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

[JayJuanGee]

We're already seeing blocks fill up on this pump. I'm curious as to how a rally can be sustained when confirmation times take hours.

Yeah, right, whatever.   


The last six months regarding the average block size look pretty stable to me, with a slightly upward trend in the chart.. and that upward trend in the approximately 60% capacity arena potentially could be nearly completely resolved by seg wit.

https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?timespan=180days&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

After seg wit goes into effect, then we can assess the situation and regroup... ..

In other words, transactions etc seem to be going pretty well on the technical side of bitcoin, and maybe some of the public is coming to realize that there are really not any technical problems in bitcoin, and accordingly, if you keep doubling down in selling your supposedly existing coins based on these upward BTC price movements, we may be relieved of you from bitcoin and your baloney posts very, very soon.     

However, I understand when you a guy is dealing with fictitious coins, he really doesn't ever run out of coins.


On the other hand, if you do happen to have some coins, and you really are selling them as you claim, then I can imagine you sticking around the forum, after you have run out of coins and while BTC prices go past $450 and then $600 and then $800 and further into the $2k to $5k price arena, and then you will continue to participate to attempt to talk down BTC prices in order that you would be able to get back in at a lower price than your sell prices in the $200s to $400s.  And, when prices drop from $3800 to $1800, you will stick out your tongue and proclaim that you were right all along. blah blah blah.

I remember, not that long ago, you were supposedly selling considerable amounts of BTC while the prices were below $280 and arguing that BTC prices were going down?  but that strategy did not go too well, right?

[1714624579]

1714624579

[1714624579]

1714624579

[yefi]

chinese are pushing for 2MB HF, core already hinted compromise. spoken word is HF in early 2017 with several other HF implementations as well.

I didn't know that the Chinese were pushing for anything. A 1MB increase certainly wouldn't be unwelcome in any case.

[aztecminer]

We're already seeing blocks fill up on this pump. I'm curious as to how a rally can be sustained when confirmation times take hours.

Yeah, right, whatever.   


The last six months regarding the average block size look pretty stable to me, with a slightly upward trend in the chart.. and that upward trend in the approximately 60% capacity arena potentially could be nearly completely resolved by seg wit.

https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?timespan=180days&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

After seg wit goes into effect, then we can assess the situation and regroup... ..

In other words, transactions etc seem to be going pretty well on the technical side of bitcoin, and maybe some of the public is coming to realize that there are really not any technical problems in bitcoin, and accordingly, if you keep doubling down in selling your supposedly existing coins based on these upward BTC price movements, we may be relieved of you from bitcoin and your baloney posts very, very soon.     

However, I understand when you a guy is dealing with fictitious coins, he really doesn't ever run out of coins.


On the other hand, if you do happen to have some coins, and you really are selling them as you claim, then I can imagine you sticking around the forum, after you have run out of coins and while BTC prices go past $450 and then $600 and then $800 and further into the $2k to $5k price arena, and then you will continue to participate to attempt to talk down BTC prices in order that you would be able to get back in at a lower price than your sell prices in the $200s to $400s.  And, when prices drop from $3800 to $1800, you will stick out your tongue and proclaim that you were right all along. blah blah blah.

I remember, not that long ago, you were supposedly selling considerable amounts of BTC while the prices were below $280 and arguing that BTC prices were going down?  but that strategy did not go too well, right?

retard .. peeps like billyjoe keep coins in cold storage... i think $400 is break even for me..  all we gotta do is ride out obama another 10 months and wait for the cia leadership shuffle and wala all new ballgame.............. #GimpedCoin

[r0ach]

If anyone remembers my post in October, I went all in at $230 and posted a couple days later:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1200114.0

I was fully out at $44x.  Now I'm back all in at $375.

This gone be good.

And it was good.

[aztecminer]

Bitcoin now has a rather nice flag formation after the rise from 200-500 with little media fanfare. The alt's are waking up and the halving is approaching. The only thing keeping bitcoin back is the blocksize debate which will soon resolve either by a HF with majority of miner support, or with Core acquiescing to the demands of the market and miners (3 weeks!) and fixing a 2mb blocksize HF in the roadmap.

It isn't hard to see a perfect storm for bitcoin during times of further turbulence in the major markets, where negative rates are being introduced in Western economies as central bankers start to lose control. Previously there has been a hunt for return and yield with QE and cheap money post 2008 being used by banks to bid up stock markets and levitate asset prices. ZIRP has turned everyone into a speculator with cash offering negative returns and the markets looking crash prone now bitcoin may start to look mighty attractive as an asset class in the coming months with it's unique monetary properties.

How many times have we heard this before. "Oh, Bitcoin's fix is just around the corner. It's already in the works. It's just as if it has already happened."

Time after time we think it's over only to turn around and find out we haven't gotten ANYWHERE. XT, Classic, Core Roadmap.... 

All that has happened is that some miners sent a letter to Core saying they don't want any trouble, they just want a time frame on the hard fork. Why would Core listen to them any more than us?  Core knows that these guys will avoid a contentious hard fork like the plague and so they can be ignored with impunity. 

Core guys say "fuck you" to Gavin, Mike, Jeff, Coinbase, Bitpay, Bitstamp, The Winklevi, us, etc but they are supposed to just cave immediately to some Chinese miners who have more to lose in a fight than anybody else?  Does core have a history of being responsive to stakeholder concerns?

Dream on. It ain't fixed until it's fixed.  Until then, holding is risky, selling is prudent and buying is just plain naive.

You're maybe a bit pessimistic. Whatever core or classic, one of them will become the fix.

or NOT.. until it is fixed it still isn't... the constant talk about the fix its right around the corner is like janet yellen telling us negative interest rates is the new fix while it has never even been tested... #GimpedCoin

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[aztecminer]

Say goodbye to the $300s people

not going to happen.. it will crash right back down to 360m- 370 cuz the pumpers cant maintain higher .. this pump reminds me of how they used to crash pms after someone would talk trash.. they would do it just to discredit that person.. and we would all BUY more ... lol . ...i talk TONS of trash not because i am losing... but rather... because i am WINNING and continue to win.. i have a Win Win position . ... and the desperate govy desperately pumping bitcoin while mulling over negative interest rates for the USD after their 1/4th interest rate hike FAILURE keep LOSING. negative interest rates is the final act of desperation by the federal reserve... .. the 'interest to infinity' debt slavery system of the 'in god we trust' usd is FAILING...  and as the 'interest to infinity' debt system begins its final gasps for breathe.. bitcoin can't even scale....

[JayJuanGee]

We're already seeing blocks fill up on this pump. I'm curious as to how a rally can be sustained when confirmation times take hours.

the question is: will confirmation times for bigger transactions (lets say 100$+) really take longer? i mean if i want to transfer for example 5 BTC to an exchange i just make the fee 3$ or whatever and that's it!

the only TXs that will really suffer are the small and micro ones.

All of my most recent transfers of BTC over the past 6 months or so have included a transaction fee of between .0001 and .0002 BTC, which was generally between $.07 to $.09, and varying transaction sizes of .045BTC and 30BTC..., so your description of a possible $3 transaction fee seems to be quite excessive and outside of actual expected experiences... and really, there may be a bit of an incentive to transfer larger amounts because the transaction fee is the same no matter the amount transferred.

[billyjoeallen]

Bitcoin now has a rather nice flag formation after the rise from 200-500 with little media fanfare. The alt's are waking up and the halving is approaching. The only thing keeping bitcoin back is the blocksize debate which will soon resolve either by a HF with majority of miner support, or with Core acquiescing to the demands of the market and miners (3 weeks!) and fixing a 2mb blocksize HF in the roadmap.

The Chinese will stick with Core, they are quite conservative with respect to leadership. I'd be surprised to see Core implement 2MB blocks in addition to segregated witness, but we'll see.

And so long, farewell, auf wiedersehen 300s!

I'm actually pleasantly surprised with the steady price increase recently. Does anyone know the reasoning behind the increase? Does it have anything to do with the lack of users moving to classic or something, and now that the investors see that, they're buying again?

Or has Classic caused the increase as more users flock to it?

i think thats the reason. miners are hesitant and so a contentious HF is for the moment highly unlikely. 95% HF in 2017 is therefore highly likely.

@ImI:  Why do you keep framing the issue as if a hard fork is inevitable?  Why is a hardfork needed in the first place?  I think that threatening and even engaging in action to employ a hard fork is what causes so much contentious behavior from a large number of persons who become more entrenched in their positions because the solution is framed as being a hardfork.

There seems to be no reason for a hardfork, except one that strives to fundamentally change bitcoin's currently existing consensus based governance mechanism. 

ANY blocksize increase will require a hard fork, Numbnuts. The issue at hand is whether or not a contentious hard fork will be necessitated by Core dragging their heels.  The consensus-based governance mechanism is broken.  Maxwell and crew do not know business or economics. The problem with most people who do not know economics is not that they are ignorant, but that they believe in economic models that are incorrect.  It's not like physics. Economics is counterintuitive and people with the least amount of bias and a lack of intellectual rigor almost always get it wrong.  Smart people are often the worst offenders because they assume competence in one field automatically translates into the economics field, but it doesn't.

There is no such thing as a free lunch. The closest we can get is improved efficiency, and Core is intentionally making Bitcoin less efficient because reasons.  There is a cost associated with this.  If you pay higher fees OR you pay by waiting longer, that cost is taken out of price. That's why the 5 year logarithmic uptrend is broken.  This matters much more than some lame $30 pump. That is transient.

[JayJuanGee]

Bitcoin now has a rather nice flag formation after the rise from 200-500 with little media fanfare. The alt's are waking up and the halving is approaching. The only thing keeping bitcoin back is the blocksize debate which will soon resolve either by a HF with majority of miner support, or with Core acquiescing to the demands of the market and miners (3 weeks!) and fixing a 2mb blocksize HF in the roadmap.

The Chinese will stick with Core, they are quite conservative with respect to leadership. I'd be surprised to see Core implement 2MB blocks in addition to segregated witness, but we'll see.

And so long, farewell, auf wiedersehen 300s!

I'm actually pleasantly surprised with the steady price increase recently. Does anyone know the reasoning behind the increase? Does it have anything to do with the lack of users moving to classic or something, and now that the investors see that, they're buying again?

Or has Classic caused the increase as more users flock to it?

i think thats the reason. miners are hesitant and so a contentious HF is for the moment highly unlikely. 95% HF in 2017 is therefore highly likely.

@ImI:  Why do you keep framing the issue as if a hard fork is inevitable?  Why is a hardfork needed in the first place?  I think that threatening and even engaging in action to employ a hard fork is what causes so much contentious behavior from a large number of persons who become more entrenched in their positions because the solution is framed as being a hardfork.

There seems to be no reason for a hardfork, except one that strives to fundamentally change bitcoin's currently existing consensus based governance mechanism. 

afaik (chinese) miners are determined to HF to 2MB. so i dont see is as "inevitable" but i expect it to happen.

It would be interesting to see your source for this. 

Surely there may be some discussion of various hardfork possibilities, but when push comes to shove, there seems to be no need for a hardfork, if a very large majority are already inclined to agree to the change from 1mb to 2mb (if that is what you are talking about).

On the other hand, if they feel that there is a need for a hardfork, because there are other controversial provisions, then that would be a different story.

At this point, a hard fork seems far from inevitable, and even though this is a speculation thread, when we are talking about something that is not even currently on the table, it seems to be quite "out there" - even though technically still within the realms of speculation.

[ImI]

We're already seeing blocks fill up on this pump. I'm curious as to how a rally can be sustained when confirmation times take hours.

the question is: will confirmation times for bigger transactions (lets say 100$+) really take longer? i mean if i want to transfer for example 5 BTC to an exchange i just make the fee 3$ or whatever and that's it!

the only TXs that will really suffer are the small and micro ones.

All of my most recent transfers of BTC over the past 6 months or so have included a transaction fee of between .0001 and .0002 BTC, which was generally between $.07 to $.09, and varying transaction sizes of .045BTC and 30BTC..., so your description of a possible $3 transaction fee seems to be quite excessive and outside of actual expected experiences... and really, there may be a bit of an incentive to transfer larger amounts because the transaction fee is the same no matter the amount transferred.

indeed 3$ is exaggerated. my point was that TXs bigger than just a few $s will most likely have no issues in an eventual TX-jam.

[aztecminer]

We're already seeing blocks fill up on this pump. I'm curious as to how a rally can be sustained when confirmation times take hours.

the question is: will confirmation times for bigger transactions (lets say 100$+) really take longer? i mean if i want to transfer for example 5 BTC to an exchange i just make the fee 3$ or whatever and that's it!

the only TXs that will really suffer are the small and micro ones.

All of my most recent transfers of BTC over the past 6 months or so have included a transaction fee of between .0001 and .0002 BTC, which was generally between $.07 to $.09, and varying transaction sizes of .045BTC and 30BTC..., so your description of a possible $3 transaction fee seems to be quite excessive and outside of actual expected experiences... and really, there may be a bit of an incentive to transfer larger amounts because the transaction fee is the same no matter the amount transferred.

$3.00 just to move money currency ?? #outrageous #abusivehightaxes #weneedMagnaCarta

[adamstgBit]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDktBZzQIiU

[adamstgBit]

[adamstgBit]

[adamstgBit]

http://www.pymnts.com/news/2016/netflix-cfo-bullish-on-bitcoin-payments/

[JayJuanGee]

We're already seeing blocks fill up on this pump. I'm curious as to how a rally can be sustained when confirmation times take hours.

Yeah, right, whatever.   


The last six months regarding the average block size look pretty stable to me, with a slightly upward trend in the chart.. and that upward trend in the approximately 60% capacity arena potentially could be nearly completely resolved by seg wit.

https://blockchain.info/charts/avg-block-size?timespan=180days&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

After seg wit goes into effect, then we can assess the situation and regroup... ..

In other words, transactions etc seem to be going pretty well on the technical side of bitcoin, and maybe some of the public is coming to realize that there are really not any technical problems in bitcoin, and accordingly, if you keep doubling down in selling your supposedly existing coins based on these upward BTC price movements, we may be relieved of you from bitcoin and your baloney posts very, very soon.     

However, I understand when you a guy is dealing with fictitious coins, he really doesn't ever run out of coins.


On the other hand, if you do happen to have some coins, and you really are selling them as you claim, then I can imagine you sticking around the forum, after you have run out of coins and while BTC prices go past $450 and then $600 and then $800 and further into the $2k to $5k price arena, and then you will continue to participate to attempt to talk down BTC prices in order that you would be able to get back in at a lower price than your sell prices in the $200s to $400s.  And, when prices drop from $3800 to $1800, you will stick out your tongue and proclaim that you were right all along. blah blah blah.

I remember, not that long ago, you were supposedly selling considerable amounts of BTC while the prices were below $280 and arguing that BTC prices were going down?  but that strategy did not go too well, right?

retard .. peeps like billyjoe keep coins in cold storage... i think $400 is break even for me..  all we gotta do is ride out obama another 10 months and wait for the cia leadership shuffle and wala all new ballgame.............. #GimpedCoin

I understand that BullyJA is all over the place when he is making various assertions regarding what he is going to do, and that is part of my point to assert that it is a lot easier to be all over the place when you are making things up.

Anyhow, he also seemed to be asserting that he was going to continue to double down until he used up all of his supposedly existing coins, and yesterday at about $380, he said that he had shorted about 40btc, and then a bit later he said 80 BTC and then a bit later, in the upper $380s, he asserted that he had put 150BTC.  At that rate, he should be out of coins soon, hopefully, then potentially, we all could be relieved of his drama, and he can rest assured in fiat or some scam altcoin.

[ImI]

afaik (chinese) miners are determined to HF to 2MB. so i dont see is as "inevitable" but i expect it to happen.

It would be interesting to see your source for this.  

mostly IRC

Surely there may be some discussion of various hardfork possibilities, but when push comes to shove, there seems to be no need for a hardfork, if a very large majority are already inclined to agree to the change from 1mb to 2mb (if that is what you are talking about).

HF doesnt mean two competing forks. its just means to hardcode 1MB -> 2MB at block number xyz. even if we have 100% consensus we will have to HF

[adamstgBit]

[Alley]

Aztecminer likely sold his account to a shill.  A year ago he was bullish and a active miner.