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

[becoin]

text

The blocksize will obviously need to be larger or the fees will become too big. Why is that hard to understand tho?

The fees need to become too big to accelerate development of long term scaling solutions like LN. Why is that hard to understand tho?

The current code has a true "bug" (i.e., transaction malleability) that miners seem unwilling to fix (with SW). If miners won't fix semi-serious bugs now, then what trust do we have for them accepting fixes for more serious bugs going forward?

Why is that hard to understand tho?

Increasing blocksize will not fix transaction malleability. It will made the "bug" even bigger. Why is that hard to understand tho?

Agreed. Why is that hard (for the BU lynch mob) to understand tho?

Can we assume that miners will oppose bitcoin price appreciation even by using silly arguments to counter improvements? Bitcoin price appreciation will allow new competitors to enter mining space and that is the most undesirable development for key mining players.

I've always wondered why companies like Intel and AMD are not yet in the bitcoin mining field with their own ASICs?

[notme]

text

The blocksize will obviously need to be larger or the fees will become too big. Why is that hard to understand tho?

The fees need to become too big to accelerate development of long term scaling solutions like LN. Why is that hard to understand tho?

Show me a solution to the decentralized routing problem that prevents LN from devolving into a hub and spoke model that just creates a new banker class (or is bought up by the existing one).

[Meuh6879]

Nice beartrap ...

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Nice beartrap ...

What kind of an idiot sells any kind of substantial amount of coins right now when the price could be literally anything ridiculously high in years to come.

[becoin]

text

The blocksize will obviously need to be larger or the fees will become too big. Why is that hard to understand tho?

The fees need to become too big to accelerate development of long term scaling solutions like LN. Why is that hard to understand tho?

Show me a solution to the decentralized routing problem that prevents LN from devolving into a hub and spoke model that just creates a new banker class (or is bought up by the existing one).

You're quite ignorant about the banker class and economics in general.

Bitcoin is a monetary system in the first place. In the digital world moving bitcoins from one address to another is equivalent to moving physical gold from one place to another in the physical world. It is the ultimate settlement method of outstanding trade balances but it is also most expensive. Different payment systems will be developed that will have no scaling issues whatsoever and moving bitcoins from one address to another will be the settlement layer of all those payment systems.

[Torque]

text

The blocksize will obviously need to be larger or the fees will become too big. Why is that hard to understand tho?

The fees need to become too big to accelerate development of long term scaling solutions like LN. Why is that hard to understand tho?

The current code has a true "bug" (i.e., transaction malleability) that miners seem unwilling to fix (with SW). If miners won't fix semi-serious bugs now, then what trust do we have for them accepting fixes for more serious bugs going forward?

Why is that hard to understand tho?

Increasing blocksize will not fix transaction malleability. It will made the "bug" even bigger. Why is that hard to understand tho?

Agreed. Why is that hard (for the BU lynch mob) to understand tho?

Can we assume that miners will oppose bitcoin price appreciation even by using silly arguments to counter improvements? Bitcoin price appreciation will allow new competitors to enter mining space and that is the most undesirable development for key mining players.

I've always wondered why companies like Intel and AMD are not yet in the bitcoin mining field with their own ASICs?

I've wondered the same.

Also, these Chinese miners should worry about following a version of Bitcoin that only benefits them (i.e., creating an environment where centralizing bitcoin more into their mining pools and thus more under their centralized control). They will literally be following it off a cliff.

There's nothing stopping thousands of bitcoin users from mining a 1MB Bitcoin version at a loss (for altruistic reasons) in order to secure the network. In fact, this could indeed be the future of the Bitcoin network.

I'm all for a MB limit increase if and when it makes sense.  But it should make sense to both the core developers and the miners simultaneously, and it should be for purely technical/scaling/bug fixing reasons as opposed to financial or political ones.

A hostile takeover will never work, in the end trust will be lost.  At the very least, many core devs will walk out.

[machasm]

Nice beartrap ...

What kind of an idiot sells any kind of substantial amount of coins right now when the price could be literally anything ridiculously high in years to come.

It might not even be years. Probably months!!

[pinger]

Nice beartrap ...

That probably confirms the ETF approval.

[Ted E. Bare]

Taking out $1300 over the weekend?

Probably this will happens over the weekend but here is the answer of Friday :

We were so close! $1298 on Bitstamp.

[spooderman]

text

The blocksize will obviously need to be larger or the fees will become too big. Why is that hard to understand tho?

it's not, but your understanding lacks any nuance. with larger blocks comes problems i'm assuming you aren't aware of.

[Searing]

Nice beartrap ...

What kind of an idiot sells any kind of substantial amount of coins right now when the price could be literally anything ridiculously high in years to come.

Someone I guess betting the etf won't go thru. On a side note if btc tanked some due to
That I'd bet pboc would jump on btc with fud too.

I also don't agree, but something like that must be the play.

[abercrombie]

Bitcoin could hit $3,000 by the end of the year after recent rally. (cnbc.com)

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/07/bitcoin-price-could-hit-3000-by-the-end-of-the-year-after-recent-rally-analyst.html

[HI-TEC99]

Nice beartrap ...

What kind of an idiot sells any kind of substantial amount of coins right now when the price could be literally anything ridiculously high in years to come.

The same kind of idiot that dumped at the red arrow less than a month ago. That was a worse bear trap than this one.

[Stevenirving]

Loads fiat into exchange ------>Prays for a dip so I can gobble up some cheap coins ------> Wakes up right as its happening and buys at bottom ------> Blessed be Satoshi

[MR1]

The beast in unstoppable!

[Elwar]

[Stevenirving]

Why is this a 1?
What am I missing?
Is ETF by tomorrow?
Have I lost my mind?!

[Torque]

Roger Ver is the BIGGEST hypocrite in the Bitcoin space.

Why do I say that? Just go take a look at his Twitter stream:
https://twitter.com/rogerkver?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

He has tweets where he is saying
1. Average transaction time over 2 hours
2. Transaction fees too high
3. Blocksize limit *killing* bitcoin usability as a currency
4. No one spends bitcoin, just hordes

- AND -

Interspersed with those tweets, he shows other tweets of himself

5. Smiling and seemingly proud using bitcoin just fine as a currency at many restaurants for his meals, where I'm pretty sure he didn't have to wait 2 hours to get a transaction confirmation or give up in total disgust

 

[becoin]

Roger Ver is the BIGGEST hypocrite in the Bitcoin space.

This guy has sold almost all of his bitcoins a year ago to invest in dubious business projects. Now he is mad to see he had lost a fortune and could have done much better if he had just hodled his bitcoin stash. He is craving for cheaper bitcoins.

[Stevenirving]

Why is this a 1?
What am I missing?
Is ETF by tomorrow?
Have I lost my mind?!

Anyone?