the way they are (which I prefer) will lead to higher fees and still not be able to meet real growth adoption needs. I don't see how not doing anything will pave the way for future growth. Classic definition of a true conundrum here. 

[hdbuck]

I say either way "damned if we do and damned if we don't"  bitcoin will never be able to meet high volume demands if block size isn't increased. To keep things the way they are (which I prefer) will lead to higher fees and still not be able to meet real growth adoption needs. I don't see how not doing anything will pave the way for future growth. Classic definition of a true conundrum here.  

1/ there is on need mainstream adoption to all get what we want here: that is moon.
2/ mainstream adoption of bitcoin by sheeples is highly unlikely anyway, they might use some top layer of it or cheap altcoins.
3/ bitcoin is no pocket money, it is a secured (by decentralized rewarded miners) safe investment haven from them FED/USG/Wall street mafia.

Bitcoin is a privilege that you'll have to pay for eventually.

else just go altcoin with max blocksize and faster transactions.

[JayJuanGee]

The market WILL price in as BTC has failed, be prepared for ridiculously cheap Bitcorns (or Buttcoins or whatever)....

WAAAAAYYY TOO SOON to call failure.

[bassclef]

I've said it before, but doing something that has a 0% to undermine the network (which is nothing) is better than doing something with 0.5% or even 0.1% chance to harm the network (XT) in the long term.

0% chance of undermining the network? Really?

"If the cap is not raised to some higher limit; allowing a larger number of users to maintain direct access, then individuals will be priced out of the blockchain. When that happens Bitcoin becomes yet another network with no direct (peer) access; like FedWire, SWIFT, and other private closed transfer networks.  There is no realistic scenario where a network capped permanently at 1MB can have meaningful adoption whilst still maintaining direct access to the blockchain by individuals. To be clear, by ‘direct access’ I mean both parties transacting directly on-chain without relying on an intermediary or trusted third party."

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=946236.0

I'm not against raising the block limit, but there is not one solution. For the umpteenth time, it is not black and white, not XT or nothing.

Use logic and facts to form your opinion. It's important to not let fear cloud your judgement, nor marry oneself to a particular point of view.  Should we rush to judgement based on someone's opinion or weigh all evidence and make the most informed decision possible based on the facts?

[klee]

The market WILL price in as BTC has failed, be prepared for ridiculously cheap Bitcorns (or Buttcoins or whatever)....

WAAAAAYYY TOO SOON to call failure.

We just need to stay below 225 for a week without any change in the blocksize drama. Bitfinex 20M USD swaps are ready for action!

[TerraMaster]

I say either way "damned if we do and damned if we don't"  bitcoin will never be able to meet high volume demands if block size isn't increased. To keep things the way they are (which I prefer) will lead to higher fees and still not be able to meet real growth adoption needs. I don't see how not doing anything will pave the way for future growth. Classic definition of a true conundrum here.  

1/ there is on need mainstream adoption to all get what we want here: that is moon.
2/ mainstream adoption of bitcoin by sheeples is highly unlikely anyway, they might use some top layer of it or cheap altcoins.
3/ bitcoin is no pocket money, it is a secured (by decentralized miners) safe haven from them FED/USG/Banks mafia.

Bitcoin is a privilege that you'll have to pay for eventually.
else just go altcoin with max blocksize and fast transaction.

I suppose that is one way to look at it and is very true at present. I said in an earlier post, that I do not believe now is the time for something like XT.

I for one firmly believe in keeping the purity of the original core. IF mainstream adoption looked more promising, then ya, something would have to give I'm afraid. One of the best things about bitcoin is the inexpensive means to send and receive. So, what do ya do?

[Fakhoury]

I've never saw you Klee insanely bearish like this !!

[adamstgBit]

I say either way "damned if we do and damned if we don't"  bitcoin will never be able to meet high volume demands if block size isn't increased. To keep things the way they are (which I prefer) will lead to higher fees and still not be able to meet real growth adoption needs. I don't see how not doing anything will pave the way for future growth. Classic definition of a true conundrum here.  

1/ there is on need mainstream adoption to all get what we want here: that is moon.
2/ mainstream adoption of bitcoin by sheeples is highly unlikely anyway, they might use some top layer of it or cheap altcoins.
3/ bitcoin is no pocket money, it is a secured (by decentralized miners) safe haven from them FED/USG/Banks mafia.

Bitcoin is a privilege that you'll have to pay for eventually.
else just go altcoin with max blocksize and fast transaction.

I suppose that is one way to look at it and is very true at present. I said in an earlier post, that I do not believe now is the time for something like XT.

I for one firmly believe in keeping the purity of the original core. IF mainstream adoption looked more promising, then ya, something would have to give I'm afraid. One of the best things about bitcoin is the inexpensive means to send and receive. So, what do ya do?

have Core add a few MB to the limit while they implement blockstream and side chains

they either do that or risk losing the war.

i seriously doubt they will be able to get away with doing NOTHING and not get Owned by XT

[klee]

I've never saw you Klee insanely bearish like this !!

We are facing extreme conditions - this will either bring BTC to it's knees or fuel the next mega bubble (above 3000 usd).
I will post a conspiracy theory in P&F thread soon.

Just for the laughs but sometimes the badest taste joke can become true...

[klee]

I say either way "damned if we do and damned if we don't"  bitcoin will never be able to meet high volume demands if block size isn't increased. To keep things the way they are (which I prefer) will lead to higher fees and still not be able to meet real growth adoption needs. I don't see how not doing anything will pave the way for future growth. Classic definition of a true conundrum here.  

1/ there is on need mainstream adoption to all get what we want here: that is moon.
2/ mainstream adoption of bitcoin by sheeples is highly unlikely anyway, they might use some top layer of it or cheap altcoins.
3/ bitcoin is no pocket money, it is a secured (by decentralized miners) safe haven from them FED/USG/Banks mafia.

Bitcoin is a privilege that you'll have to pay for eventually.
else just go altcoin with max blocksize and fast transaction.

I suppose that is one way to look at it and is very true at present. I said in an earlier post, that I do not believe now is the time for something like XT.

I for one firmly believe in keeping the purity of the original core. IF mainstream adoption looked more promising, then ya, something would have to give I'm afraid. One of the best things about bitcoin is the inexpensive means to send and receive. So, what do ya do?

have Core add a few MB to the limit while they implement blockstream and side chains

they either do that or risk losing the war.

i seriously doubt they will be able to get away with doing NOTHING and not get Owned by XT

Fully agree here...