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

[ragnar0k]

Trying to insult bitcoin by calling it S1X isn't gonna change anything.

These stupid assorted monikers are reserved for garbage alts and forkcoin attacks.

Bitcoin is called bitcoin whether you like it or not.

Actually, this is a good point orpington..   There is a frequent ongoing campaign from bitcoin deniers and bitcoin attackers to attempt to denigrate bitcoin and to attempt to cause their alt coin propaganda to be some kind of bitcoin equivalent by renaming bitcoin..   They do this over and over and over hoping that their nonsense nomenclature will sink in and either confuse people regarding the real bitcoin or to increase the stature of their attack (or alt coin)

This has proven that every random person with enough miner support can turn up and call their fork an update...
If we think these guys are a problem, it will be much worse once the big corps join the BTC train, it will take someone with bad intentions and lots of $$$ no time to corrupt the right people

[1714499029]

1714499029

[1714499029]

1714499029

[1714499029]

1714499029

[1714499029]

1714499029

[1714499029]

1714499029

[1714499029]

1714499029

[JayJuanGee]

One day, my dream is to come back to thread, and see absolutely no discussions of contentious shitcoin forks.... sigh..  

It's true though isn't it.....


The more forks that happen will prove that everything that's forked is bullshit compared to the real Bitcoin. It will strengthen bitcoin in the long run.

^^

Agree 100% but in my mind there are 2 types of forks -

1) people forking off the main chain and going their own way - to survive they will need a emergency difficulty adjustment. Hopeful most of these will die off asap which will reinforce Bitcoin over and over again and

2) forks of the main chain that everyone follows.

I honestly think we need more of the second type of fork - it will progress the Bitcoin state of the art (even if the improvements are tiny and incremental), bring the community together and build confidence that we have our shit together. Right now we are lacking the leadership that can make it happen, which is a shame because it makes the core team look weak - technically sound, but politically weak and naive. I cringe when I see all the emotional No2X / UASF stuff.

You can cringe all you want with your core denigration and pro-forking nonsense talk.       

[JayJuanGee]

I am not trying to insult Bitcoin. You cannot deny that SegWit did not appear as it would become reality until miners signaled for NYA. Further, a significant portion of the community is fully behind S2X.  See above. The box is yet to be opened.

Yeah?  Spin all that you like jbreher.. that is not what happened.

Let me attempt to edumacate you (to any extent that it might actually be possible to edumacate a troll like you    ) about what actually happened.  


The various bullshit segwit2x and NY agreement ended up facilitating an avenue in order to accomplish what the vast majority recognized to be to the benefit of bitcoin, and that was an avenue to lock-in, activate and subsequently implement segwit.

Yeah, there were several of the fucking nutjob BIGBLOCKERS, other anti-bitcoin folks, corporate shills who did not like what had happened, and they both 1) embarked upon a spontaneous renegade hardfork (aka BCH) and 2) kept up with their stupid ass largely non-supported whining that 2x is needed.. blah, blah, blah in order to continue to attack bitcoin and to attempt by whatever means possible to get some kind of inroads in either undermining bitcoin's governance or otherwise weakening of bitcoin in order to pump their various alternative projects.

Sure there might be some other stuff going on too, but the nutshell of what happened is how I outline above, and many folks who know about bitcoin know that my outline above is correct and even the vast majority of smart money likely understands these basic points, too.. and that is that hardforks have become attack vectors of the BIG blocker nutjobs rather than either legitimate criticisms or evidence of actual technical bitcoin flaws.

[Torque]

Notice how jbreher just comes here to troll, and then leave.

He doesn't really give a shit what the latest Bitcoin fork du jour is, as long as it's not the current core developed, fully tested, and supported version (which is working stellar, btw). Thus the reason why he shilled for XT/BU, then got his BCH with 8X but still isn't happy, and now discarding it just like Ver/Wu/Wright and has moved on to promoting 2X. And when that fails, I guess he'll just move on to shilling for the next contentious fork?

The trolls like him will never stop, because they hate a decentralized, non-corp controlled Bitcoin with the core team currently at the helm. It throws a monkey wrench into their whole "Bitcoin-as-PayPal-2.0" plans.

[LewisPirenne]

Though fratricide are plainly tragic, I do think that a civil war is needed before Bitcoin grows to the next stage (i.e. a new order, a new empire).  Otherwise, it would just be all words and "perceived" power, which may not be an indication of real power they wield.  

I doubt Satoshi sees a world with thousands of cryptocurrencies competing with each other, where miners can jump in to strip-mine a crypto to the ground, then leave as soon as it is unprofitable to do so and leave the chain to die or languish.  That would be "against their self-interest" as according to the white paper right?  Not if there are tons of crypto to choose from and mine.  

So once there are thousands of crypto around and more fork/alt are coming everyday, then hashrate WILL follow profitability.  What determines profitability?  Market price.  And who determines market price?  The USERS of course.  Hence miners just become incentivized service provider who follows money, not the other way around.  Sure, there is short term supply inelasticity as people need time to setup mining operation.  But if there is money to be made, then someone who like the ROI WILL make the jump.  

As far as I can tell, many Chinese miners don't give a crap about Bitcoin ideology.  They admit as much in that Quartz article interview.  But they love the ROI they can make as often they can recover their fixed investment in less than a year when price spike and total hashrate didn't jump nearly as fast!  So I am often puzzled by people who quote the original white paper and saying hashrate is king and thus other people don't understand economics and what not.  I mean, are people deliberately NOT telling these people how the system works so that they can make money off them?  

The truth is that financial market don't give a crap about politics or religion.  You can not convince a person to change their political or religious view.  But financial market CAN redistribute wealth from those who are wrong and continue to punish them until they are broke or admit their mistake.  If anything, the rise of bitcoin itself would be the best lesson.  

[conspirosphere.tk]

It throws a monkey wrench into their whole "Bitcoin-as-PayPal-2.0" plans.

Their plan is to kill decentralized crypto money production and trasmission.
Paypal 2 is just a ruse to mobilize the useful idiots who don't get it.

That's why they concentrate their attacks on the nodes (because bigger blocks are attacks on the nodes): because they already feel that they can control miners/pools via corruption or force, but nodes are still out of their control.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

The fact people aren't migrating away from Coinbase en masse tells me something about people--they're mostly a bunch of apathetic wankers.

[d_eddie]

The point remains that any 'changing of the guard' would be an abdication*. And hence, would not be merely an effort to overthrow the current devs with ones more malleable.

You mean: Core would abdicate by refusing to code for a project (S2X) that they don't subscribe to.

*Much as we all abdicated our consensus-determining (i.e., mining) power years ago.

You mean: we abdicated by exiting the arms race for mining.

Actually, these are different actions - the first already historical (by user "inaction"), and the second hypothetical, only possible if S2X "wins" and "takes over". The difference is that the first abdication - we, the users giving up mining - was more or less unavoidable, given the financial and existential investment in becoming a pro miner. On the other hand, Core's abdication would be a political-economic switch to one of two sides - voluntary and totally avoidable, therefore closer to the meaning of the verb "abdicate." Not exactly spot on, though: while "abdicating" S2X, the developers would probably continue to code BTC, likely adding some kind of software retaliation to burn bridges.

Your rhetoric use of the same verb for the two actions is sophisticated all right, but it feels like by way of this sophisticated rhetoric you're trying to deflect my attention. Come on, please!

The reason I like arguing with your "trolling" (not my definition ehehe, I'm only quoting someone else O:-) is that I want to understand the ultimate reason why you support your claim. What do you expect the normal user could gain from something like S2X? Or maybe you're not a normal user? If so, who are you in terms of financial-social goals?

[d_eddie]

The fact people aren't migrating away from Coinbase en masse tells me something about people--they're mostly a bunch of apathetic wankers.

That's why I say a word from Amazon (or a "pay with BTC" button, even better) can close the matter. The inertia of single users is nothing compared to that of organizations. Just imagine what happens with all the merchants when they must switch to a different token, with a different value, that they can convert into fiat or into the other token only at certain exchanges.

Of course, Amazon's strength is its mass adoption, which would quickly transfer to the chosen method of payment. Other economic actors, while not that powerful, could sum up to a similar effect over a longer time.

[rolling]

This just aired live on ABC:

http://www.thelisttv.com/the-list/crypto-what-everything-you-need-to-know-about-bitcoin

[Heater]

This just aired live on ABC:

http://www.thelisttv.com/the-list/crypto-what-everything-you-need-to-know-about-bitcoin

Actually explained how to buy them and left out all the crap about criminals?

[Heater]

After 2 weeks of going nowhere, the market depth on Bitstamp looks interesting. The number coins has edged up to 3450 but the cash as shot up to $83m.

If/when the price hits 6k that will wipe out about a third of those coins and there will still be a crazy amount of $$ on the sidelines missing out and presumably waiting for a dip to 3k that will never happen.

There could be another stampede on the way..... if not, it still looks like we have reasonable support at this crazy level.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

I hope Jeff has a better marketing team behind his alt fork. Because this is embarrassing.



Just what even?? Is that a Pokemon toy?

[assbot]

https://twitter.com/JihanWu/status/923242864263303168

"Bitcoin Cash is super fast, super low cost tx fee, super Satoshi Nakamoto."

[LewisPirenne]

I hope Jeff has a better marketing team behind his alt fork. Because this is embarrassing.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DM8tQ3yWAAAR2f_.jpg

Just what even?? Is that a Pokemon toy?

Is that even serious?  Or is it photoshopped?

Though I do kind of get the joke as that main character from Pokemon is named サトシ (Satoshi), taken from the creator of Pokemon, Satoshi Tajiri.  But still, I am sure new comers would be puzzled and think that they are buying some virtual currency for the Pokemon Go app.   

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

I hope Jeff has a better marketing team behind his alt fork. Because this is embarrassing.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DM8tQ3yWAAAR2f_.jpg

Just what even?? Is that a Pokemon toy?

Is that even serious?  Or is it photoshopped?

Though I do kind of get the joke as that main character from Pokemon is named サトシ (Satoshi), taken from the creator of Pokemon, Satoshi Tajiri.  But still, I am sure new comers would be puzzled and think that they are buying some virtual currency for the Pokemon Go app.   

I don't know if serious is the right word. He retweeted it. Can you get sued over Twatter?

[acquafredda]

The fact people aren't migrating away from Coinbase en masse tells me something about people--they're mostly a bunch of apathetic wankers.

I spent time and effort to teach some friends about how to use proper wallets before the bcash drama. at the end when they did claim their bcash they asked  : ok, thanks great! how do I go back to coinbase now?

I am not going to help them anymore

[jbreher]

I am not trying to insult Bitcoin. You cannot deny that SegWit did not appear as it would become reality until miners signaled for NYA. Further, a significant portion of the community is fully behind S2X.  See above. The box is yet to be opened.

Yeah?  Spin all that you like jbreher.. that is not what happened.

Bullshit. It is exactly what happened. Signaling support for segwit was anemic. It was not until the NYA agreement and signaling of S2X that segwit amassed any provable support. That is what occurred, and it is clearly within the record.

Notice how jbreher just comes here to troll, and then leave.

WTF are you talking about? I am here, I was here, and I will continue to be here. I have read each and every post in this thread, participating regularly, going back to April of 2013. I ain't going nowheres.

He doesn't really give a shit what the latest Bitcoin fork du jour is, as long as it's not the current core

Well, that is not true in the least. For instance, I'd rather Bitcoin Gold or GPU or whatever they're calling it today never saw the light of day (which it indeed may not). However, as far as satoshi's original principles are concerned, the calculus is:
BCH >> S2X > S1X
due to increased capacity not choking off adoption.

Thus the reason why he shilled for XT/BU

Inasmuch as the word 'shilling' means 'accepting payment for advocacy', I did not shill for either XT nor BU. I did support each in turn, as each at the time seemed the best positioned to break the logjam of stupid centrally-planned production quotas limiting capacity and thereby stifling adoption.

then got his BCH with 8X but still isn't happy,

Incorrect. I am quite happy with BCH. As it has capacity exceeding current demand. Just as Bitcoin had from the time satoshi created it until about 18 months ago when the new membership of core allowed a stupid production quota to limit capacity and stifle adoption. I'm a little disappointed with the level of adoption so far, but I am patient. It will come around.

and now discarding it just like Ver/Wu/Wright

Incorrect again. See above. BCH >> S2X > S1X

and has moved on to promoting 2X.

Wrong yet again. I am not promoting S2X. Indeed, If I have anything I would like to promote, it remains Bitcoin Cash. I am not promoting S2X; I am correcting misstatements.

And when that fails, I guess he'll just move on to shilling for the next contentious fork?

Nope. I will continue to advocate for Bitcoin Cash. However, if another fork challenges S1X, and has the properties I deem worthy (i.e., no or relaxed stupid centrally-planned production quotas limiting capacity and stifling adoption; and no other new fatal missteps), then I will indeed advocate that over S1X.

The trolls like him

The word 'troll' conveys someone who posts simply to irritate. I do not. I post to advocate for that which I believe is the right path forward.

will never stop,

Well, you finally got one right. I am unlikely to stop. My financial future is intertwined with the success of Bitcoin. Which is why I advocate for a Bitcoin I believe has the most solid future.

because they hate a decentralized, non-corp controlled Bitcoin

100% backwards.

with the core team currently at the helm.

Well, there is an element of truth to this. While I acknowledge that Core is very strong on the technical front, their knowledge of economics, sociology, and game theory is woefully inadequate. Worse yet, they can't see that this is the case.

But in review, it is quite clear that you have absolutely incorrect assumptions about me, my motivations, and my actions. Perhaps you should stop hyperventilating long enough to think.

The point remains that any 'changing of the guard' would be an abdication*. And hence, would not be merely an effort to overthrow the current devs with ones more malleable.

You mean: Core would abdicate by refusing to code for a project (S2X) that they don't subscribe to.

*Much as we all abdicated our consensus-determining (i.e., mining) power years ago.

You mean: we abdicated by exiting the arms race for mining.

Actually, these are different actions

Agreed. I was merely drawing an analogy. But both of them involve giving up a held power.

we, the users giving up mining - was more or less unavoidable, given the financial and existential investment in becoming a pro miner.

I don't think that is true. Who here still mines? Show of hands? I know there are some here that mine on a limited scale.

But more to the point, there was nothing preventing each of us from jumping in and mining. Sure, it seems an insurmountable expense today (but is it really? what about the small scale miners in existence?) but at the dawn of the pro miner era, there were no pro miners. Or IOW, when the mining gets tough, the tough get pro. Yes, we abdicated.

I want to understand the ultimate reason why you support your claim. What do you expect the normal user could gain from something like S2X?

As I have been saying for literally years, the stupid centrally-planned production quota that limits capacity is stifling adoption. I expect S2X (in comparison to S1X) to allow double the number of transactions per second, per hour, per day. Therefore reenabling use cases that have been obsoleted by Cores insane Raspberry Pi fetish. More use cases = more usability. Pretty simple calculus really. Oh - and lower fees besides.

It ain't Bitcoin Cash, but it's double the goodness of S1X.

Besides, we've shown that bigger blocks are not a problem. Why the obstinance on the part of Core? I think they're merely afraid of losing face.

[Asrael999]

The fact people aren't migrating away from Coinbase en masse tells me something about people--they're mostly a bunch of apathetic wankers.

While I agree with the sentiment at least coinbase have stated upfron that their customers will have access to coins on both chains.
For me the bigger issue is bitpay - and their power to force transactions onto one chain or the other, and asfaik they have not rolled back from NYA as yet.

[JayJuanGee]

Besides, we've shown that bigger blocks are not a problem.

Yeah right....     The royal "we" have not shown shit about "bigger blocks are not a problem."    You are just making up shit and trying to act like there is some kind of evidence to support your desired outcome for bigger blocks with no fucking evidence whatsoever beyond mere assertions and whining for more than 2 years.  Actually the fact that the blocks have not gotten bigger during this period, and the price has gone up more than 20x including user base and adoption going up at decent levels should provide some evidence supporting the exact opposite - that bigger blocks are not needed.  Furthermore largely since about July 2017, there has been a lot less spamming of the bitcoin network, and fees and transaction times have been pretty fucking reasonable (low and fast respectively).

Why the obstinance on the part of Core? I think they're merely afraid of losing face.

Yeah.. paint core as obstinate and afraid of losing face is also a pure fabrication on your part.  There is no need for larger blocks, and you expect that core needs to change its position merely because of ongoing and big blocker forking terrorist threats when the facts have not changed and only the sabotage threats have increased?