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

[bitebits]

I was honestly surprised that the alleged identification of 'Satoshi' did not cause a significant price drop

Can you explain your thought process why it would?

[1714497599]

1714497599

[600watt]

Warning: I bought back at $402, probable crash incoming because my luck is usually terrible.

Sweet! Wished I could have caught 402.

Gotta set your buys before the price goes there, Pretty damn hard to catch falling knives.

You got that right. I'm up so I'm not complaining. I'm normally 2 bucks under the lows and miss em.

You are not the only one...

I had a small buy order around 404.5 .....





.... but on Finex  

should have used stamp

[inca]

I was honestly surprised that the alleged identification of 'Satoshi' did not cause a significant price drop

Can you explain your thought process why it would?

The same mechanism as satoshi's early coins moving - the unfounded fear of a large market sell would push weak traders to immediately sell their coins.

[jbreher]

Hello there,

Gavin Andresen has just published a new article: Segregated Witness is cool

BULLISH!!!

TL;DR recap:

So… how does all of this help with the one megabyte block size limit?

Well, once all the details are worked out, and the soft or hard fork is past, and a significant fraction of transactions are spending segregated witness-locked outputs… more transactions will fit into the 1 megabyte hard limit. For example, the simplest possible one-input, one-output segregated witness transaction would be about 90 bytes of transaction data plus 80 or so bytes of signature– only those 90 bytes need to squeeze into the one megabyte block, instead of 170 bytes. More complicated multi-signature transactions save even more.

Looks like they're working to double the transaction limits of a block, without a hard fork! This could spell a lot of good news for the every day commerce of BTCitcoin.

Yeah - it's a neat accounting trick. Split the block into the signature, and everything else. Call the 'everything else' the newblock. Put only newblock on the blockchain. Make a new data structure out of the signatures. Sweep under the rug the fact that the blocks are meaningless without the signatures. Ignore the fact that trustless use of bitcoin requires knowledge of, and maintenance of, both the newblockchain and the signature tree - now ever-so-slightly _larger_ than the old blockchain. Pretend you've done something about scalability. Profit!

I must be missing something. Everyone else seems to luuurve The New Hotness.

[marcus_of_augustus]

Warning: I bought back at $402, probable crash incoming because my luck is usually terrible.

no, you'll do fine. Anyone buying the dips since late August has been doing well. This is a simple bull market to play now ... buy the dips.

[JayJuanGee]

Hello there,

Gavin Andresen has just published a new article: Segregated Witness is cool

BULLISH!!!

TL;DR recap:

So… how does all of this help with the one megabyte block size limit?

Well, once all the details are worked out, and the soft or hard fork is past, and a significant fraction of transactions are spending segregated witness-locked outputs… more transactions will fit into the 1 megabyte hard limit. For example, the simplest possible one-input, one-output segregated witness transaction would be about 90 bytes of transaction data plus 80 or so bytes of signature– only those 90 bytes need to squeeze into the one megabyte block, instead of 170 bytes. More complicated multi-signature transactions save even more.

Looks like they're working to double the transaction limits of a block, without a hard fork! This could spell a lot of good news for the every day commerce of BTCitcoin.

Yeah - it's a neat accounting trick. Split the block into the signature, and everything else. Call the 'everything else' the newblock. Put only newblock on the blockchain. Make a new data structure out of the signatures. Sweep under the rug the fact that the blocks are meaningless without the signatures. Ignore the fact that trustless use of bitcoin requires knowledge of, and maintenance of, both the newblockchain and the signature tree - now ever-so-slightly _larger_ than the old blockchain. Pretend you've done something about scalability. Profit!

I must be missing something. Everyone else seems to luuurve The New Hotness.

And?  What's the problem? 

Is BTC's security undermined? 

Are the odds of double spends increased? 

Is there some other kind of vulnerability for malicious players to exploit? 

Under Segregated witness, isn't all of the accounting going to be reconciled within a relatively short period of time?  It's not like segregated witness causes ongoing unresolved transactions. Is it?

[marcus_of_augustus]

sold out bulls still waiting for 2XX coins will be sitting here twiddling thumbs at 450 waiting for 3XX coins ... same old, same old ( I used to be one of those guys and it sucks)

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[jbreher]

And?  What's the problem?  

Is BTC's security undermined?  

Are the odds of double spends increased?  

Is there some other kind of vulnerability for malicious players to exploit?  

Under Segregated witness, isn't all of the accounting going to be reconciled within a relatively short period of time?  It's not like segregated witness causes ongoing unresolved transactions. Is it?

And. Perhaps many. Maybe. I think so. Yes, see link below. I don't know how long. I think the answer is that it does.

Rather than reiterate, I point you here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1279444.msg13197163#msg13197163

Maybe my fears are unjustified. I don't yet know enough about it to know. What I do know is that I don't trust that all those crowing about how this SegWit is going to save us have really looked at it to the point where they understand it.

[aminorex]

Monkey vision:  Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.

[nioc]

It's official, we are not going below 400 today

[Fatman3001]

Monkey vision:  Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.

You know this is wrong

[aztecminer]

On BFX, it's almost as if someone pumped ~$5,000,000 to $10,000,000, just to gain a quick 5% and then dumped again. 

A successful P&D like that is likely to be repeated, but the question  is will it be for a higher buy in price, lower, or the same? 

I think it's likely that it was for considerably more money and performed on multiple exchanges simultaneously.  or it could just be the sum of many players acting independently. It's fun to think about.

Well, since you were threatening to do this with your 6 figures of bitcorns, I'd say you are a likely suspect.

No no no. I have a tradeable balance of over $100,000. But even that is with max leverage. I'm only playing with ~1 years salary. The bulk of my holdings are in cold storage.  I WISH it was me. That would have been quite a windfall.

you should diversify into metals. i'm not buying bitcoins at these inflated higher prices. it is too risky for me. even with the us govy behind it cuz the dollar is still on its deathbed. they are fronting like they are in control. its like the catastrophes, you have to cover your own ass. relying on bitcoin is probably not a great strategy imo. especially with the unresolved issues that bitcoin is facing. might be able to make some fiat though if buy bitcoins at this risky higher prices. i'm not sure the risk is worth it to gain more fiat through bitcoins when can get more fiat through other means and buy metals at suppressed cheap prices and HODL them. the reason to buy the metals is because the us govy doesnt want us to buy metals. keep your eyes on the money on the exchange!

[peonminer]

We all know what happened last time Adam trusted the monkey.

[aztecminer]

sold out bulls still waiting for 2XX coins will be sitting here twiddling thumbs at 450 waiting for 3XX coins ... same old, same old ( I used to be one of those guys and it sucks)

nope.. still refusing to buy..that money go into metals. i wont buy above 300. too risky ..

[Fatman3001]

sold out bulls still waiting for 2XX coins will be sitting here twiddling thumbs at 450 waiting for 3XX coins ... same old, same old ( I used to be one of those guys and it sucks)

nope.. that money is going into metals. i wont buy above 300. too risky ..

So, what do you think will plummet if we get e rerun of 2008, only this time China is joining?

[aztecminer]

sold out bulls still waiting for 2XX coins will be sitting here twiddling thumbs at 450 waiting for 3XX coins ... same old, same old ( I used to be one of those guys and it sucks)

nope.. that money is going into metals. i wont buy above 300. too risky ..

So, what do you think will plummet if we get e rerun of 2008, only this time China is joining?

what do you mean?? if bitcoin goes up .. i'm covered. insurance policy... i got coins in cold storage. i might be done buying bitcoins altogether. i'm not trading bitcoins anymore cuz i dont have any to trade and i am absolutely refusing to buy at higher than 300.. period. i'll buy metals. u dont give a dam then i don't give a dam. i am much more confident buying metals than bitcoins. i think end game the metals are going to be worth a lot more than bitcoin crypto-digits. china is buying more metals than cryptos for sure.

[JayJuanGee]

And?  What's the problem?  

Is BTC's security undermined?  

Are the odds of double spends increased?  

Is there some other kind of vulnerability for malicious players to exploit?  

Under Segregated witness, isn't all of the accounting going to be reconciled within a relatively short period of time?  It's not like segregated witness causes ongoing unresolved transactions. Is it?

And. Perhaps many. Maybe. I think so. Yes, see link below. I don't know how long. I think the answer is that it does.

Rather than reiterate, I point you here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1279444.msg13197163#msg13197163

Maybe my fears are unjustified. I don't yet know enough about it to know. What I do know is that I don't trust that all those crowing about how this SegWit is going to save us have really looked at it to the point where they understand it.

I believe that you have kind of answered your question in a couple of places by asserting that you don't really know if the points that you raised are issues are not.

Well to draw a bit of an analogy, there are a quite a few areas related to bitcoin that I do not understand or claim to understand - for example, cryptography, math, economics and politics (to name a few), but in the past two years, I have been continuing to invest in bitcoin because I have some faith that the various bitcoin contributions are filling niches that are not otherwise filled by mainstream traditional (and often centralized) institutions, and I am continuing to investigate various dynamics and contributions of BTC.

Even though on an ongoing basis, I continue to learn about various bitcoin dynamics, I frequently read, see and hear people who appear to be much knowledgeable than me in some of the areas that I lack knowledge causing me to maintain a positive view of bitcoin and to continue to be fairly bullish about the future performance of bitcoin.

Accordingly, it does not hurt to ask a large number of questions like you have done, but contrary to what you seem to be doing, I would not assume without specific evidence and/or examples or even proposed scenarios that various contributors to bitcoin's code are sloppily leading us down some perilous doom and gloom path. 

In fact, it seems to me, that in the whole scheme of things, we should feel some comfort in the opposite, that is if a bunch of battling coders are currently appearing to compromising and agreeing to such compromise, there must be some mutually agreeable aspect regarding such compromise that causes the battling sides to be gravitating towards intermediate consensus (at least for the short term).  So it makes little sense to me if someone seems to be assuming, without evidence that they are a bunch of fuck-ups. 

[Fatman3001]

sold out bulls still waiting for 2XX coins will be sitting here twiddling thumbs at 450 waiting for 3XX coins ... same old, same old ( I used to be one of those guys and it sucks)

nope.. that money is going into metals. i wont buy above 300. too risky ..

So, what do you think will plummet if we get e rerun of 2008, only this time China is joining?

what do you mean?? if bitcoin goes up .. i'm covered. insurance policy... i got coins in cold storage. i might be done buying bitcoins altogether. i'm not trading bitcoins anymore cuz i dont have any to trade and i am absolutely refusing to buy at higher than 300.. period. i'll buy metals. u dont give a dam then i don't give a dam. i am much more confident buying metals than bitcoins. i think end game the metals are going to be worth a lot more than bitcoin crypto-digits. china is buying more metals than cryptos for sure.

That's my point. But if the brakes are on for real in China, they'll consume less metal. A lot less.

[Fatman3001]

I think Theymos might have been advising the Trump campaign.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericmack/2015/12/08/donald-trump-thinks-he-can-call-bill-gates-to-shut-down-the-internet/