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

[iCEBREAKER]

where's trolfi these days?

he's hanging out on reddit surprisingly he's defending our beloved Bitcoin to the bitter end.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/45rqb3/heres_adam_back_stalling_master_hei_gavin_lets/czzykx4?context=3

No he's insulting Bitcoin and advocating GavinCoin

GavinCoin WTF is that, Gavin is the longest standing developer he's taking heat for personal attacks, the only questionable thing hes done is visit the CIA and the CFR, and that was to tell them how bitcoin worked.

You just need to look at what he's produced to know he's pro bitcoin.  

GavinCoin means squat, try looking for facts!

He's trying to make Bitcoin inflationary. He's a socialist. He's an enemy of Bitcoin.

GavinCoin is a fork of Bitcoin that increases the block size or the coin supply.

I must admit admiring the relative success of Generalissimo Trollfi's latest machinations.

It was obvious honey badger would never give a shit about Buttcoin.

But it was not obvious how best to adopt camouflage and infiltrate the Bitcoin community, until Frap.doc and the Gavinistas provided the perfect opportunity.

The tiny band of hard forking malcontents needed their numbers increased by Buttcoiner muscle, and the Buttcoiners needed entry into the legitimate ecosystem.

It was a match made in heaven; Frap.doc and Trollfi have been BFFs ever since.  Quite the adorable Maximalist/Denialist odd couple, they are.   

[1714610811]

1714610811

[1714610811]

1714610811

[1714610811]

1714610811

[1714610811]

1714610811

[1714610811]

1714610811

[marcus_of_augustus]

where's trolfi these days?

he's hanging out on reddit surprisingly he's defending our beloved Bitcoin to the bitter end.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/45rqb3/heres_adam_back_stalling_master_hei_gavin_lets/czzykx4?context=3

No he's insulting Bitcoin and advocating GavinCoin

GavinCoin WTF is that, Gavin is the longest standing developer he's taking heat for personal attacks, the only questionable thing hes done is visit the CIA and the CFR, and that was to tell them how bitcoin worked.

You just need to look at what he's produced to know he's pro bitcoin.  

GavinCoin means squat, try looking for facts!

He's trying to make Bitcoin inflationary. He's a socialist. He's an enemy of Bitcoin.

GavinCoin is a fork of Bitcoin that increases the block size or the coin supply.

I must admit admiring the relative success of Generalissimo Trollfi's latest machinations.

It was obvious honey badger would never give a shit about Buttcoin.

But it was not obvious how best to adopt camouflage and infiltrate the Bitcoin community, until Frap.doc and the Gavinistas provided the perfect opportunity.

The tiny band of hard forking malcontents needed their numbers increased by Buttcoiner muscle, and the Buttcoiners needed entry into the legitimate ecosystem.

It was a match made in heaven; Frap.doc and Trollfi have been BFFs ever since.  Quite the adorable Maximalist/Denialist odd couple, they are.   

Crassic jalopy is a broad church ... full of muppets, people, all sorts.

[rebuilder]

Maybe this bickering has gone on long enough? Obviously no agreement can be found, all that's left is to see what measures the miners adopt. I expect we'll know more about that when the 2016 halving takes effect, or some time after that. The subsidy being cut in half will put the miners on the spot - either they'll take the small-blocks bet that a controlled amount of transactions will lead to bigger profits for them, or they'll take the big-block bet that more tx is better even if the average tx fee is lower. Until then... Let's watch some walls, huh?

[bargainbin]

Get thee behind me, Gavin: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of Satoshi, but those that be of [gubermint] men.

Be unafraid, Marcus Idioticus!

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Maybe this bickering has gone on long enough? Obviously no agreement can be found, all that's left is to see what measures the miners adopt. I expect we'll know more about that when the 2016 halving takes effect, or some time after that. The subsidy being cut in half will put the miners on the spot - either they'll take the small-blocks bet that a controlled amount of transactions will lead to bigger profits for them, or they'll take the big-block bet that more tx is better even if the average tx fee is lower. Until then... Let's watch some walls, huh?

+1

Stop with the personal attacks. Stop with the conspiracy theories. I don't know of any core developers who are evil or who have anything but the best kind of interests at heart. Everybody wants to see bitcoin succeed. And I have no doubt that the people I worked with for years as part of bitcoin core are pure of heart. We just have a disagreement about priorities, risks and benefits. It's really sad that there has been so much personal attacks on both sides -- and stop it! Don't do it. You're hurting bitcoin! It does nobody any good if you drive great developers away. That's just not productive, on either side.

https://soundcloud.com/mindtomatter/lets-talk-bitcoin-282-bitcoin @ 54m 48s

[JayJuanGee]

...
Actually, there seems to be a decent point, that mining costs are not just for the present block being mined.. but for the future and for the speculation.

That's right, because now that we've mined those coins, Bitcoin is secure &  we'll never have to mine again. Far out!

Thanks for going all hogwild to twist my post into some kind of absurdity.... 

I am questioning whether I should attempt to clarify your attempt at a baloney distraction...


O.k... here goes:


Part of my point, is that it makes little sense to calculate all of the mining costs from today, and to suggest that today we, as users, are bearing those costs, just because in the aggregate there are a variety of miners who are assuming those costs on the speculation that their investment is going to pay off.

Furthermore, in the past 5 years, there has been a bit more than 1 billion of large public venture capital invested into various bitcoin start-ups and infrastructure.  They are betting that their investment will be profitable.  Sometimes it will be and sometimes not, but merely because "they" have invested does not signify that all consumers are bearing the cost of such investment and/or speculation.



I agree somewhat with your point that the future will have to require future incentives, to the extent that you may have made such a point, and those incentives are going to evolve over time... and we will see if some miners get out and if bitcoin becomes less and less secure with the passage of time.  Some of that evolution can be attempted at being planned and prepared for, but with lot's of things into the future, it is not easy to predict specifics concerning how the details of development will evolve and how various incentives will continue to evolve because
such variations of future scenarios are a product of a variety of factors that are currently unknown in spite of the speculative bets that can be made concerning such future possible scenarios.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[blunderer]

... Some of that evolution can be attempted at being planned and prepared for, but with lot's of things into the future, it is not easy to predict specifics concerning how the details of development will evolve and how various incentives will continue to evolve because
such variations of future scenarios are a product of a variety of factors that are currently unknown in spite of the speculative bets that can be made concerning such future possible scenarios.

Yes, that's one fuckin sentence. And no, I'm not being a grammar fag -- you THINK in tedious run-ons, with shitloads of blank lines added for extra nuisance
Please, for everyone's sake, learn to think *concisely*. Stop it with frickin' derailed-train-of-thought poetry.
And try to cut down on LF/CR. You already owe me a scroll wheel.

Edit: If you're genuinely mentally ill (as in really seing a shrink/taking heavy (not antidepressant) meds, say so -- I don't look down/don't want to be cruel to the the sick. Unless I hear from you (can be in pm), am assuming simple laziness on your part.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

[–]jgarzikJeff Garzik
Correct. My trip to China was a Bloq-sponsored endeavor, looking for Chinese customers, investors and employees.
My visit to OKCoin was mentioned in 8btc. Never a secret. http://www.8btc.com/okcoin-jeff-garzik

>>Hi Jeff! In the event of a hard frok what are the odds Bloq would take the place of Blockstream in funding development? And is there anything Bloq would do differently? Consultancy only? Side chains?

Thanks.

Inquiring minds want to know. I'll keep you posted.
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/45v0ro/core_is_planning_a_secret_meeting_in_hong_kong/d017lvl?context=3

[JayJuanGee]

... Some of that evolution can be attempted at being planned and prepared for, but with lot's of things into the future, it is not easy to predict specifics concerning how the details of development will evolve and how various incentives will continue to evolve because
such variations of future scenarios are a product of a variety of factors that are currently unknown in spite of the speculative bets that can be made concerning such future possible scenarios.

Yes, that's one fuckin sentence. And no, I'm not being a grammar fag -- you THINK in tedious run-ons, with shitloads of blank lines added for extra nuisance
Please, for everyone's sake, learn to think *concisely*. Stop it with frickin' derailed-train-of-thought poetry.
And try to cut down on LF/CR. You already owe me a scroll wheel.

Yes, you poor little thing.  You are unable or unwilling understand more than 5 words strung together...    

Maybe we should employ baby talk, so guys like you can understand a bit better?

Or maybe instead, let's blame me for your stupidity and your failure and refusal to attempt to engage with the substance of my posts after you made a comment about one of my earlier posts.  

Yeah... attempt to engage me with your bullshit post, and then cry because you are either unwilling or unable to understand my response.

[Fatman3001]

[–]jgarzikJeff Garzik
Correct. My trip to China was a Bloq-sponsored endeavor, looking for Chinese customers, investors and employees.
My visit to OKCoin was mentioned in 8btc. Never a secret. http://www.8btc.com/okcoin-jeff-garzik

>>Hi Jeff! In the event of a hard frok what are the odds Bloq would take the place of Blockstream in funding development? And is there anything Bloq would do differently? Consultancy only? Side chains?

Thanks.

Inquiring minds want to know. I'll keep you posted.
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/45v0ro/core_is_planning_a_secret_meeting_in_hong_kong/d017lvl?context=3

What's your genuine take on all of this. Are you just trolling or are there neuropeptides firing up there?

[iCEBREAKER]

In September 2015, he was going around asserting that Mike Hearn would be the benevolent dictator of XT (assuming XT would be hardforked into becoming the "new" bitcoin).  I mean, jesus fucking christ, a guy has to lose some credibility in the community by the subsequent rage quit of someone who just a few months earlier would have had the potential of becoming the "benevolent dictator" of the "new" bitcoin.

Anyhow, Gavin comes off as a bit bitter about bitcoin consensus and bitcoin governance and seems to strongly suggest that bitcoin's governance has to be fixed, but then is a bit dodgy about that being the problem and continuing to insist that a technical fix is an emergency, while at the same time taking digs at the "broken" nature of bitcoin's governance .

In any event, his various assumptions and presentations of issues are losing their coherence and interferes with his objectivity and credibility as a trustworthy speaker.

One minute, Gavin is endorsing Hearn for the position of Bitcoin's glorious new benevolent dictator for life.

A bit later, Hearn flounces off in a huff of poutrage, having gone full drama queen and ragequit Bitcoin with maximum whininess.

That hurts Gavin's credibility, but not as much as his unending attempts to sell a contentious hard fork using fear and a false sense of urgency.

How much Coinbase equity does Gavin own?  I hope he's being well compensated for being such an epic shitlord, and not being coerced via NSL.

[DeathAngel]

Price didn't stay above 400 USD for long then  

There isn't much price speculation going on lately, just more Classic vs Core posturing.

Yawn!

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

[–]jgarzikJeff Garzik
Correct. My trip to China was a Bloq-sponsored endeavor, looking for Chinese customers, investors and employees.
My visit to OKCoin was mentioned in 8btc. Never a secret. http://www.8btc.com/okcoin-jeff-garzik

>>Hi Jeff! In the event of a hard frok what are the odds Bloq would take the place of Blockstream in funding development? And is there anything Bloq would do differently? Consultancy only? Side chains?

Thanks.

Inquiring minds want to know. I'll keep you posted.
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/45v0ro/core_is_planning_a_secret_meeting_in_hong_kong/d017lvl?context=3

What's your genuine take on all of this. Are you just trolling or are there neuropeptides firing up there?

I don't think block size will stay 1MB forever. I'm honestly not too worried about Core. I'm interested in bias generally.

[blunderer]

... Some of that evolution can be attempted at being planned and prepared for, but with lot's of things into the future, it is not easy to predict specifics concerning how the details of development will evolve and how various incentives will continue to evolve because
such variations of future scenarios are a product of a variety of factors that are currently unknown in spite of the speculative bets that can be made concerning such future possible scenarios.

Yes, that's one fuckin sentence. And no, I'm not being a grammar fag -- you THINK in tedious run-ons, with shitloads of blank lines added for extra nuisance
Please, for everyone's sake, learn to think *concisely*. Stop it with frickin' derailed-train-of-thought poetry.
And try to cut down on LF/CR. You already owe me a scroll wheel.

Yes, you poor little thing.  You cannot understand more than 5 words strung together...    

blame me for your stupidity and your failure and refusal to attempt to engage with the substance of my posts after you made a comment about one of the earlier ones.  

Don't be upset. See my edit above below, and try to change for the better. Don't confuse thinking in meandering run-ons with complexity of thought. You're the Rube Goldberg of thought, sans sense of humor.
Rooting 4 U 2 get better.


Edit: If you're genuinely mentally ill (as in really seing a shrink/taking heavy (not antidepressant) meds), say so -- I don't look down/don't want to be cruel to the the sick. Unless I hear from you (can be in pm), am assuming simple laziness on your part.

[billyjoeallen]

If users are going to be put off by, say, 10-20 cents in fees, then perhaps they can buy plenty of lube and go get fucked by the banks and the paypals instead. Having 1-2-3 cents in fees and complaining that it's the end of the world if we go upwards and that it's crippling adoption, when RL banking payments are charging the hell out of us (and they are being used everyday by billions of people) and we get fucked by them constantly, is somewhat hypocritic.

Besides the main selling point of BTC shouldn't be an addiction to near-zero cost txs (which we know that is not sustainable in the long run), but rather its decentralized nature and its advantages over central banks (as a token/currency) and commercial banks in terms of controlling your money, paying without trusted 3rd parties which could withhold or confiscate your money, the non reversibility of (confirmed) txs etc etc.

It's not 20 cents in fees. It's $8 and it's being subsidized by you and me, the buyers of BTC.

And it's not decentralized with 75% of the mining in China.  We are operating under the required consent of The People's Democratic Republic of China.

The centralization of mining power doesn't ipso facto mean the centralization of Bitcoin, does it? Do you think it does?

Yes, because the Chinese government could nationalize the mines and then double spend. The Red Chinese government has a long and storied history of nationalizing industries when it suits their purpose. 

[marcus_of_augustus]

Ok truce.

Now if all the big block governance coup lusers can stop posting their ill-informed drivel about technical matters and development ... then they can get back to work on communications, lobbying politicos, PR junkets, associated marketing hype and those other things they are good at to push bitcoin favourably would be good.

[JayJuanGee]

In September 2015, he was going around asserting that Mike Hearn would be the benevolent dictator of XT (assuming XT would be hardforked into becoming the "new" bitcoin).  I mean, jesus fucking christ, a guy has to lose some credibility in the community by the subsequent rage quit of someone who just a few months earlier would have had the potential of becoming the "benevolent dictator" of the "new" bitcoin.

Anyhow, Gavin comes off as a bit bitter about bitcoin consensus and bitcoin governance and seems to strongly suggest that bitcoin's governance has to be fixed, but then is a bit dodgy about that being the problem and continuing to insist that a technical fix is an emergency, while at the same time taking digs at the "broken" nature of bitcoin's governance .

In any event, his various assumptions and presentations of issues are losing their coherence and interferes with his objectivity and credibility as a trustworthy speaker.

One minute, Gavin is endorsing Hearn for the position of Bitcoin's glorious new benevolent dictator for life.

A bit later, Hearn flounces off in a huff of poutrage, having gone full drama queen and ragequit Bitcoin with maximum whininess.

That hurts Gavin's credibility, but not as much as his unending attempts to sell a contentious hard fork using fear and a false sense of urgency.

How much Coinbase equity does Gavin own?  I hope he's being well compensated for being such an epic shitlord, and not being coerced via NSL.

I agree with your points; however, I doubt that we have any real convincing evidence that Gavin is either specifically invested in Coinbase or some other endorser or that he is being controlled by a NSL (National Security Letter).  Sure, either of those situations are possible, but they are not necessary in order to recognize specifically that Gavin seems to be going a bit off of the rails.  O.k. currently, Gavin is being paid by MIT, and from my experience, sometimes those kinds of academic institutions will not outwardly coerce their employees in any kind of way, but when there remains institutional harmony, they we leave the relationship open and beneficial to each of the parties to "exercise academic freedom" and professional discretion.

Actually, I have experienced these kinds of dynamics in my own various workplace scenarios.

The persons who are the biggest kiss asses frequently truly believe in their kiss ass.  They are not faking it, and they are not necessarily receiving any specific extra payouts.  But frequently, they will also receive a lot of various intangibles including discretion to spout out the employer's party line in a variety of situations in which the more objective (and neutral) employees would not receive such latitude.

[billyjoeallen]

if you know how much power the network is consuming (about a gigawatt or 1 million kilowatts)
and you know how much power costs ($0.10/kWh)
and you now how many transactions are being processed (~4TPS)
We can figure out how much each transaction really costs unsubsidized by speculators.

@ $0.10/kWh X (1,000,000 kilowatts)= $100,000/hr

4 transactions/sec X (3600seconds/hr) = 14,400 transactions/hr

$100,000/14400 transactions = $6.94 PER TRANSACTION

Feel free to check my math, but that's about how efficient the bitcoin network is currently at maximum capacity. If there are fewer transactions, it is even less efficient.  Security and decentralization are very important factors, but this is not competitive with ACH and SWIFT, or even credit cards.  The way to increase efficiency is by massively increasing the number of transactions while keeping the total power costs almost the same.

THAT is why we want to lift the blocksize limit.  We have a very very expensive, inefficient network. Security is great, but too much armor on your armored truck will limit it's cargo capacity. 

A more correct number would be approx 400MW for the entire network and $0.05/kWh. You can't mine competitively with$0.10/kWh and efficiency is much greater than 0.71J/GH.

You don't have to take my word for it. Blockchain.info keeps a running calculation:

https://blockchain.info/stats

currently running ~$7.09/transaction.

[JayJuanGee]

Price didn't stay above 400 USD for long then  

There isn't much price speculation going on lately, just more Classic vs Core posturing.

Yawn!

It seems too early to write off $400. 

We could be floating in this $390 to $410 price range for several days, but then again, what the fuck do I know regarding short term prices?

And, actually, it seems that if BTC prices can largely remain in this $390 to $410 range for several days, that would be fairly bullish concerning that the next leg will be upwards. 

If we go down to $380 or below $380 for any extended period of time of more than a few hours, then maybe we will be seeing another test of the mid $360s?

Currently, I'm leaning a bit more towards the next 5-10% price correction from here will be upwards rather than downwards.  Maybe my current leanings are approximately 57% to 43% in favor of up?