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

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

I remember reading about a Core troll army move to support name coin, because the Eth name service was getting so much attention. But somebody's always talking about pumping something for some reason. It's probably just the wind tbh.

[1500242491]

1500242491

[1500242491]

1500242491

[1500242491]

1500242491

[1500242491]

1500242491

[willope]

HAPPY HOLYDAYS PEOPLE. AND REMEMBER:

[Wexlike]

That is a pretty heavy drop currently.

Ether is tanking brutally.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

But...all of my immense wealth

[Ted E. Bare]

Who sold at the bottom?

[Wexlike]

But...all of my immense wealth

Heads up! Maybe it's another year long bear market accumulation phase, so that we can celebrate again for 3 months in a few years when bitcoin crosses the 10k mark.

[Ted E. Bare]

We're all going to die

[bitserve]

One thing is for sure... when 1 Aug comes, there will be no more weak hands left.

To da moon?

[jbreher]

Maybe it's another year long bear market accumulation phase, so that we can celebrate again for 3 months in a few years when bitcoin crosses the 10k mark.

https://youtu.be/TRTkCHE1sS4?t=40s

[marcus_of_augustus]

Badness and wrongness all around.

Bad coders in cartel with malicious miners are rushing forward with a crucial, contentious protocol change in one of the worst possible ways.

Hypocrites have been screeching about "Satoshi's vision" for 3 years and when it comes to a blocksize hardfork they rush it out under emergency 'crisis' (more screeching lies and half-truths) ... diametrically opposed to about the only thing satoshi suggested any concrete plans for ...

It can be phased in, like:

if (blocknumber > 115000)
    maxblocksize = largerlimit

It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1347.msg15366#msg15366

It feels like a part of bitcoin is dying.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

It's all there, black and white, clear as crystal. We stole the fizzy lifting drinks. We bumped into the ceiling which now has to be washed and sterilized, so we get nothing. We lose.

[gembitz]

One thing is for sure... when 1 Aug comes, there will be no more weak hands left.

To da moon?

~marzzz then we test ringzzz of saturn  SegWit will be like godzilla

[marcus_of_augustus]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1347.msg15121#msg15121

jgarzik is finally going to rush his blocksize 'patch' through after 7 years?

He should have prepared properly after 7 years.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

It's not clear to me, is what just happened even possible on main net?

[jbreher]

It's not clear to me, is what just happened even possible on main net?

6000 blocks mined in a day? Sure. But at what probability?

[d_eddie]

It's not clear to me, is what just happened even possible on main net?

6000 blocks mined in a day? Sure. But at what probability?

Very unlikely it could happen on mainnet. Way too many transactions there to get stuck. At least from what I understood, it's been explained as a matter of not enough transactions to fill a large block. BUT to me it shows a poorly planned test.

They cry attack now, and there's talk of a secret testnet. Good luck with that.

Interesting discussion on github (the only public space where such discussion isn't secret) here: https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/issues/65

BTW this could be/lead into the possible "slight but significant correction" I forecast for the next 2-3 weeks a couple pages back.

[marcus_of_augustus]

It's not clear to me, is what just happened even possible on main net?

No, because there's no way anybody would risk real money with SegWit2X clown code.

The '6000 blocks mined in day' talking point distraction is obfuscating the real problem that the code then got stuck when the (accelerated) HF happened ... you know like the piece of the code that whole client is in existence because ... it's raison d'etre is broken.

They should be thanking whoever accelerated the '6000 blocks in one day' for showing them their fundamental brokenness bugs (how fucked they are) ... instead we get BS talking points about ASICs on testnet, wah-wah, who knew?

[infofront]

It's not clear to me, is what just happened even possible on main net?

They should be thanking whoever accelerated the '6000 blocks in one day' for showing them their fundamental brokenness bugs (how fucked they are) ... instead we get BS talking points about ASICs on testnet, wah-wah, who knew?

This.

And gmaxwell hit it out of the park:

Re "attacks" -- btc1 nodes haven't mined a block for a day. That isn't an attack, that's just a failure.

Crying attack isn't helpful-- it's often not true and at the end of the day the software must survive in an adversarial environment where attacks exist. (Though AFAICT this issue can result in pure btc1 attacker free environments stalling, and BU containing environments forking-- no attackers required).

The issue isn't a new one, this was raised as a concern and use of the 'hardfork bit' (most significant bit which must not be set on existing nodes) rather than a large block requirement was recommended.

    0.840 MB/block.

Which is less than 1 and segwit isn't even enabled yet. Moreover, btc1 by default will not make a block >1MB even if there are transactions in the mempool for it. You guys are just making your code all the more frighting by vigorously denying the issues.

Perhaps instead of making excuses you should resolve the fork? Maybe then write some tests?

And then he gets called a troll.

[infofront]

I tried to delete a post for the first time ever. I accidentally deleted the post that followed the one I meant to delete.
So, if I deleted your post, there's a 50% chance I'm sorry. 

#noobmod

[Bitcoinaire]

As we get closer, we'll see some wild swings due to this uncertainty. In the end, I'm counting on everything going smoothly.