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

[cbeast]

There have been deleted posts warning people of potential loss too. Then not long afterward there was a lot of loss.

Have you sold your bitcoins at the bottom? That was the time when those warnings appeared!

I'm not talking about trading. The warnings were about an exchange that remains nameless.

I fail to see what is the connection between that 'nameless' exchange and XT altcoin?

Good, because one wasn't implied. I fail to see the reason you are looking for one.

[1714833991]

1714833991

[1714833991]

1714833991

[1714833991]

1714833991

[AlexGR]

Bitcoin development has never been so exciting - BU, XT, BTCD, bitpay Core variant and now bitcoin classic. This is what open source is all about.

Well, development is about developing new solutions to problems. Not about arguing whether a particular variable should be set at X or Y value.

If that's "development" then 1000 versions could spring up each one having their own proposal for that particular variable (max block size). How would that improve anything? That's not development.

In the end of the day the only people making work that will actually help bitcoin scale more => are core devs.

KISS. Appeal to authority doesn't work against the market.

And vaporware development "works" in the aforementioned market?

Look, I don't know how to code shit (in terms of BTC code), but I do know how to change a few variables / constants. That doesn't make me a developer or someone who can maintain my fork even if the market agrees that I found the right value for maxblocksize.

The scaling issue hides many motives and I'm not sure how deep the rabbit hole goes. I always found it suspect that some people are so hell bent on increasing block size that even if you tell them "ok, let's say we have a tech that effectively doubles the txs that can fit in a 1MB block, like segwit or something... why would you want it to go to 2MB?" and they are like "but it has to go to 2mb". Well, I call bullshit with them. That's hypocrisy. If the 1mb is an effective 2mb, then why would you need the 2 to become 4?

Why would someone, who would say yes if you asked them about a 2mb upgrade, be dissatisfied by a technological equivalent of a 2mb upgrade in terms of tx/s? What's going on here?

Anyway, we need more people who actually code stuff that reduce the kbytes used per block, improve network transmission speeds, reduce cpu cycles needed for processing etc, and do that while maintaining the integrity of the system. Not people tinkering with an existing variable that has known tradeoffs if you set it lower or higher.

[Searing]

I'm still hesitant. I don't really see how the bubble can un-pop in 5 days... that would be have to be some sort of record!

the power of FUD  on the dark side of the BTC force is strong

ie Cryptsy say goes full Gox....

http://bitcoinist.net/cryptsy-has-moved-out-of-their-building-unannounced-nowhere-to-be-found/  Cryptsy moved out of building!

http://bitcoinnewschannel.com/2016/01/09/paul-vern-cryptsys-ceo-seems-to-have-flown-to-china/ Off to China we go!


Remember BTC is a crypto soap opera....just add some core dev issues on the patches...and China trying or making noises to stamp down

on BTC again ..useless thou that may be...and viola 250 usd btc again!

BTC and the Circle of FUD ..they should make a movie!

[yefi]

The management of this forum does not seem to have the best interest of bitcoin in mind.

Is that why you're a donator?  

[gentlemand]

ie Cryptsy say goes full Gox....

Who gives a shit about that place? No doubt there'll be alt fans who'll be sad but that's about it. I don't think we'll be seeing headlines on the news if Wankcoin dies because of it.

[ahpku]

[...]
Anyway, we need more people who actually code stuff that reduce the kbytes used per block, improve network transmission speeds, reduce cpu cycles needed for processing etc,

Not sure if serious.gif

and do that while maintaining the integrity of the system. Not people tinkering with an existing variable that has known tradeoffs if you set it lower or higher.

Because 1MB was not arrived at arbitrarily, but through exhaustive research and testing?

[Fatman3001]

Look, I don't know how to code shit (in terms of BTC code), but I do know how to change a few variables / constants. That doesn't make me a developer or someone who can maintain my fork even if the market agrees that I found the right value for maxblocksize.

This is actually a good point.

The scaling issue hides many motives and I'm not sure how deep the rabbit hole goes. I always found it suspect that some people are so hell bent on increasing block size that even if you tell them "ok, let's say we have a tech that effectively doubles the txs that can fit in a 1MB block, like segwit or something... why would you want it to go to 2MB?" and they are like "but it has to go to 2mb". Well, I call bullshit with them. That's hypocrisy. If the 1mb is an effective 2mb, then why would you need the 2 to become 4?

Why would someone, who would say yes if you asked them about a 2mb upgrade, be dissatisfied by a technological equivalent of a 2mb upgrade in terms of tx/s? What's going on here?

Segwit will take time to be spread to enough nodes and users to actually lead to a significant capacity increase. And that capacity increase will be more like 60-70%. Not double. Plus, there seems to be little advantage to this over just increasing block size, basically you can softfork it.

The GOOD thing about Core's roadmap is that their approach will fry a lot of brains in order to find scalability improvements through efficiency increases. I hope. But the fear is that whatever they come up with will be too late to avoid crippling congestion and, in its turn, the crippling of the bitcoin economy. Or, that capacity limitations will send money elsewhere. We sort of have to pray that Bitcoin stays in the periphery for a couple more years without losing its competitive advantage over other cryptos.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

ie Cryptsy say goes full Gox....

Who gives a shit about that place? No doubt there'll be alt fans who'll be sad but that's about it. I don't think we'll be seeing headlines on the news if Wankcoin dies because of it.

I'm no fan of shitcoins, but I hate to see real people get taken to the cleaners by some guy whose claim to fame seems to be really fat fingers. No offence Chubby..

[Fatman3001]

ie Cryptsy say goes full Gox....

Who gives a shit about that place? No doubt there'll be alt fans who'll be sad but that's about it. I don't think we'll be seeing headlines on the news if Wankcoin dies because of it.

I'm no fan of shitcoins, but I hate to see real people get taken to the cleaners by some guy whose claim to fame seems to be really fat fingers. No offence Chubby..

My fingers are perfectly proportioned. It's a bit freaky.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

ie Cryptsy say goes full Gox....

Who gives a shit about that place? No doubt there'll be alt fans who'll be sad but that's about it. I don't think we'll be seeing headlines on the news if Wankcoin dies because of it.

I'm no fan of shitcoins, but I hate to see real people get taken to the cleaners by some guy whose claim to fame seems to be really fat fingers. No offence Chubby..

My fingers are perfectly proportioned. It's a bit freaky.

 

[AlexGR]

Look, I don't know how to code shit (in terms of BTC code), but I do know how to change a few variables / constants. That doesn't make me a developer or someone who can maintain my fork even if the market agrees that I found the right value for maxblocksize.

This is actually a good point.

The scaling issue hides many motives and I'm not sure how deep the rabbit hole goes. I always found it suspect that some people are so hell bent on increasing block size that even if you tell them "ok, let's say we have a tech that effectively doubles the txs that can fit in a 1MB block, like segwit or something... why would you want it to go to 2MB?" and they are like "but it has to go to 2mb". Well, I call bullshit with them. That's hypocrisy. If the 1mb is an effective 2mb, then why would you need the 2 to become 4?

Why would someone, who would say yes if you asked them about a 2mb upgrade, be dissatisfied by a technological equivalent of a 2mb upgrade in terms of tx/s? What's going on here?

Segwit will take time to be spread to enough nodes and users to actually lead to a significant capacity increase. And that capacity increase will be more like 60-70%. Not double. Plus, there seems to be little advantage to this over just increasing block size, basically you can softfork it.

Yes, that's why I'm phrasing it more like a hypothetical 2x - because it's not 2x in practice. In essence, a 2MB with segwit is actually >3MB without - from the numbers they are giving.

The GOOD thing about Core's roadmap is that their approach will fry a lot of brains in order to find scalability improvements through efficiency increases. I hope. But the fear is that whatever they come up with will be too late to avoid crippling congestion and, in its turn, the crippling of the bitcoin economy. Or, that capacity limitations will send money elsewhere. We sort of have to pray that Bitcoin stays in the periphery for a couple more years without losing its competitive advantage over other cryptos.

At most a few dust and spam txs will be prevented. The money transacted will continue to increase, even with a set limit in tx/s. Instead of getting, say, 300k txs per day with 1$ each, you'll get 300k txs with 10$ each. The USD-volume will multiply, because that type of scaling in value is not dependent on the number of transactions. It is inevitable that costly transactions will consolidate the market to higher value transfers.

End of year metrics can be like "Bitcoin payments accounted for 10bn in 201x and 100bn USD the next year, rivaling other payment solutions such as ......".

But of course the tx/s will go up too. I'm just giving an example here.

[Fatman3001]

@AlexGR I hope you are right. But I think it depends on what markets Bitcoin gains traction in. I also find crashing into the block size barrier far more risky than a hardfork.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[readysalted89]

Is bitcoinity working for anyone?

I tried it in a few browsers but it's not loading properly for me. It gets as far as a basic HTML page, then stops . None of the realtime prices are showing in my browser. I had to switch to bitcoinwisdom for now, but I like bitcoinity's interface better.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[nioc]

Is bitcoinity working for anyone?

I tried it in a few browsers but it's not loading properly for me. It gets as far as a basic HTML page, then stops . None of the realtime prices are showing in my browser. I had to switch to bitcoinwisdom for now, but I like bitcoinity's interface better.

It's not loading properly for me either.

[redsn0w]

Is bitcoinity working for anyone?

I tried it in a few browsers but it's not loading properly for me. It gets as far as a basic HTML page, then stops . None of the realtime prices are showing in my browser. I had to switch to bitcoinwisdom for now, but I like bitcoinity's interface better.

It's not loading properly for me either.

Also for me, waiting ...

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

Yes, that's why I'm phrasing it more like a hypothetical 2x - because it's not 2x in practice. In essence, a 2MB with segwit is actually >3MB without - from the numbers they are giving.

I think you are missing an important point in that segwit is not (in itself) about scaling - the 1.6x space saving is a side effect - its about removing malleability* bugs in scripts so that complex contracts ( for payment channels) will work. At present most of the script functionality has been removed/disabled due to malleability.

Thinking that segwit is part of the immediate capacity issue is wrong.  These are long term developments to support bitcoin in the future. But they are being rushed through now under the guise of 'scaling'. Dont get me wrong - I like segwit - but it needs to be introduced in the correct context, with the correct due diligence.



* but tragiically still fails to address all of them....

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation