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

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[1714669872]

1714669872

[1714669872]

1714669872

[Feri22]

These long periods of 'stable' prices tend to lead to price explosions in the long run. I'll continue with HODL.

Do you HOADR as well or just hodl?

[noobtrader]

These long periods of 'stable' prices tend to lead to price explosions in the long run. I'll continue with HODL.

Do you HOADR as well or just hodl?

what was that ?
is it ?


Hodl Add Dump Repeat

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[romero121]

Price when approaching Bitcoin halving in July:

A. Big drop?

B. Big pump?

Definitely gonna pump the living daylights out of it. If you time it well, there's money to be made. But I suspect that it will happen about a month before the first 12.5btc block.

Definitely big bump is there, but not sure that it will take place at halving. This time the situation of market in most of the countries is very worse. Still a rise in price can
be seen within few months.

[AlexGR]

don't forget everyone! BITCOIN CANNOT SCALE! until it does then it still doesn't ... its only been EIGHT MONTHS of arguing over it. #GimpedCoin

Technological progress actually ...ensures that bitcoin not only can scale, but will indeed scale. It's not a matter of if, only a matter of when.

1995 = Pentium 75-100MHz / 8-16MB ram / 1-2GB disks / 14.4kbps - 128kbps connections.
2015 = 4-8core CPUs at 4 GHz / 4-16GB ram / 1-4 TB disks / home connections in the mbps to gbps (for fiber).

Everything has gone upwards like 1000x in 20 years. Processing power, memory, storage, network connections etc. And I'm not counting processing breakthroughs in GPU power or storage speedup like SSDs.

If the trend continues, by 2035 the technology will allow >5000tx/sec, without even improving the software. If the software gets improved (and it constantly is getting scaling improvements), we are talking multiple that - so we'll be seeing VISA-like capabilities way before the 2030's.

Bitcoin is ...doomed to scale, except if some catastrophic failure of our civilization destroys the IT industry. And we won't have to wait for 2035 for scaling, that's just a number. There are incremental steps in hardware and network capabilities all the time. We just want too much, too fast. And that's good because scaling solutions will have to be devised faster. Although one thing will never be overcome: The necessity for fees. It is impossible to have near-zero cost txs AND protect the network for abuse at the same time.

Free txs = attack vector possible for free.
Near free txs = attack vector possible for peanuts.

Hmm...
You know it's really putting your faith in technology evolution and respect of the Moore law...

But experience is showing that Moore law is reaching a limit. The base of Moore principle is that the more time passes, the smaller electronic elements become. But we're reaching a point where you cant get any smaller! It becomes harder and harder and we'll eventually reach a physical limit: you can't go small enough to reach the nanometer. At this scale physics as we know no longer exists...

Thing is, we've seen 1000x in the 1995-2015 step, from things that involve hard disk platter capacity, to network speeds, to processors - so it's not only processors, it's everything. If you told a telco back in '95 that they will be delivering hundreds of mbps over the home copper wire, or a 4G mobile phone, they'd laugh at you. Yet, here we are.

Personally, I expect CPU to become much more efficient in their architecture, even in the same nanometers. X86 chips are generally not very ...optimized and it's the reason why each generation creates big gains over the predecessor with the same clock speeds / similar cache levels etc.

However, with General Purpose GPUs being pushed by the manufacturers, and bitcoin tasks being able to be parallel processed, I think there are great gains that can be made by making bitcoin software that actually takes advantage of the GPU for its processing ability. Mining is probably one of the best known abilities of GPUs, and how instead of waiting for much better CPUs to come out, people went out and created GPU miners that were 10x or more, but there is no reason why their power should not be harnessed for other operations too. I'm thinking specifically of cryptographic operations and real time compression/decompression of small blocks of data (in order to get it to parallelize the operation) - and there could be more.

The biggest gains will be when AI (Artificial Intelligence) starts optimizing both human software and hardware. We may see tremendous boosts or breakthroughs within the next 10 years, and it may be that it is *after* the AI optimizations that we will start seeing a curve of very diminishing returns - as all the huge gains will have been made by the AI.

Cool, so it's time to bump the DoS limit from 2010.

If my cpu or network could endure a flood ping of 100 pings per second in 2010 and now they can endure 500 pings per second, a flood situation will still take me to my limit.

Likewise, you can raise blocksize x10 and an attacker will fill them up if there are cooperating miners that accept cheap spam (and there are).

In my view you just give the space required for legit txs and a bit more for "sudden growth spike" potential, but that's it. Or you give plenty of space right away and impose a high mandatory fee to prevent abuse.

[valta4065]

Hmm...
You know it's really putting your faith in technology evolution and respect of the Moore law...

But experience is showing that Moore law is reaching a limit. The base of Moore principle is that the more time passes, the smaller electronic elements become. But we're reaching a point where you cant get any smaller! It becomes harder and harder and we'll eventually reach a physical limit: you can't go small enough to reach the nanometer. At this scale physics as we know no longer exists...

Moore's Law is a straw man - the previous poster was talking about general technological progress, not the much more narrow Moore's Law. A limit to component density didn't prevent technological development in the centuries before Gordon Moore, and there's no reason to suspect it'll stop simply when integrated circuitry reaches a physical limit.

Well I understand your point but I'd say it's totally flawed.
It's not because it had happened that it will actually happen 

I wouldn't be incredibly shocked if in 10 years scientists would explain that we reached a point in IT where development can't really go any further. You're still limited to physic, and if you can't make smaller elements... What can you do?

Oh maybe in only 3 days someone is going to come with a revolution in science and explain something that will allow us to use a 1000times better internet/PC. But it's not because it has, and it can, that it will 

If you can't make smaller elements... What can you do?

Well... you can:

• Connect multiple elements together.
  
• Continue to improve elements in ways that don't rely on component density, or even reduce the number of components.
  
• Develop better ways to connect elements.
  

A revolution in 3 days isn't necessary. Technological developments that speed our processing power and increase our bandwidth happen all the time, and are not tightly coupled to component density. They tend not to yield 1000x improvements, but they compound together over time to achieve something pretty spectacular. The shift from CISC to RISC CPUs, for example, reduced the complexity of CPUs (and hence the number of components they required), allowing more powerful computers - it wasn't necessary for component density to increase, because the number of components was *decreasing*. The shift from HDDs to SSDs has increased bandwidth. Wi-fi gets faster with every generation, and that's (broadly) using tech that's familiar to radio engineers from back in the day.

I'm not saying that Moore's Law didn't happen, that it was a bad thing, or anything like that. What I'm saying is that reaching a limit to the number of components we can put on a piece of silicon is not going to bring an end to technological development in general, or to IT in particular. Bitcoin is safe.

I'd say that you're rather right.
But being confident in the increase of IT performances doesn't mean it HAS to happen ^^

Bitcoin SHOULD be safe. But it doesn't need an apocalypse in IT sector to be endangered, just a freezing in evolution

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[bitcoinboy12]

Price is stagnant which is bad even for traders as there's not even 1% price change in between several hours. Seems most investors are now in altcoin.

[LMGTFY]

Hmm...
You know it's really putting your faith in technology evolution and respect of the Moore law...

But experience is showing that Moore law is reaching a limit. The base of Moore principle is that the more time passes, the smaller electronic elements become. But we're reaching a point where you cant get any smaller! It becomes harder and harder and we'll eventually reach a physical limit: you can't go small enough to reach the nanometer. At this scale physics as we know no longer exists...

Moore's Law is a straw man - the previous poster was talking about general technological progress, not the much more narrow Moore's Law. A limit to component density didn't prevent technological development in the centuries before Gordon Moore, and there's no reason to suspect it'll stop simply when integrated circuitry reaches a physical limit.

Well I understand your point but I'd say it's totally flawed.
It's not because it had happened that it will actually happen 

I wouldn't be incredibly shocked if in 10 years scientists would explain that we reached a point in IT where development can't really go any further. You're still limited to physic, and if you can't make smaller elements... What can you do?

Oh maybe in only 3 days someone is going to come with a revolution in science and explain something that will allow us to use a 1000times better internet/PC. But it's not because it has, and it can, that it will 

If you can't make smaller elements... What can you do?

Well... you can:

• Connect multiple elements together.
  
• Continue to improve elements in ways that don't rely on component density, or even reduce the number of components.
  
• Develop better ways to connect elements.
  

A revolution in 3 days isn't necessary. Technological developments that speed our processing power and increase our bandwidth happen all the time, and are not tightly coupled to component density. They tend not to yield 1000x improvements, but they compound together over time to achieve something pretty spectacular. The shift from CISC to RISC CPUs, for example, reduced the complexity of CPUs (and hence the number of components they required), allowing more powerful computers - it wasn't necessary for component density to increase, because the number of components was *decreasing*. The shift from HDDs to SSDs has increased bandwidth. Wi-fi gets faster with every generation, and that's (broadly) using tech that's familiar to radio engineers from back in the day.

I'm not saying that Moore's Law didn't happen, that it was a bad thing, or anything like that. What I'm saying is that reaching a limit to the number of components we can put on a piece of silicon is not going to bring an end to technological development in general, or to IT in particular. Bitcoin is safe.

I'd say that you're rather right.
But being confident in the increase of IT performances doesn't mean it HAS to happen ^^

Bitcoin SHOULD be safe. But it doesn't need an apocalypse in IT sector to be endangered, just a freezing in evolution

Well, I'm fairly confident that reaching the natural limit of components on chips won't suddenly cause all other development in other areas to stop, which seems to be what a "freezing in evolution" would imply.

[TReano]

Price is stagnant which is bad even for traders as there's not even 1% price change in between several hours. Seems most investors are now in altcoin.

lol nobody who is really trading is even considering altcoins... You should better put your money in a slot machine then into an altcoin..


If you really want to trade there are other markets which are mega liquid...

[billyjoeallen]

4 HR moving average crossover. Here comes the bump.

[WeltMaster]

NOVEMBER 25^rd

[nor9865]

384.1 preev

[WeltMaster]

http://www.coindesk.com/commonwealth-member-countries-bitcoin-legal/



>"prohibition of virtual currencies is unlikely to be effective"

nocoiner shills

BTFO
T
F
O

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[soullyG]

HELLO, ARE YOU THERE MOON?

[ImI]

did i miss something?

[blunderer]

did i miss something?

BJA has spoken

4 HR moving average crossover. Here comes the bump.

[Hunyadi]