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

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[1714485640]

1714485640

[1714485640]

1714485640

[harrymmmm]

I just thought that it was crazy to not take advantage of this when I was posting anyway.

There is a cost. See _my_ sig.

You too.

Luckily, the 700 micros far exceeds the value of any credibility loss I may suffer in your direction.

Mirth aside, I prefer to maintain the illusion that my comments stand on their own, and do not require jbreher 'credibility points'.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[Elwar]

So...how do I roll my 401k into a Bitcoin share?

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[White sugar]

If we don't break 400 soon, we will see an epic dump.

Save my words

[medialab101]

If we don't break 400 soon, we will see an epic dump.

Save my words

Aaaaaaaand it... broke $400

[BitUsher]

So, all that "concern trolling" about the terrible consequences of large blocks by Adam, Greg, and the rest of the Blockstream/Viacoin crowd was just bullshit, and they kew it. Segregated Witness will allow 4-5 MB blocks "soon"(because they will not wait for consensus, of course, but intend to deploy it in "stealth mode", aka "soft fork ).  And they are all euphoric about it.  

I wonder how the small-blockians who sincerely believed that bullshit are feeling now.  Betrayed and duped? Probably not: like that speaker from 1984, they will swicth in mid-sentence from "blocks larger than 1 MB will kill bitcoin" to "4 MB blocks are wonderful".  From "we need the fee market to support miners and push traffic to off-chain solutions" to "segregated witnesses is essential to let bitcoin to grow without running into saturation".

To be sure, Blockstreamers only now are coming to realize that an increase of the effective block size limit to 4 MB will have the unexpected and unwelcome consequence of increasing the effective block size limit to 4 MB.  So Luke has already proposed to keep the 1 MB limit for the total block size, including the segregated part. And Greg, in his characteristic straightforward and honest manner, has proposed to combine SW with Adam's 2-4-8 block size limit plan, but "scaled for the effect of segregated witnesses" -- which must mean setting the nominal block size limit to 0.5-1-2 MB.

But they should not worry, since the space savings will only occur if the clients start issuing transactions in the new SW format.  Which will not happen right away, if SW is deployed by soft fork.  And even after the clients have upgraded, the use of SW will be optional.  Will there be incentives for the clients to use it?

The Moment when you know you are on the right path when bitter bitcoin skeptics strangely take sides in consensus changes when they have no stake in the battle.

"Academic interest in bitcoin only."

Why so many emotional and bitter outbursts instead of cool, collective, or humored observances?

To those interested in a balanced and holistic way to scale and grow capacity here is a great outline--

http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-December/011865.html

Bitcoin has a bright future indeed.

[JorgeStolfi]

And even after the clients have upgraded, the use of SW will be optional.  Will there be incentives for the clients to use it?

They could easily add extra priority points for transactions that use sw.

Greg Maxwell aka nullc on reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3vurqp/greg_maxwell_capacity_increases_for_the_bitcoin/cxr73g3
They're given priority by having a much lower effective size; meaning they'll be ranked higher for a given amount of fee paid, and thus mined quicker.

Will they? Miners still have to process and transmit the full data if they are to really validate the transactions that they mine.  The space and bandwidth savings will be realized only by simple clients and nodes who do not need to validate the signatures.  So why would the miners give discounts for transactions in the SW format?

But they should not worry, since the space savings will only occur if the clients start issuing transactions in the new SW format.  Which will not happen right away, if SW is deployed by soft fork.  And even after the clients have upgraded, the use of SW will be optional.  Will there be incentives for the clients to use it?

No, regular transactions get a 75% bump in space.

IIUC, segregated witnesses requires a different signature format (achieved through a scripting hack to avoid hard forks) whereby the signatures are moved out of the tx body and are not included in the tx hash.  That allows the signatures to be sent and stored separately.  Regular transactions will still have to be stored in full in the blocks.  Wallets willnot be issuing SW trasactions until they upgrade, and (since it will be a soft fork) they will not be required to.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[StarenseN]

This thread becomes silent again. Perfect.

[JorgeStolfi]

The Moment when you know you are on the right path when bitter bitcoin skeptics strangely take sides in consensus changes when they have no stake in the battle.

"Academic interest in bitcoin only."

Why so many emotional and bitter outbursts instead of cool, collective, or humored observances?

Yeah, having been called an idiot/troll/shill by the "1 MB is sacred" crowd for months did spoil my academic detachment, I confess. 

[Stringer Bell]

The Moment when you know you are on the right path when bitter bitcoin skeptics strangely take sides in consensus changes when they have no stake in the battle.

"Academic interest in bitcoin only."

Why so many emotional and bitter outbursts instead of cool, collective, or humored observances?

This really says it all. Kind of fun to watch them grasping at straws.

[jbreher]

So...how do I roll my 401k into a Bitcoin share?

http://www.broadfinancial.com/self-directed/bitcoin-ira/

[suda123]

This thread becomes silent again. Perfect.

meep

[BitUsher]

Yeah, having been called an idiot/troll/shill by the "1 MB is sacred" crowd for months did spoil my academic detachment, I confess.  

So did you pick a consensus side in matters which have no impact upon you merely out of academic interest or because of a bitter emotional reaction?

So why would the miners give discounts for transactions in the SW format?

Ignoring the miners long term incentives to benefit the ecosystem and assuming short term selfish behavior only, the miners will be incentivized by more tx fees when the capacity more than doubles. When margins are extremely tight these incentives are more than enough to encourage the right behavior.

[oda.krell]

I don't really care how we get to effective ~4MB (should be good for now), as long as the economical retardation of artificial scarcity, i.e purposefully bottlenecking txs, doesn't take hold -- and judging by the (economically surprisingly lucid) reaction of the mining majority of recent months, that's not likely to happen in the foreseeable future.

[becoin]

Yeah, having been called an idiot/troll/shill by the "1 MB is sacred" crowd for months did spoil my academic detachment, I confess. 

Everyone that is part of "XT altcoin is sacred" crowd is idiot/troll/shill.

[Fatman3001]

Yeah, having been called an idiot/troll/shill by the "1 MB is sacred" crowd for months did spoil my academic detachment, I confess. 

Everyone that is part of "XT altcoin is sacred" crowd is idiot/troll/shill.

That's a particularly idiotic statement. And it's not even from brg444 or hdbuck.

[Dotto]

That price action is so sustainable.

Also, the only active troll on the forum is Strollfi.

Good work, fellows