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

[ElectricMucus]

How do you propose that the miners are incentivized to protect the security of the blockchain if there is no scarcity enforced on the size of the Blockchain?

By the block reward, and theoretically by enforcing scarcity themselves. BIP100 simply provides a means for a "production target" on confirming transactions. OPEC does it, Semiconductor producers do it.
Aren't you people usually all about "supply side" economics?  

The issue is something else:
What incentive do miners have to relay transactions with significant fees to other miners once the block reward is reduced? (see the red balloons and bitcoin paper done by Microsoft)
What incentive do I have to run a node as an end user?
What incentive is there at all to relay any transaction made by somebody else for anyone?

[1714294337]

1714294337

[1714294337]

1714294337

[1714294337]

1714294337

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[aztecminer]

who will bother to open an account with coinbase to buy bitcoins so they can buy stuff while paying a high fee ?? whats the point.. pay high fees.. instead use a debit card doesnt cost end user nothing to use a debit card and its easy.. no reason to use bitcoin that has multiples of issues that we all are aware of .. and if you are a gun owner and support the second amendment then you need to oppose the implementation of the "blockchain blacklists" code. i happen to be one of the "dwayne" brothers and i think your "blockchain blacklists" is a real cute trick. obviously there is only once choice.. cripple bitcoin with low bandwidth, slow payments with high fees ...... RIP XT or bitcoin make your choice.

about to get smacked down by the bear troll fud (i gotta get me one these cameras!) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIhCNbdIFT4

[billyjoeallen]

[ mass adoption ] will NEVER happen if the network doesn't scale efficiently.

One must wonder whether mass adoption will ever happen.  The block size limit has not been an obstacle so far, yet adoption does not seem to be exactly exploding.  (The block size limit might be an obstacle within a year, if the traffic keeps growing at the recent rate.)

Internet adoption didn't dramatically accelerate until the World Wide Web. Bitcoin is still looking for that "killer app".  There are many potential candidates, but what will take off is probably something we haven't even thought of yet. 

[brg444]

They can include or exclude any transactions as they see fit.

Then this is the culprit that needs to be fixed in a future update.  Miners should have no say whatsoever in which transactions to in or exclude.

Unfortunately, Satoshi's breakthrough, that made bitcoin possible, was to give all the power to the miners -- with the proof-of-work trick to keep them from cheating.  That would have worked if mining had remained well-distributed, so that it would be practically impossible to convince a majority of them to sabotage the system. 

But it did not happen that way, basically because the price shoot up to 100 or 1000 times what it should have been, given its usage.   With that hyperinflated price, and the fixed block reward, mining become a very profitable activity, that was worth carrying out in an industrial scale, by entities distinct from the users.  Then the mining industry got concentrated in a few companies because of economies of scale.

Bitcoin was created to be a peer-to-peer payent system that did not require trusted third parties, including central authorities.  Strictly speaking, bitcoin is broken right now; because the top 5-6 miners are third parties that must be trusted not to abuse their power.  With the BIP100 discussion, bitcoiners seem to be gradually becoming aware of that fact: it will be the miners that will decide whether, when, and how to change the block size limit

Bitcoin may still get "cured" if mining becomes again distributed among the users.  However, I do not see how that could happen, unless the price crashes to such a low level that no one will want to mine for profit, and mining becomes again a client activity -- say, a convenient alternative to buying bitcoins, that an ordinary person could use  to get some bitcoins to pay for coffee or whatever.

Taking away the power from the miners -- in particular, forcing them to process all transactions issued by clients -- would require reforming bitcoin to the core.  It seems that another Satoshi-level ingenious idea would be needed do that without introducing some trusted central authority.

All of this would be true if it wasn't for the nodes actually enforcing governance on the system.

Miners won't decide anything but what the economic majority gets consensus on.

The reason the block size is here is precisely to put a check on these miners and their selfish interest by protecting the network of nodes and its decentralization from the inherent economies of scale at play.

[PoolMinor]

Good Morning Doji Star!

[brg444]

who will bother to open an account with coinbase to buy bitcoins so they can buy stuff while paying a high fee ?? whats the point.. pay high fees.. instead use a debit card doesnt cost end user nothing to use a debit card and its easy.. no reason to use bitcoin that has multiples of issues that we all are aware of .. and if you are a gun owner and support the second amendment then you need to oppose the implementation of the "blockchain blacklists" code. i happen to be one of the "dwayne" brothers and i think your "blockchain blacklists" is a real cute trick. obviously there is only once choice.. cripple bitcoin with low bandwidth, slow payments with high fees ...... RIP XT or bitcoin make your choice.

about to get smacked down by the bear troll fud (i gotta get me one these cameras!) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIhCNbdIFT4

Indeed. What is the point of buying bitcoins to buy stuff? That is the question maybe you should ask yourself.

Did you consider maybe you did not have the right idea about what Bitcoin's real utility is?

[aztecminer]

who will bother to open an account with coinbase to buy bitcoins so they can buy stuff while paying a high fee ?? whats the point.. pay high fees.. instead use a debit card doesnt cost end user nothing to use a debit card and its easy.. no reason to use bitcoin that has multiples of issues that we all are aware of .. and if you are a gun owner and support the second amendment then you need to oppose the implementation of the "blockchain blacklists" code. i happen to be one of the "dwayne" brothers and i think your "blockchain blacklists" is a real cute trick. obviously there is only once choice.. cripple bitcoin with low bandwidth, slow payments with high fees ...... RIP XT or bitcoin make your choice.

about to get smacked down by the bear troll fud (i gotta get me one these cameras!) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIhCNbdIFT4

Indeed. What is the point of buying bitcoins to buy stuff? That is the question maybe you should ask yourself.

Did you consider maybe you did not have the right idea about what Bitcoin's real utility is?

it doesnt matter what i think or used to think about bitcoin utility..  problem is i think making a tool to intimidate gun owners with "blockchain blacklists" is unacceptable .. bitcoin not going to be reserve currency .

[brg444]

[ mass adoption ] will NEVER happen if the network doesn't scale efficiently.

One must wonder whether mass adoption will ever happen.  The block size limit has not been an obstacle so far, yet adoption does not seem to be exactly exploding.  (The block size limit might be an obstacle within a year, if the traffic keeps growing at the recent rate.)

Internet adoption didn't dramatically accelerate until the World Wide Web. Bitcoin is still looking for that "killer app".  There are many potential candidates, but what will take off is probably something we haven't even thought of yet. 

Heh, so you're a "killer app" troll too  

Consider that Bitcoin adoption is not merely about adding users but attracting capital. Bitcoin as it exists can accommodate an infinite amount of capital. There is no "scaling" problem in that regard.

Now what you are concerned with "transaction scaling" is a different set of problem. One that is often correlated to the growth of the network but any perspicacious onlooker will have noticed there is something missing from this theory.

You have misconception about Bitcoin's utility value and you need to address it before coming forward with more arguments!

[brg444]

who will bother to open an account with coinbase to buy bitcoins so they can buy stuff while paying a high fee ?? whats the point.. pay high fees.. instead use a debit card doesnt cost end user nothing to use a debit card and its easy.. no reason to use bitcoin that has multiples of issues that we all are aware of .. and if you are a gun owner and support the second amendment then you need to oppose the implementation of the "blockchain blacklists" code. i happen to be one of the "dwayne" brothers and i think your "blockchain blacklists" is a real cute trick. obviously there is only once choice.. cripple bitcoin with low bandwidth, slow payments with high fees ...... RIP XT or bitcoin make your choice.

about to get smacked down by the bear troll fud (i gotta get me one these cameras!) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIhCNbdIFT4

Indeed. What is the point of buying bitcoins to buy stuff? That is the question maybe you should ask yourself.

Did you consider maybe you did not have the right idea about what Bitcoin's real utility is?

it doesnt matter what i think or used to think about bitcoin utility..  problem is i think making a tool to intimidate gun owners with "blockchain blacklists" is unacceptable .. bitcoin not going to be reserve currency .

Uh. Ok.

Now I remember why I always skip over your posts.

 

[aztecminer]

who will bother to open an account with coinbase to buy bitcoins so they can buy stuff while paying a high fee ?? whats the point.. pay high fees.. instead use a debit card doesnt cost end user nothing to use a debit card and its easy.. no reason to use bitcoin that has multiples of issues that we all are aware of .. and if you are a gun owner and support the second amendment then you need to oppose the implementation of the "blockchain blacklists" code. i happen to be one of the "dwayne" brothers and i think your "blockchain blacklists" is a real cute trick. obviously there is only once choice.. cripple bitcoin with low bandwidth, slow payments with high fees ...... RIP XT or bitcoin make your choice.

about to get smacked down by the bear troll fud (i gotta get me one these cameras!) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIhCNbdIFT4

Indeed. What is the point of buying bitcoins to buy stuff? That is the question maybe you should ask yourself.

Did you consider maybe you did not have the right idea about what Bitcoin's real utility is?

it doesnt matter what i think or used to think about bitcoin utility..  problem is i think making a tool to intimidate gun owners with "blockchain blacklists" is unacceptable .. bitcoin not going to be reserve currency .

Uh. Ok.

Now I remember why I always skip over your posts.

 

you mean your not going to tell me about the utility of bitcoin ?? i figure it has utility since i can't put a gold or silver coin through the internet. the usa is going to have to replace the usd eventually, probably sooner than we think. i don't believe it will be with cryptos though.. i think cryptos wont be going away however i do not believe they will be the primary currency. i think they will continue just as they are as a secondary speculative commodity + currency ... too many problems to overcome to become a primary currency at this time.. and "blockchain blacklists" will toast bitcoin so we will have to be happy with "cripplecoin" ..

[billyjoeallen]

[ mass adoption ] will NEVER happen if the network doesn't scale efficiently.

One must wonder whether mass adoption will ever happen.  The block size limit has not been an obstacle so far, yet adoption does not seem to be exactly exploding.  (The block size limit might be an obstacle within a year, if the traffic keeps growing at the recent rate.)

Internet adoption didn't dramatically accelerate until the World Wide Web. Bitcoin is still looking for that "killer app".  There are many potential candidates, but what will take off is probably something we haven't even thought of yet. 

Heh, so you're a "killer app" troll too  

Consider that Bitcoin adoption is not merely about adding users but attracting capital. Bitcoin as it exists can accommodate an infinite amount of capital. There is no "scaling" problem in that regard.

Now what you are concerned with "transaction scaling" is a different set of problem. One that is often correlated to the growth of the network but any perspicacious onlooker will have noticed there is something missing from this theory.

You have misconception about Bitcoin's utility value and you need to address it before coming forward with more arguments!

I know what Bitcoin's utility value to me is, but nobody has the whole picture. What are you implying is the "real" utility value?  Yes, we absolutely need to attract new capital.  How do you think we're gonna do it?

[DieJohnny]

Bitcoin's killer app is whenever bank lets you create a savings account in bitcoin and you don't have to worry about ever losing your keys.

In other words, Bitcoin itself sucks for the average person, it won't be until trusted financial institutions offer it as an investment and insulate people from bitcoins horrid private key management problems that bitcoin will ever get to 100 billion.

Funny the way to bitcoin moving forward is through trust, too funny.

[brg444]

[ mass adoption ] will NEVER happen if the network doesn't scale efficiently.

One must wonder whether mass adoption will ever happen.  The block size limit has not been an obstacle so far, yet adoption does not seem to be exactly exploding.  (The block size limit might be an obstacle within a year, if the traffic keeps growing at the recent rate.)

Internet adoption didn't dramatically accelerate until the World Wide Web. Bitcoin is still looking for that "killer app".  There are many potential candidates, but what will take off is probably something we haven't even thought of yet. 

Heh, so you're a "killer app" troll too  

Consider that Bitcoin adoption is not merely about adding users but attracting capital. Bitcoin as it exists can accommodate an infinite amount of capital. There is no "scaling" problem in that regard.

Now what you are concerned with "transaction scaling" is a different set of problem. One that is often correlated to the growth of the network but any perspicacious onlooker will have noticed there is something missing from this theory.

You have misconception about Bitcoin's utility value and you need to address it before coming forward with more arguments!

I know what Bitcoin's utility value to me is, but nobody has the whole picture. What are you implying is the "real" utility value?  Yes, we absolutely need to attract new capital.  How do you think we're gonna do it?

By attracting capital looking for a safe, deflationary, impossible to censor or seize store of wealth.  

Stop the posturing about mainstream sheeple adoptions. The sheeps are generally poor and can only procure so much value to Bitcoin. We are still a couple years from crossing the technological chasm as Bitcoin as it stands is quite honestly not a competitive consumer product.

Fortunately there are trillions of capital who will soon be looking for that exit. Better strap your helmet and just be patient. Stop trying to "make Bitcoin better" 

[brg444]

Bitcoin's killer app is whenever bank lets you create a savings account in bitcoin and you don't have to worry about ever losing your keys.

Bitcoin's killer app is its deflationary nature and scarce supply in a world of inflationary money and quantitative easing.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[aztecminer]

Bitcoin's killer app is whenever bank lets you create a savings account in bitcoin and you don't have to worry about ever losing your keys.

Bitcoin's killer app is its deflationary nature and scarce supply in a world of inflationary money and quantitative easing.

they will make more when the "cripplecoin" miners vote to make more .. they have to because people lose bitcoins all the time by losing their private keys to their cold storage wallets and stuff.. precious metals is a much more true deflationary and scarce supply than cryptos... bitcoin is not being straightforward about the cap just as they are not being straightforward about "blockchain blacklists" or how they intend to use "cripplecoins" and the new miner companies ability to vote how slow we gonna go and how much fees they are going to charge everyone ... u need to ask yourself again what is bitcoins utility because you obviously have not thought it through.

[mavericklm]

i want 300 or under 200!!!
c'mon btc! do something!

[JorgeStolfi]

If the miners do something that the bitcoin hodlers don't like, they will be mining worthless tokens. Care to explain why they would abuse their power?

My mother had a supertitious prayer in Venetian that she recited during storms, asking for "Santa Barbara e San Simon" to protect us from "thunder and lightning".  Of the same genre as St. Benedict's apocriphal verses to repeal the Devil.

"The economic majority rules" is a similar mantra that superstitious bitcoiners invoke to drive away the menace of the Five Evil Mining Pools, those that have 70% or more of the total hashing power.   The bitcoiner's mantra is just as logical, effective, and tested by experience as those medieval formulas.

If a mining majority decides to impose a protocol change, that the other players don't like but can live with -- like higher or lower block size limit, higher minimum fees, delayed reward halving -- the "economic majority" will accept it, because it knows that miners can hurt them far more efffectively and promptly than they can hurt the miners.

Holders, in particular, have almost no power.  All they could do is to commit financial suicide by dumping their coins and crashing the price; but they wold inflict more harm to themselves than to the miners.  Therefore they will not do that; they will keep holding, praying to Sain Barbara that the price will not suffer.  Indeed, I bet that they will even speak out in favor of the change, to protect their investment.

When the US government removed the backing of the dollar, Americans did not burn their dollar bills.  When banks as a whole raise their fees or cut some services, clients do not run en masse to close their accounts.  

I would really like you to research what would happen if every bitcoin hodler, in the event of the miners going rogue, turns on GPU miners and their ASIC units that are now collecting dust.

Well, not "every" bitcoin holder would do that.  Like bankers and governments, the miners will usually avoid diong something so bad that it will directly hurt all of them and cause all of them to revolt.  Therefore, most holders will be upset, but will not spend real money with utility bills just to fight some ideological "purity of protocol" cause.  

But, even if all off-line mining equipment was brought on-line again, it probably would not account for 20% of the total hashpower.,

[billyjoeallen]

By attracting capital looking for a safe, deflationary, impossible to censor or seize store of wealth.  

Stop the posturing about mainstream sheeple adoptions. The sheeps are generally poor and can only procure so much value to Bitcoin. We are still a couple years from crossing the technological chasm as Bitcoin as it stands is quite honestly not a competitive consumer product.

Fortunately there are trillions of capital who will soon be looking for that exit. Better strap your helmet and just be patient. Stop trying to "make Bitcoin better" 

So the new Swiss Bank Account, huh? Why not just store wealth in an active volcano? It doesn't do you any good to hide wealth if you can't retrieve it.