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

[AlexGR]

We've been over and over this. There's no reason why the blockchain has to be small.

It is definitely destined to become big. However, the blockchain should not be treated like a dumpster.

Not when broadband is ubiquitous. Not when 1TB hard drives cost less than a carton of smokes.  My XTnode cost me $118 bucks. The cost is trivial, and even if it becomes less trivial, nodes will still be run because those of us with an incentive to keep the network operating smoothly will do so.

It depends on the scaling parameters.

Someday a bitcoin node may be the size of a google datacenter. So what?

It's not unlikely that it will happen but at that point the centralization factor will have gone up ...a lot.

You don't seem to understand certain things, like why aren't blocks filling up now when fees are either zero or near zero.

It's not me crying doom for 1MB blocksize and fee increases...

The risk of orphaned blocks is real. it happens all the time.  It's because miners can chose how big to make their blocks now by deciding which transactions to include.  Miners, smart miners, most miners don't care about what percentage of their compensation comes from block reward and which part comes from fees. They only care about ROI, like any sane businessman. If they can make more money from bigger blocks, they'll do it. If they can make more money from smaller blocks, they'll do that.  

Not all miners behave the same way.

You want to keeps blocks small to make stress tests less likely. Why? Stress tests are a good thing. They are important for determining the safety and security of the network.

There's not much that a stress test can reveal that a script on a virtual testnet can't. And the second one won't have a lasting imprint on the blockchain.

I mean you know beforehand what will happen. If you start spamming, the blockchain size will start increasing, free txs will slow down a lot in their processing while those txs with fees will go through quickly.

Actually I'm concerned with far bigger attack vector implementations by "the powers that be". And the thing is, these guys are more dangerous than the average script kiddie because they also have money to pay for the tx fees. In that scenario you are fucked because they can do both bloating + tx crowding over the rest of the users, by paying more fees and rendering the network unusable. So you need much better solutions than increasing the blocksize (which will happen when it is necessary).

A half million transaction/day isn't enough for bitcoin to be anything more than a hobby network.

How many txs do you want it to handle per day?

Nobody can build a business model around Bitcoin now without knowing what the future capacity will be. People need to plan.

All the bitcoin developers want Bitcoin to scale and there is 100% consensus on that. This practically guarantees it will happen, despite their differences on whether the blocksize should be raised now, raised temporarily (kicking the can), raised later, have something else done, etc etc.

The precise numbers on how scaling will go down on 5 years, 10 years, 20 years are pretty much unknown but that will not stop investments or businesses.

[1714752371]

1714752371

[1714752371]

1714752371

[1714752371]

1714752371

[1714752371]

1714752371

[1714752371]

1714752371

[1714752371]

1714752371

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

So what's the probability of Bitcoin becoming the World Reserve Currency if the on chain transaction capacity is 500,000/day? Zero. The IMF's SDR has a higher capacity than that nowand most people don't even know what the hell I'm talking about.

With eight billion people on the planet, that would be only 1 transaction per day for every 8,000 people ( 2 people per xaction).  or one send and one recieve for only 1 in 16,000 people.  That means that almost everything would be handled by middlemen, the same bankster assholes Bitcoin was created to route around.

Anything less than 20 BTC will have to be delivered by paper wallet, in the mail.

[nioc]

Is it still okay to hold? I noticed btc price is falling today will it continue or will this bounce again? Please no rude response in my post, I don't understand the images I'm seein in this thread when I tries back reading..

you better move you better dance

ITs Going Down ~!

I'm yelling timber

I was wondering if I should "buy the dip"

You make it very tempting Adam.

Yeah just a small amount to round up my total

Edit: $427 it is

[LFC_Bitcoin]

[JimboToronto]

Is it still okay to hold? I noticed btc price is falling today will it continue or will this bounce again? Please no rude response in my post, I don't understand the images I'm seein in this thread when I tries back reading..

you better move you better dance

ITs Going Down ~!

I'm yelling timber

Hey, I wanted the price to stay down until morning.

Don't go yelling timber.

 

[peonminer]

Doubtful $330 will hold this time.

[Cconvert2G36]

I posted this in another thread but it seems relevant to what you guys are talking about.

Do we really have security and decentralization today when a few phone calls from the PRC could shut the whole thing down?

The only security against nation states with hundreds of billions of $ at their disposal is either through obscurity (monero) or through ubiquity (too big and important to attack).

Practically, it seems a compromise to 2MB would buy time to develop and roll out other solutions (segwit, LN, SC, etc) and could allow us to have more productive dialog in the interim. 

[birr]

So what's the probability of Bitcoin becoming the World Reserve Currency if the on chain transaction capacity is 500,000/day? Zero. The IMF's SDR has a higher capacity than that nowand most people don't even know what the hell I'm talking about.

With eight billion people on the planet, that would be only 1 transaction per day for every 8,000 people ( 2 people per xaction).  or one send and one recieve for only 1 in 16,000 people.  That means that almost everything would be handled by middlemen, the same bankster assholes Bitcoin was created to route around.

Not banksters.  We'll use
OpenTransactions
Monetas.net

[billyjoeallen]

A half million transaction/day isn't enough for bitcoin to be anything more than a hobby network.

How many txs do you want it to handle per day?

I want the capacity to go up at a predictable predetermined rate. Entrepreneurs can plan with that.

All the bitcoin developers want Bitcoin to scale and there is 100% consensus on that. This practically guarantees it will happen, despite their differences on whether the blocksize should be raised now, raised temporarily (kicking the can), raised later, have something else done, etc etc.

The precise numbers on how scaling will go down on 5 years, 10 years, 20 years are pretty much unknown but that will not stop investments or businesses.

I don't believe it. Even a 2MB kick-the-can increase would show that they are actually willing to make a permanent fix it at some point. This is far from certain now. If there is 100% consensus that the developers want it to scale, then why haven't they publicly made a joint statement to that effect? 

If there is an actually ongoing rough consensus attack on the network, and I think there is a real possibility that there is, then we would expect to see exactly what we are seeing from core. My ex wife used to deal with beggars not by saying "no", but by saying "not now".  It made them go away easier.  She never gave them any money ever.  It's kinda like that.

[suda123]

I posted this in another thread but it seems relevant to what you guys are talking about.

Do we really have security and decentralization today when a few phone calls from the PRC could shut the whole thing down?

The only security against nation states with hundreds of billions of $ at their disposal is either through obscurity (monero) or through ubiquity (too big and important to attack).

Practically, it seems a compromise to 2MB would buy time to develop and roll out other solutions (segwit, LN, SC, etc) and could allow us to have more productive dialog in the interim. 

Have we considered the fact that a lot of those small-blockers seem to also have a vested interest in the success of a certain altcoin?

which one?

[JimboToronto]

Doubtful $330 will hold this time.

It dropped by $30 so you think it will drop $100 more?  

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Doubtful $330 will hold this time.

It dropped by $30 so you think it will drop $100 more?  

If wishes were horses...

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[nioc]

I posted this in another thread but it seems relevant to what you guys are talking about.

Do we really have security and decentralization today when a few phone calls from the PRC could shut the whole thing down?

The only security against nation states with hundreds of billions of $ at their disposal is either through obscurity (monero) or through ubiquity (too big and important to attack).

Practically, it seems a compromise to 2MB would buy time to develop and roll out other solutions (segwit, LN, SC, etc) and could allow us to have more productive dialog in the interim. 

Have we considered the fact that a lot of those small-blockers seem to also have a vested interest in the success of a certain altcoin?

I am not a small blocker.  I am however clueless so kick the can sounds good to me.

I don't drink coffee.  I don't drink coke, pepsi or cola.

Tea at 3 cents a cup

[PoolMinor]

So what's the probability of Bitcoin becoming the World Reserve Currency if the on chain transaction capacity is 500,000/day? Zero. The IMF's SDR has a higher capacity than that nowand most people don't even know what the hell I'm talking about.

With eight billion people on the planet, that would be only 1 transaction per day for every 8,000 people ( 2 people per xaction).  or one send and one recieve for only 1 in 16,000 people.  That means that almost everything would be handled by middlemen, the same bankster assholes Bitcoin was created to route around.

It seems to be all or nothing with you. So many infinitive statements, do you realize there are many people everyday that don't make any transactions in fiat or otherwise. The population of the planet is one of the extreme stances you take, clearly you can only think in terms of worst case scenarios.

Really starts to become tiresome reading the same level of thinking over and over again; weren't we supposed to be observing a wall or something?

[Cconvert2G36]

I posted this in another thread but it seems relevant to what you guys are talking about.

Do we really have security and decentralization today when a few phone calls from the PRC could shut the whole thing down?

The only security against nation states with hundreds of billions of $ at their disposal is either through obscurity (monero) or through ubiquity (too big and important to attack).

Practically, it seems a compromise to 2MB would buy time to develop and roll out other solutions (segwit, LN, SC, etc) and could allow us to have more productive dialog in the interim. 

Have we considered the fact that a lot of those small-blockers seem to also have a vested interest in the success of a certain altcoin?

Meh, I don't dismiss their concerns completely because of this.

There are real concerns about maliciously formed 8MB blocks made by a dominant selfish miner. IMO it would be a miner acting against their interest in continued income, but the possibility is there, and the worry is not completely unfounded.

It's greatly diminished at 2MB, so I think that's a good compromise to buy some time and allow us to stop obsessing and fighting for a while.

[peonminer]

Doubtful $330 will hold this time.

It dropped by $30 so you think it will drop $100 more?  

If wishes were horses...

Give it a week for sub $330. Steady gradual shame dump inbound. The coins used to pump us up need to get dumped. It will be a hedged ass beating.

[billyjoeallen]

So what's the probability of Bitcoin becoming the World Reserve Currency if the on chain transaction capacity is 500,000/day? Zero. The IMF's SDR has a higher capacity than that nowand most people don't even know what the hell I'm talking about.

With eight billion people on the planet, that would be only 1 transaction per day for every 8,000 people ( 2 people per xaction).  or one send and one recieve for only 1 in 16,000 people.  That means that almost everything would be handled by middlemen, the same bankster assholes Bitcoin was created to route around.

It seems to be all or nothing with you. So many infinitive statements, do you realize there are many people everyday that don't make any transactions in fiat or otherwise. The population of the planet is one of the extreme stances you take, clearly you can only think in terms of worst case scenarios.

Really starts to become tiresome reading the same level of thinking over and over again; weren't we supposed to be observing a wall or something?

Hyperbole isn't intended to be taken literally. It's used to make a point.  If a logical case is still valid at the extremes, it is valid in most other cases also.   offchain, sidechain and altcoin solutions re-introduce middlemen.  That is a form of centralization every bit as dangerous as mining centralization. It also adds friction to transactions which hurts trade.

[PoolMinor]

So what's the probability of Bitcoin becoming the World Reserve Currency if the on chain transaction capacity is 500,000/day? Zero. The IMF's SDR has a higher capacity than that nowand most people don't even know what the hell I'm talking about.

With eight billion people on the planet, that would be only 1 transaction per day for every 8,000 people ( 2 people per xaction).  or one send and one recieve for only 1 in 16,000 people.  That means that almost everything would be handled by middlemen, the same bankster assholes Bitcoin was created to route around.

It seems to be all or nothing with you. So many infinitive statements, do you realize there are many people everyday that don't make any transactions in fiat or otherwise. The population of the planet is one of the extreme stances you take, clearly you can only think in terms of worst case scenarios.

Really starts to become tiresome reading the same level of thinking over and over again; weren't we supposed to be observing a wall or something?

Hyperbole isn't intended to be taken literally. It's used to make a point.  If a logical case is still valid at the extremes, it is valid in most other cases also.   offchain, sidechain and altcoin solutions re-introduce middlemen.  That is a form of centralization every bit as dangerous as mining centralization. It also adds friction to transactions which hurts trade.

Are you also under the impression that BitPay hurts the trade of BTC?

[billyjoeallen]

There are real concerns about maliciously formed 8MB blocks made by a dominant selfish miner. IMO it would be a miner acting against their interest in continued income, but the possibility is there, and the worry is not completely unfounded.

It's greatly diminished at 2MB, so I think that's a good compromise to buy some time and allow us to stop obsessing and fighting for a while.

Yeah, that would give him a big head start  on mining the next block, but at a high risk of getting the big one orphaned.  This is the same kind of concern we heard ad nauseum over mining pools in the first place. The risk isn't zero, but it's pretty small relative to the risks of not allowing bigger blocks.