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

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[1714307885]

1714307885

[1714307885]

1714307885

[1714307885]

1714307885

[marcus_of_augustus]

I wonder how much money and time it would take to add enough XT hashing power to trigger the switch assuming no more existing nodes defected.  I'm guessing it could easily be done for less than $500M.  The problem is that the cripplecoiners would only need to add one Terahash/second for every 3 Terahashes/sec new nodes to prevent it from happening.

I'm pretty sure 21.co's chips will be mining XT. Microtransactions will not be practical once the network approaches capacity.  At capacity, they won't even be possible.

Cripplecoiners consider small transactions "spam", but microtransactions will prevent spam if, for example, email requires 0.1 milibit postage. or even 0.01 mBit. A lightning network adds a layer of complexity to a system that is already too complex for mainstream use.  Trusted third parties may make it simple and easy, but that defeats the whole purpose of a peer to peer network.

i think you should try squeezing in more "cripplecoiners" slurs into your rants to be more believable ... or it's simply a rant and ineffective

[billyjoeallen]

I wonder how much money and time it would take to add enough XT hashing power to trigger the switch assuming no more existing nodes defected.  I'm guessing it could easily be done for less than $500M.  The problem is that the cripplecoiners would only need to add one Terahash/second for every 3 Terahashes/sec new nodes to prevent it from happening.

I'm pretty sure 21.co's chips will be mining XT. Microtransactions will not be practical once the network approaches capacity.  At capacity, they won't even be possible.

Cripplecoiners consider small transactions "spam", but microtransactions will prevent spam if, for example, email requires 0.1 milibit postage. or even 0.01 mBit. A lightning network adds a layer of complexity to a system that is already too complex for mainstream use.  Trusted third parties may make it simple and easy, but that defeats the whole purpose of a peer to peer network.

Did you make some bad bets Mr decentral banker? You seem awfully bitter as of late.

Well, a small profit in BTC terms. I immediately reinvested my profits from the flash crash back into BTC. Obviously my stash in dollar terms is down. No, I'm bitter because I know this scaling controversy will drag on for months. Markets hate uncertainty.

Having said that, I know BFX isn't going to crash to double digits. If it didn't during the flash crash with far more dollar swaps and fewer BTC swaps, it won't crash now. It may go down and probably will, but there are too many people living in countries with crashing fiat and BTC onramps now. All I have to do is stay solvent and wait.  BTC is crippled, but in the land of the lepers, the man with the most toes is king.

[billyjoeallen]

I wonder how much money and time it would take to add enough XT hashing power to trigger the switch assuming no more existing nodes defected.  I'm guessing it could easily be done for less than $500M.  The problem is that the cripplecoiners would only need to add one Terahash/second for every 3 Terahashes/sec new nodes to prevent it from happening.

I'm pretty sure 21.co's chips will be mining XT. Microtransactions will not be practical once the network approaches capacity.  At capacity, they won't even be possible.

Cripplecoiners consider small transactions "spam", but microtransactions will prevent spam if, for example, email requires 0.1 milibit postage. or even 0.01 mBit. A lightning network adds a layer of complexity to a system that is already too complex for mainstream use.  Trusted third parties may make it simple and easy, but that defeats the whole purpose of a peer to peer network.

i think you should try squeezing in more "cripplecoiners" slurs into your rants to be more believable ... or it's simply a rant and ineffective

I call our side "scaleforkers", because I try to be an equal opportunity offender. Anyhowz, if the slur fits...

There's no reason for there to be any block size limit for the same reason there is no reason to fear selfish miners witholding blocks to get a head start on the next one. If your block is too big, someone else's block will propagate faster and you'll miss out on the block reward.

You gotta decide if you want a small slice of a big pie or a huge slice of a tiny one.  intentionally throttling the network to collect more fees is like strangling the golden goose to get more eggs.

[Cconvert2G36]

I wonder how much money and time it would take to add enough XT hashing power to trigger the switch assuming no more existing nodes defected.  I'm guessing it could easily be done for less than $500M.  The problem is that the cripplecoiners would only need to add one Terahash/second for every 3 Terahashes/sec new nodes to prevent it from happening.

I'm pretty sure 21.co's chips will be mining XT. Microtransactions will not be practical once the network approaches capacity.  At capacity, they won't even be possible.

Cripplecoiners consider small transactions "spam", but microtransactions will prevent spam if, for example, email requires 0.1 milibit postage. or even 0.01 mBit. A lightning network adds a layer of complexity to a system that is already too complex for mainstream use.  Trusted third parties may make it simple and easy, but that defeats the whole purpose of a peer to peer network.

i think you should try squeezing in more "cripplecoiners" slurs into your rants to be more believable ... or it's simply a rant and ineffective

I call our side "scaleforkers", because I try to be an equal opportunity offender. Anyhowz, if the slur fits...

There's no reason for there to be any block size limit for the same reason there is no reason to fear selfish miners witholding blocks to get a head start on the next one. If your block is too big, someone else's block will propagate faster and you'll miss out on the block reward.

You gotta decide if you want a small slice of a big pie or a huge slice of a tiny one.  intentionally throttling the network to collect more fees is like strangling the golden goose to get more eggs.

Or like jumping out of a certain wooden sculpture when the walls of Troy first come into view?

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[TerraMaster]

The ball is already in motion. XT is here but for how long?  I think its going to be a slow long process. If it fails to succeed at some point and time they (gavin hearn etc) will have to go back to the drawing board and write this one off I would think.

Also, I guess its better for them to put this out there now XT" while BTC is kind of in a lull with price ho hum, as opposed to putting it out there when or if BTC is at say 600.00 or so    you get the point. No offense to anyone who has bought in higher than todays price..... lol

Main thought is, how long will devs pursue XT if there is no adoption but by a handful of supporters.... 3 months? 6 10 a year?  when do they throw in the towel. I noticed 4 XT blocks found of last 1000 up one. That's going to be the number to watch.

[billyjoeallen]

I wonder how much money and time it would take to add enough XT hashing power to trigger the switch assuming no more existing nodes defected.  I'm guessing it could easily be done for less than $500M.  The problem is that the cripplecoiners would only need to add one Terahash/second for every 3 Terahashes/sec new nodes to prevent it from happening.

I'm pretty sure 21.co's chips will be mining XT. Microtransactions will not be practical once the network approaches capacity.  At capacity, they won't even be possible.

Cripplecoiners consider small transactions "spam", but microtransactions will prevent spam if, for example, email requires 0.1 milibit postage. or even 0.01 mBit. A lightning network adds a layer of complexity to a system that is already too complex for mainstream use.  Trusted third parties may make it simple and easy, but that defeats the whole purpose of a peer to peer network.

i think you should try squeezing in more "cripplecoiners" slurs into your rants to be more believable ... or it's simply a rant and ineffective

I call our side "scaleforkers", because I try to be an equal opportunity offender. Anyhowz, if the slur fits...

There's no reason for there to be any block size limit for the same reason there is no reason to fear selfish miners witholding blocks to get a head start on the next one. If your block is too big, someone else's block will propagate faster and you'll miss out on the block reward.

You gotta decide if you want a small slice of a big pie or a huge slice of a tiny one.  intentionally throttling the network to collect more fees is like strangling the golden goose to get more eggs.

Or like jumping out of a certain wooden sculpture when the walls of Troy first come into view?

Not sure if you're being sarcastic. If you don't like XT, then give us an alternative that scales. I'm not in love with Gavin and Hearn, but they are the only devs apparently committed to making Bitcoin scale. The Trojan Horse metaphor could equally apply to core devs centralizing control in the name of decentralization. Without at least the threat of a hard fork, there is no incentive for them to listen to users like me.

[Chef Ramsay]

1900 bitcoin bought in the last hour per fiatleak so this is something to be happy about. Now, we press forward.

[Cconvert2G36]

Poe's law folks...

(I was agreeing with you, to an extent.)

Let's hope Core doesn't wait until the depths of winter, the grove is cold that time of year, to provide a road map.

[TerraMaster]

1900 bitcoin bought in the last hour per fiatleak so this is something to be happy about. Now, we press forward.

Monday is coming now, it should be an interesting week with all the stock market woes and so on. I still believe BTC is as good or better an investment, as in any other time, despite the core vs. XT debate. 

[billyjoeallen]

1900 bitcoin bought in the last hour per fiatleak so this is something to be happy about. Now, we press forward.

Monday is coming now, it should be an interesting week with all the stock market woes and so on. I still believe BTC is as good or better an investment, as in any other time, despite the core vs. XT debate. 

Playing the stock market amounts to guessing which way the Fed will go and when: print or raise rates. The fact that the current BTC market amounts to guessing which way Core will go and when should tell you that they already have too much power.

[shmadz]

 intentionally throttling the network to collect more fees is like strangling the golden goose to get more eggs.

Or like jumping out of a certain wooden sculpture when the walls of Troy first come into view?

Or like trying to charge money for an infinite resource?

Bip 101 timescale:

Year.  Size.  Reward.  blockchain size (rough estimate)
2016  8MB.  12.5.     40GB
2020  32MB  6.25.     3.4TB
2024. 128MB  3.125.  16.8TB
2028. 512MB  1.5625.  70.56TB
2032  2048MB  0.78125.  285.6TB
2036  8192MB  0.390625.  1145TB

How many individuals do you think will be incentivized to store more than a petabyte of data with no compensation? The good news is that Gavin's plan is preposterous and will never gain traction, so fortunately there's nothing to worry about.  

[aztecminer]

1900 bitcoin bought in the last hour per fiatleak so this is something to be happy about. Now, we press forward.

defending 225 first and then 220 to keep bitfinix longs from being rekt again.

[billyjoeallen]

  intentionally throttling the network to collect more fees is like strangling the golden goose to get more eggs.

Or like jumping out of a certain wooden sculpture when the walls of Troy first come into view?

Our like trying to charge money for an infinite resource?

Bip 101 timescale:

Year.  Size.  Reward.  blockchain size (rough estimate)
2016  8MB.  12.5.     40GB
2020  32MB  6.25.     3.4TB
2024. 128MB  3.125.  16.8TB
2028. 512MB  1.5625.  70.56TB
2032  2048MB  0.78125.  285.6TB
2036  8192MB  0.390625.  1145TB

How many individuals do you think will be incentivized to store more than a petabyte of data with no compensation? The good news is that Gavin's plan is preposterous and will never gain traction, so fortunately there's nothing to worry about.  

2036 is in 21 years. How big was a hard drive 21 years ago?  (hint: a tiny fraction of the storage on my current 3 year old phone).  Storage is so cheap now that if you include cloud storage like dropbox, it's free.
This is the same fallacy the Malthusians made about mass starvation with population doubling every forty years.  Didn't happen. All famines today are political, including ours.

[Cconvert2G36]

 intentionally throttling the network to collect more fees is like strangling the golden goose to get more eggs.

Or like jumping out of a certain wooden sculpture when the walls of Troy first come into view?

Or like trying to charge money for an infinite resource?

Bip 101 timescale:

Year.  Size.  Reward.  blockchain size (rough estimate)
2016  8MB.  12.5.     40GB
2020  32MB  6.25.     3.4TB
2024. 128MB  3.125.  16.8TB
2028. 512MB  1.5625.  70.56TB
2032  2048MB  0.78125.  285.6TB
2036  8192MB  0.390625.  1145TB

How many individuals do you think will be incentivized to store more than a petabyte of data with no compensation? The good news is that Gavin's plan is preposterous and will never gain traction, so fortunately there's nothing to worry about.  

Good thing I don't have to store or maintain today's blockchain with the computers and networks of 20 years ago...

Edit: Pg 13333, Meet on the Level, Part Upon the Square, amirite?

[aztecminer]

Also, I guess its better for them to put this out there now XT" while BTC is kind of in a lull with price ho hum, as opposed to putting it out there when or if BTC is at say 600.00 or so    you get the point. No offense to anyone who has bought in higher than todays price..... lol

well if the fork doesnt get us then the "too big to fail" leveraged longs @bitfinix probably will ..

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[HerrAndreas]

Ever wondered why unsuccessful people (or movements) always blame others for their failure, but successful ones never?

Dont get me wrong, but if you are oposing an existing system, please be prepared for equally sized oposition.

If you dont make it, it will have been your own fault.

[billyjoeallen]

Ever wondered why unsuccessful people (or movements) always blame others for their failure, but successful ones never?

Dont get me wrong, but if you are oposing an existing system, please be prepared for equally sized oposition.

If you dont make it, it will have been your own fault.

As much as I would like to blame the banksters for this mess, there is too much evidence that it's actually a reaction to 21's embedded chip business model by the soon-to-be-obsolete ASIC miners. Never ascribe to conspiracy that which can be equally explained by incompetence.  Old miners think making microtransactions impractical will save them when the opposite is true. Microtransactions will be the onramp for the third world and the great majority of the unbanked. 

In England, land prices skyrocketed when the great estates were broken up and the peasants were finally allowed to own land.  You would think the people selling the land would be happy about that, but the great lords thought it was the end of the world.  The more things  change, the more they stay the same.