Bitcoin Forum
March 23, 2019, 10:08:28 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: What do you think most of the Mt. Gox recipients will do upon receiving their BTC/BCH?
HODL - 63 (63.6%)
DUMP - 36 (36.4%)
Total Voters: 99

Pages: « 1 ... 18208 18209 18210 18211 18212 18213 18214 18215 18216 18217 18218 18219 18220 18221 18222 18223 18224 18225 18226 18227 18228 18229 18230 18231 18232 18233 18234 18235 18236 18237 18238 18239 18240 18241 18242 18243 18244 18245 18246 18247 18248 18249 18250 18251 18252 18253 18254 18255 18256 18257 [18258] 18259 18260 18261 18262 18263 18264 18265 18266 18267 18268 18269 18270 18271 18272 18273 18274 18275 18276 18277 18278 18279 18280 18281 18282 18283 18284 18285 18286 18287 18288 18289 18290 18291 18292 18293 18294 18295 18296 18297 18298 18299 18300 18301 18302 18303 18304 18305 18306 18307 18308 ... 23216 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion  (Read 21075905 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. (13 posts by 6 users deleted.)
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1656


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
November 14, 2017, 01:34:49 AM

If Monday comes and we're still bleeding down like Peter R. imagines we will be, I'm going to start daytarding. Simple as that.


That is why I follow this thread.

Continued hillarity!!!!    Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy


You never learn, BMB, do you?


How much money you gotta lose before you reconsider your temptation to trade?  especially when you don't have any clue about how to structure your orders.   

Well, good for the rest of us that you will likely sell at the bottom and buy at the top, and it is good for the ecosystem to have some of you "brave" folks out there.

 Roll Eyes    Tongue
+
=
Equity on offer
in the world's largest
crypto enabled
marketplace
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1553378908
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1553378908

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1553378908
Reply with quote  #2

1553378908
Report to moderator
1553378908
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1553378908

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1553378908
Reply with quote  #2

1553378908
Report to moderator
Rosewater Foundation
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 254



View Profile
November 14, 2017, 01:35:52 AM

If Monday comes and we're still bleeding down like Peter R. imagines we will be, I'm going to start daytarding. Simple as that.


That is why I follow this thread.

Continued hillarity!!!!    Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy


You never learn, BMB, do you?


How much money you gotta lose before you reconsider your temptation to trade?  especially when you don't have any clue about how to structure your orders.   

Well, good for the rest of us that you will likely sell at the bottom and buy at the top, and it is good for the ecosystem to have some of you "brave" folks out there.

 Roll Eyes    Tongue

yeah. he earned that.
AZwarel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 401
Merit: 280


View Profile
November 14, 2017, 01:39:39 AM

Why are you reacting so emotionally?  You have held bitcoin for a long time, and so you would have equal coins on both the Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin Cash chains.  If Bitcoin evolves as peer-to-peer digital cash, with low fees and reliable confirmation, you win; if Bitcoin evolves as digital gold, with high fees and transaction friction, you win too.

I believe in the original vision for Bitcoin as described in the white paper: as a peer-to-peer electronic cash system.  I am working to help shape bitcoin to that vision and will continue to do so.

Could I be wrong?  Sure.  Maybe it actually is good to have $20 fees (soon to be $50) and a network that can only process 3 transactions per seconds (one thousand times less than Visa).  

And that is why I hold both BTC and BCH.  

i react emotionally because YOU play games with my live savings. why the fuck aren´t you creating just another altcoin to realize your great vision? why tamper with bitcoin? if you are not happy with it, leave it. well, you sort of did, but you try to steal as much juice of it as possible, trying to hurt bitcoin as much as possible.

now you expecting me to hug you for it? your game is called hijacking and it is evil.


From my perspective, it is Blockstream/Core that are tampering with Bitcoin, by refusing to allow a much-needed capacity increase to reduce fees and allow for continued growth, and then by fundamentally changing the structure of the BTC coin by adding segwit.  

Bitcoin Cash represents the original vision for Bitcoin as peer-to-peer electronic cash.  I will continue work to realize this vision, and help resist the hijack attempt by Blockstream and Core.

Bitcoin gains it's value by proven exclusion of any third party intervention in a value exchange network between peers.
This is achieved in "The original vision" by that both the sender and receiver peer can independently get a proof by running a full node that there is no double spending on a transaction between them. No need for a trusted third party can be only achieved by this independent verification process, which needs the physically possible minimum technical requirements for running a full node for the most participants. A large block size excludes most peers doing this, essentially destroying the very core of bitcoin's value.

There was nothing about how the cost of transactions (fees) would be "fair" in the white paper; the costs of doing transactions in a voluntary, opt-in value exchange network is entirely upon the peers do decide between themselves.

You are basically saying that the free market is not working to establish the subjective valuation of the actors to reach a price of transacting. You think you can "spend their money better than they do".
That is the problem, not the vaporware you shill.
yermom
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10


View Profile
November 14, 2017, 01:50:10 AM

New slogan in here next year:

This is Bitcointalk, not a fucking Bitcoin forum!  :roto2:

Shame on you
jojo69
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330
Merit: 1682


no FOMO


View Profile
November 14, 2017, 01:59:58 AM


Bitcoin gains it's value by proven exclusion of any third party intervention in a value exchange network between peers.
This is achieved in "The original vision" by that both the sender and receiver peer can independently get a proof by running a full node that there is no double spending on a transaction between them. No need for a trusted third party can be only achieved by this independent verification process, which needs the physically possible minimum technical requirements for running a full node for the most participants. A large block size excludes most peers doing this, essentially destroying the very core of bitcoin's value.

There was nothing about how the cost of transactions (fees) would be "fair" in the white paper; the costs of doing transactions in a voluntary, opt-in value exchange network is entirely upon the peers do decide between themselves.

You are basically saying that the free market is not working to establish the subjective valuation of the actors to reach a price of transacting. You think you can "spend their money better than they do".
That is the problem, not the vaporware you shill.

This is the fundamental truth that I think holes the bigblock argument below the waterline.  Thank you for formulating it so succinctly.  Of course they retort that low transaction throughput will force most transactions on to L2 or L3 solutions, thus reintroducing a "trusted" third party into the equation.

I say, fine, for low value transactions I have no issue with taking my chances with some gatekeeper, or using a lesser coin.  But when I want to move a significant lump of value, bet your ass I will gladly pay whatever the fee at that time is to take the responsibility for the security of that transaction myself.
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162
Merit: 1007



View Profile
November 14, 2017, 02:23:26 AM

Bitcoin gains it's value by proven exclusion of any third party intervention in a value exchange network between peers.
This is achieved in "The original vision" by that both the sender and receiver peer can independently get a proof by running a full node that there is no double spending on a transaction between them. No need for a trusted third party can be only achieved by this independent verification process, which needs the physically possible minimum technical requirements for running a full node for the most participants. A large block size excludes most peers doing this, essentially destroying the very core of bitcoin's value.

There was nothing about how the cost of transactions (fees) would be "fair" in the white paper; the costs of doing transactions in a voluntary, opt-in value exchange network is entirely upon the peers do decide between themselves.

You are basically saying that the free market is not working to establish the subjective valuation of the actors to reach a price of transacting. You think you can "spend their money better than they do".
That is the problem, not the vaporware you shill.

With simplified payment verification technology (Section 8 of white paper), users can be their own banks, verify their own transactions, and send payments to anyone, trustlessly and without a middleman.  Users do not need to run network nodes.

Here are slides from a talk I gave this summer explaining how this brilliant technique created by Satoshi works:

https://www.slideshare.net/peter_r/scaling-bitcoin-to-a-billion-users?qid=3e0b7061-f29b-4a6c-bc5b-ee6b59fffe49&v=&b=&from_search=1

Satoshi's design is massively scalable.
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1656


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
November 14, 2017, 02:26:33 AM




The news links below, but in Korean.
Basically 3000 people show up at Bithumb's Gangnam HQ to protest that lovely Gox style candlestick from 2.85 mio KRW ($2600) to 0.25 mio KRW ($220).  The presidential palace is demanding an investigation into the incident.  Hope that Vers et al. won't get a visit from those Jopok anytime soon.   Roll Eyes

http://biz.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2017/11/13/2017111302006.html
http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/economy/finance/818839.html

Any news about what is happening at Bithumb? That's the korean exchange where most of the BCH trading/pumping happened I think.



 I was thinking that maybe JJG has gone to Korea to kick some ass.  Haven't seen him here since the shit show began.




hahahaha


It' is nice to be missed...    Cry Cry
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1656


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
November 14, 2017, 02:41:08 AM

Paid 6$ transaction fee and after 3 days .. 0 confirmations . Bullish.

This is not a good time for making such measurements, since there is an  ongoing spam attack going on - and sure some folks believe that bitcoin should be resilient enough to withstand spam attacks and still transmit.  I suppose some of these kinds of matters might be addressed by off chain transactions, too.

Overall bitcoin is bullish, but not for the contraindicator reasons that you trollishly point out.   Roll Eyes
pfrtlpfmpf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 257


View Profile
November 14, 2017, 02:57:30 AM
Last edit: November 14, 2017, 03:10:22 AM by pfrtlpfmpf

I believe in short posts:
Short.

Bitcoincash ?   Nahh  Smiley

Gab0
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 283
Merit: 127



View Profile
November 14, 2017, 03:26:51 AM

Bitcoin gains it's value by proven exclusion of any third party intervention in a value exchange network between peers.
This is achieved in "The original vision" by that both the sender and receiver peer can independently get a proof by running a full node that there is no double spending on a transaction between them. No need for a trusted third party can be only achieved by this independent verification process, which needs the physically possible minimum technical requirements for running a full node for the most participants. A large block size excludes most peers doing this, essentially destroying the very core of bitcoin's value.

There was nothing about how the cost of transactions (fees) would be "fair" in the white paper; the costs of doing transactions in a voluntary, opt-in value exchange network is entirely upon the peers do decide between themselves.

You are basically saying that the free market is not working to establish the subjective valuation of the actors to reach a price of transacting. You think you can "spend their money better than they do".
That is the problem, not the vaporware you shill.

With simplified payment verification technology (Section 8 of white paper), users can be their own banks, verify their own transactions, and send payments to anyone, trustlessly and without a middleman.  Users do not need to run network nodes.

Here are slides from a talk I gave this summer explaining how this brilliant technique created by Satoshi works:

https://www.slideshare.net/peter_r/scaling-bitcoin-to-a-billion-users?qid=3e0b7061-f29b-4a6c-bc5b-ee6b59fffe49&v=&b=&from_search=1

Satoshi's design is massively scalable.

Could you explain why you think that users don't need to run network nodes?
I don't agree, but I would like to understand your point of view.
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1656


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
November 14, 2017, 03:28:58 AM

good opportunity to buy more. i dont know where the bottom will be so i'm buying 0.05 at every $300 drop Grin

JJ will be proud of you...

That is exactly what you supposed to be doing....     Grin

And were the hell have you been during this shit storm? You alone could have worn all the BCH shillers down with you never ending walls of text.

hahahahahaha

Thanks for the praise (I think?).

I was not completely detached, but I was out having fun (that did not involve typing).


All of my outstanding BCH sell orders filled between .08 and .31 BTC.  I only have access to a tiny bit more BCH on WEX (and then the token BCH that WEX has not issued and the coinbase BCH that has not issued).. so yeah, nearly out of BCH.

Regarding BTC, I was able to set some of my BTC sell orders after my many buy orders triggered all the way down from $6700 to $5400-ish.  I did fall behind a little bit on setting my orders (because of my fun having), and I was not able to catch up on my thread reading until today.

Go figure.  I do admit that I did have to wade through quite a lot of troll posts, and surely PeterR has been allowed quite a bit of nonsensical latitude, as you likely already recognized.   Wink
AZwarel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 401
Merit: 280


View Profile
November 14, 2017, 03:35:24 AM

Bitcoin gains it's value by proven exclusion of any third party intervention in a value exchange network between peers.
This is achieved in "The original vision" by that both the sender and receiver peer can independently get a proof by running a full node that there is no double spending on a transaction between them. No need for a trusted third party can be only achieved by this independent verification process, which needs the physically possible minimum technical requirements for running a full node for the most participants. A large block size excludes most peers doing this, essentially destroying the very core of bitcoin's value.

There was nothing about how the cost of transactions (fees) would be "fair" in the white paper; the costs of doing transactions in a voluntary, opt-in value exchange network is entirely upon the peers do decide between themselves.

You are basically saying that the free market is not working to establish the subjective valuation of the actors to reach a price of transacting. You think you can "spend their money better than they do".
That is the problem, not the vaporware you shill.

With simplified payment verification technology (Section 8 of white paper), users can be their own banks, verify their own transactions, and send payments to anyone, trustlessly and without a middleman.  Users do not need to run network nodes.

Here are slides from a talk I gave this summer explaining how this brilliant technique created by Satoshi works:

https://www.slideshare.net/peter_r/scaling-bitcoin-to-a-billion-users?qid=3e0b7061-f29b-4a6c-bc5b-ee6b59fffe49&v=&b=&from_search=1

Satoshi's design is massively scalable.

If users do not run nodes, who does? I mean.. non users run the nodes?? Is this an Orwelian newspeak?
I think we have a different definition of what a node is and does in a network, but that happens.

And no, i will never trust anything that begins with "simplified" in that sense. That is a code word for "do not worry, we have your back, somewhere, you do not need to know, relax".
I must be able to see EVERYTHING since the Genesis block. That is the ONLY 100% guarantee not to be screwed over by "simplified technology". You can not simplify an information state below itself (you can not express '1' with anything shorter than itself).

edit: btw, you have not addressed my argument about free market of fees, or that what if users want to run nodes - not because they have to/need to, but because that is bitcoin's value proposition but prohibited by gigabyte blocks. You have just recited slogans "be your own bank! - even though you can not run a server farm yourself, but, meh it sounded good!"
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1656


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
November 14, 2017, 03:41:02 AM

You mean the CEO of Bitcoin Cash -- Rick Falkvinge -- isn't allowed to trade bitcoin?
If he trades based on insider information, as you implied, and this can be proven in court, he will go to jail in most countries in the world.
Well, most likely not jail, but a hefty fine Roll Eyes


Maybe start a twitter campaign to jail the CEO of Bitcoin Cash?  Cheesy


For the record, there is no Bitcoin Cash CEO.  That doesn't even make sense.  How can a blockchain have a CEO? That letter was satire. The people with "inside information" are the miners and the whales battling it out right now.  I have no idea how this mess will play out, which is why I hold both BTC and BCH.

I am leaning towards BCH though.




I guess that you are conceding that some folks are fucking nutjobs, including that Rick whatever his name is who proclaimed to be the CEO of Bcash as a kind of pump "satire", as you call it.

Sure, it is understandable that cryptos are generally unregulated, and largely decentralized, but if the SEC considers some behaviors to be bordering on the promotion of securities, then some players could get themselves into trouble by pumping such, no?  Even if they later proclaim, "satire?" 

Dabs
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2282
Merit: 1129



View Profile
November 14, 2017, 04:21:58 AM

If you paid $6 to move $40 worth of bitcoin, and it confirmed, you would pay $6 to move $400 or $4000 or $40000 or even $4 million worth of bitcoin, and it will also confirm. (Well, maybe if you used more unspent inputs then you'd pay more than $6 but I think that's acceptable for a $4m transaction.)
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162
Merit: 1007



View Profile
November 14, 2017, 04:25:55 AM

Could you explain why you think that users don't need to run network nodes?
I don't agree, but I would like to understand your point of view.

The design of Bitcoin is such that users can just be users.  

For example, if I transfer a coin to you, you can immediately verify my signature.  You do not need to trust me or trust anyone else -- the transaction itself contains cryptographic proof that I transferred ownership of my coin to you.  You can even follow the chain of signatures backwards and confirm that the person who I received the coin from also signed the transfer, and so on and so forth, as far back as you want to go.  You do not need a network node to do this!

The only risk to you is that I may have also signed that same bitcoin over to someone else.  This is the double-spend problem that had not been solved until Satoshi.  Satoshi's revolutionary solution was to use proof-of-work to time stamp transactions into a chain such that -- if his proof-of-work conjecture held --  that the same coin could not be spent twice.

As a user then, the only additional piece of information you need, is whether the transaction I gave to you was accepted into the blockchain.  A network node can provide you this proof (that you can trustlessly verify for yourself!) with a few kilobytes of information.

Here is a talk I gave (only about 10 min long) that explains how SPV works in more detail (sorry about the crappy audio!)  

https://youtu.be/m7cvPvtGIUI?t=459
tetra
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 464
Merit: 250


View Profile
November 14, 2017, 04:26:09 AM

If you paid $6 to move $40 worth of bitcoin, and it confirmed, you would pay $6 to move $400 or $4000 or $40000 or even $4 million worth of bitcoin, and it will also confirm. (Well, maybe if you used more unspent inputs then you'd pay more than $6 but I think that's acceptable for a $4m transaction.)

Sounds like a pretty standard amount for a transaction
AlexGR
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1582
Merit: 1027



View Profile
November 14, 2017, 04:42:34 AM

The only risk to you is that I may have also signed that same bitcoin over to someone else.

More recently another risk emerged: The ability of the node to feed the user a different chain, and then proclaiming that this chain is Bitcoin - when it's not.

In this scenario, a userbase which relies heavily on a few nodes can be switched to any implementation the few node-owners want. So if a few node-owners collude, they can switch nearly the entire BTC userbase to another coin and then proclaim it BTC.

So nodes are important. Very important.
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162
Merit: 1007



View Profile
November 14, 2017, 04:49:24 AM

The only risk to you is that I may have also signed that same bitcoin over to someone else.

More recently another risk emerged: The ability of the node to feed the user a different chain, and then proclaiming that this chain is Bitcoin - when it's not.

In this scenario, a userbase which relies heavily on a few nodes can be switched to any implementation the few node-owners want. So if a few node-owners collude, they can switch nearly the entire BTC userbase to another coin and then proclaim it BTC.

So nodes are important. Very important.

Sounds like you don't understand how PoW works.
Dabs
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2282
Merit: 1129



View Profile
November 14, 2017, 04:51:44 AM

Sounds like a pretty standard amount for a transaction

I recently (a few months ago) paid $10.84 to move $833,092.49 split among 3 people.
tetra
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 464
Merit: 250


View Profile
November 14, 2017, 05:04:56 AM

Sounds like a pretty standard amount for a transaction

I recently (a few months ago) paid $10.84 to move $833,092.49 split among 3 people.
Yeah, that sounds so 99%
Pages: « 1 ... 18208 18209 18210 18211 18212 18213 18214 18215 18216 18217 18218 18219 18220 18221 18222 18223 18224 18225 18226 18227 18228 18229 18230 18231 18232 18233 18234 18235 18236 18237 18238 18239 18240 18241 18242 18243 18244 18245 18246 18247 18248 18249 18250 18251 18252 18253 18254 18255 18256 18257 [18258] 18259 18260 18261 18262 18263 18264 18265 18266 18267 18268 18269 18270 18271 18272 18273 18274 18275 18276 18277 18278 18279 18280 18281 18282 18283 18284 18285 18286 18287 18288 18289 18290 18291 18292 18293 18294 18295 18296 18297 18298 18299 18300 18301 18302 18303 18304 18305 18306 18307 18308 ... 23216 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!