Bitcoin Forum
December 14, 2024, 11:16:49 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: Price Target for Nov. 30, 2024:
<$75K - 4 (3.3%)
$75K to $80K - 1 (0.8%)
$80K to $85K - 2 (1.7%)
$85K to $90K - 10 (8.3%)
$90K to $95K - 15 (12.4%)
$95K to $100K - 27 (22.3%)
>$100K - 62 (51.2%)
Total Voters: 121

Pages: « 1 ... 18959 18960 18961 18962 18963 18964 18965 18966 18967 18968 18969 18970 18971 18972 18973 18974 18975 18976 18977 18978 18979 18980 18981 18982 18983 18984 18985 18986 18987 18988 18989 18990 18991 18992 18993 18994 18995 18996 18997 18998 18999 19000 19001 19002 19003 19004 19005 19006 19007 19008 [19009] 19010 19011 19012 19013 19014 19015 19016 19017 19018 19019 19020 19021 19022 19023 19024 19025 19026 19027 19028 19029 19030 19031 19032 19033 19034 19035 19036 19037 19038 19039 19040 19041 19042 19043 19044 19045 19046 19047 19048 19049 19050 19051 19052 19053 19054 19055 19056 19057 19058 19059 ... 34067 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion  (Read 26580365 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. (174 posts by 3 users with 9 merit deleted.)
realr0ach
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 311


#TheGoyimKnow


View Profile
January 06, 2018, 11:32:16 PM

Since Bitcoin’s only true value lies in ‘decentralisation’

Then I guess it's value is already zero.
Ibian
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268
Merit: 1278



View Profile
January 06, 2018, 11:34:23 PM
Last edit: January 06, 2018, 11:47:06 PM by Ibian


I have yet to see anyone explain how increasing the blocksize increases centralization. It seems to be some idea that just took hold and that everyone believes in, because they believe in it.

And it doesn't end. There will always be a need for improvements because there will always be competitors ready to take over if we stagnate. stagnation is death.

Lightning requires segwit. Which is to say, it will be as worthless as segwit is.

Increasing the block size will require more storage, faster CPUs, and more network resources.

The further we go, the more we price out smaller miners and move mining to the cartels which is already a problem.

Congrats.  It's now been explained to you.
More processing for more work. Yes. And the problem with that would beee.... that you are upset at physics?

Whatever system is used, industry level players will do better than home hobbyists. Storage is cheap and getting cheaper, and 2 mb blocks, for example, would certainly not tax the typical home connection so I don't see the problem. It would not require more processing power as the block reward is split among miners relative to their contribution, not per-flop. Miners would keep their relative positions.
Wekkel
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3122
Merit: 1538


yes


View Profile
January 06, 2018, 11:37:31 PM

Since Bitcoin’s only true value lies in ‘decentralisation’

Then I guess it's value is already zero.

In the long run, we are all dead.

Meanwhile, let me enjoy BTC $50k soon and the ability to stock up on some Gold, just in case.
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162
Merit: 1007



View Profile
January 06, 2018, 11:53:21 PM

That is not relevant in the least. It will make it better than it is now.

We need improvements. Before we hit $100+ fees would be nice.


Why does BTC need improvements?  If it is digital gold -- designed to be held and not spent -- then high fees that make it more difficult to use could be seen as a feature.  Plus small blocks make it easier to run full nodes, which is important to many people. 

realr0ach
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 311


#TheGoyimKnow


View Profile
January 06, 2018, 11:56:07 PM

Since Bitcoin’s only true value lies in ‘decentralisation’

Then I guess it's value is already zero.

In the long run, we are all dead.

Meanwhile, let me enjoy BTC $50k soon and the ability to stock up on some Gold, just in case.

Bitcoin = The Mississippi scheme:

Icygreen
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1464
Merit: 1136



View Profile
January 06, 2018, 11:58:23 PM

And once again ... Satoshi was wrong.
Good to have geniuses like your Torque. Thank you for enlightening us with your wisdom.
Now ... if Satoshi was so wrong, why do not we just rewrite the white paper?

.....

Oh! Stupid Satoshi, you were so wrong.

Quit being a trite tool. It's the reason people here don't take you seriously and many have you on ignore.

It doesn't matter what Satoshi originally envisioned as Bitcoin's proposed/intended usage, it only matters how the people that buy it actually use it. It saw almost nil usage as a currency even back when transaction fees were low. Disregarding transaction fees and long confirmation times, it's deflationary nature alone, combined with all the hoop jumping required just to acquire it, nearly kills it as a daily currency. It functions much better as a decentralized digital asset that stores value. That's a fact and nothing you can allude to wrt "Satoshi's original vision" can change that.

Even pre-teens and teens use paper currencies around the world on a daily basis, but hell they can't even purchase Bitcoin without being 18+ yrs old and having a drivers license and a bank account first. How about that fkn irony, Satoshi? Should we add an addendum in the white paper for that too?

Grow the fk up and quit making tool statements.

Torque, you're wrong. People need a coin. Having a decentralized asset, outside the influence of governments, of course it is important; but for ordinary people, it is much more important to have a decentralized currency.

I do not agree either that bitcoin was not used as a currency. The great success of bitcoin came from the hand of black markets. The world could see that it was a real, useful alternative, and outside the influence of governments. And if it were still cheap to make payments, I'm sure the commerce would continue to develop.
Until recently, we saw an organic development of the ecosystem, in which savers, traders, commerce, investors grew symbiotically. Today, commerce has no alternative, and simply bitcoin is being used as an asset for the speculation of the new rich.

I have already told my experience here many times, but Bitcoin for me and many other people, in a third world country, represents much more than an asset. And that is the vision that I always discuss, because here it is much more important to have decentralized money. The rich already have hundreds of assets with which to have fun, and it bothers me to think that bitcoin becomes one more of them.

Edit:My first bitcoins I bought them on the street, without a bank account.


For the other two comments of shit, I do not defend a dogma, but a vision. I like the side chains, but it seems to me that the blockchain must be accessible to anyone.

I get what Torque is pointing at.
Here's a quote from Andreas book that lays it out plainly and I tend to agree.
"Bitcoin isn’t currency. That’s a really important thing to realize. Currency is an app that runs on the bitcoin network. Bitcoin is the internet of money, and currency is just the first application."
So... considering this, is everyone right?
DaRude
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2923
Merit: 1926


In order to dump coins one must have coins


View Profile
January 07, 2018, 12:16:20 AM

BTC606 ask wall @ $17.500 on Finex oops OT
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349


Eadem mutata resurgo


View Profile
January 07, 2018, 12:26:50 AM

I get what Torque is pointing at.
Here's a quote from Andreas book that lays it out plainly and I tend to agree.
"Bitcoin isn’t currency. That’s a really important thing to realize. Currency is an app that runs on the bitcoin network. Bitcoin is the internet of money, and currency is just the first application."
So... considering this, is everyone right?

Basically, yes.

Everyone can be right because they are all using semantics, spin and double-speak to push their control agendas. It's like asking Methodists, Anglicans and Mormons about Jesus of Nazareth's teachings.

The final outcome is a sect of coder-monks that live in isolation (on top of mountain in Tibet or Switzerland), take vows of poverty and extreme purity of syntax, to work on the one true bitcoin client ... that's the one I'll be running on my machines.
jojo69
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3388
Merit: 4755


diamond-handed zealot


View Profile
January 07, 2018, 12:34:10 AM

BTC... oops OT

LOL!
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349


Eadem mutata resurgo


View Profile
January 07, 2018, 12:36:08 AM

Hi. We are here to talk to you about Satoshi's vision.

realr0ach
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 311


#TheGoyimKnow


View Profile
January 07, 2018, 12:41:38 AM


cAPSLOCK
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3850
Merit: 5410

Note the unconventional cAPITALIZATION!


View Profile
January 07, 2018, 12:51:09 AM

That is not relevant in the least. It will make it better than it is now.

We need improvements. Before we hit $100+ fees would be nice.


Why does BTC need improvements?  If it is digital gold -- designed to be held and not spent -- then high fees that make it more difficult to use could be seen as a feature.  Plus small blocks make it easier to run full nodes, which is important to many people. 



It does bother me that someone as (I think?) intelligent as you can only see this problem in 1 dimension and black and white...

That is assuming the above quote is sarcasm, and not a sudden change of heart or a hacked account.

By the way, I do not think bitcoin is/will be only a store of value... likely many of us do not.  Also it is a straw man to assume small blockers want "no improvements".  We want different ones from BCash.
windjc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1070


View Profile
January 07, 2018, 12:59:22 AM

That is not relevant in the least. It will make it better than it is now.

We need improvements. Before we hit $100+ fees would be nice.


Why does BTC need improvements?  If it is digital gold -- designed to be held and not spent -- then high fees that make it more difficult to use could be seen as a feature.  Plus small blocks make it easier to run full nodes, which is important to many people.  



How come you can't articulate the simple following explanation:

In what if any way is Bcash superior to LTC, DASH and DOGE as transactional currency?
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162
Merit: 1007



View Profile
January 07, 2018, 01:03:16 AM

That is not relevant in the least. It will make it better than it is now.

We need improvements. Before we hit $100+ fees would be nice.


Why does BTC need improvements?  If it is digital gold -- designed to be held and not spent -- then high fees that make it more difficult to use could be seen as a feature.  Plus small blocks make it easier to run full nodes, which is important to many people. 



It does bother me that someone as (I think?) intelligent as you can only see this problem in 1 dimension and black and white...

That is assuming the above quote is sarcasm, and not a sudden change of heart or a hacked account.

By the way, I do not think bitcoin is/will be only a store of value... likely many of us do not.  Also it is a straw man to assume small blockers want "no improvements".  We want different ones from BCash.


It will be interesting to watch BTC development move forward.  There was a huge portion of the community pushing for bigger blocks who have now shifted there holdings towards BCH.  These people will now support keeping BTC crippled at 1 MB, as they believe that shifting value from BTC -> BCH is now the best solution.  So we have a situation where both small-blockers will be pushing for no block size limit increase AND big-bockers (like me) will also be pushing for no block size limit increase.  So I think it will be difficult for BTC to scale if Lightning Network (LN) doesn't work out as planned.

Of course, if your of the view that use cases besides "holding" aren't important, then BTC is fine as is.  
realr0ach
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 311


#TheGoyimKnow


View Profile
January 07, 2018, 01:09:20 AM

By the way, I do not think bitcoin is/will be only a store of value...

Bitcoin can only derive value from flow, not stock.  The idea an imaginary object can be a store of value is absurd.  In other words, the second people are unable to perform regulatory arbitrage, or arbitrage against the dollar with bitcoin, it's value becomes zero.  If the govt attempts to ban gold or silver, due to them being real commodities instead of imaginary commodities and having real world use cases, their value generally doesn't go below cost of production.

It's pretty obvious the Jewish occupied US govt attempts to prevent people from using physical metals instead of dollars.  Knowing that all they have to do to defeat bitcoin is shutting down the exchanges and/or making it illegal, which cuts off both regulatory arbitrage and dollar arbitrage, the real question is, WHY haven't they done it?  One can only conclude the Jewish occupied US govt backs bitcoin due to not exercising these easily available actions against it.
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162
Merit: 1007



View Profile
January 07, 2018, 01:12:06 AM

That is not relevant in the least. It will make it better than it is now.

We need improvements. Before we hit $100+ fees would be nice.


Why does BTC need improvements?  If it is digital gold -- designed to be held and not spent -- then high fees that make it more difficult to use could be seen as a feature.  Plus small blocks make it easier to run full nodes, which is important to many people.  



How come you can't articulate the simple following explanation:

In what if any way is Bcash superior to LTC, DASH and DOGE as transactional currency?


I view money as a ledger.  Or "money as memory," as per the work of Kocherlakota. From this viewpoint, it is the information encoded in the ledger about who owns which coins that is of value.  The actual mechanism used to update that ledger is just a technical decision -- which is the best paper to write on?  Which is the best pen?

Bitcoin Cash (BCH) and Bitcoin Core (BTC) share the same ledger up until August 1.  At this point, the "ledger updating mechanisms" diverged (BCH allowed more information about the state of the ledger to be updated every ten minutes to facilitate growth).

Switching to DOGE would be like ripping up the "ledger of money" because the pen we were using to update it ran out of ink.  Instead, just get a better pen and keep updating the same ledger.  



 
Ibian
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268
Merit: 1278



View Profile
January 07, 2018, 01:13:52 AM

Lightning requires segwit. Which is to say, it will be as worthless as segwit is.

This is one of the most ignorant and myopic statements I have ever seen someone make on these forums.

Sheeeeit !
Care to elaborate?
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349


Eadem mutata resurgo


View Profile
January 07, 2018, 01:14:11 AM

the wannabe control freakery trolling is intensifying to extreme levels ... shorts about to explode?
realr0ach
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 311


#TheGoyimKnow


View Profile
January 07, 2018, 01:16:29 AM

the wannabe control freakery trolling is intensifying to extreme levels ... shorts about to explode?

I noticed you are unable to come up with any excuse as to why the Jewish occupied US govt has not tried to stop bitcoin (and instead promote it) while both China and Russia try to get rid of it.
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349


Eadem mutata resurgo


View Profile
January 07, 2018, 01:19:02 AM

Pages: « 1 ... 18959 18960 18961 18962 18963 18964 18965 18966 18967 18968 18969 18970 18971 18972 18973 18974 18975 18976 18977 18978 18979 18980 18981 18982 18983 18984 18985 18986 18987 18988 18989 18990 18991 18992 18993 18994 18995 18996 18997 18998 18999 19000 19001 19002 19003 19004 19005 19006 19007 19008 [19009] 19010 19011 19012 19013 19014 19015 19016 19017 19018 19019 19020 19021 19022 19023 19024 19025 19026 19027 19028 19029 19030 19031 19032 19033 19034 19035 19036 19037 19038 19039 19040 19041 19042 19043 19044 19045 19046 19047 19048 19049 19050 19051 19052 19053 19054 19055 19056 19057 19058 19059 ... 34067 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!