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

[Icygreen]

Nice! was starting to worry you'd moved on. 

[1556247284]

1556247284

[jbreher]

... jbreher ... come back to team bitcoin.   

'Come back'? I've been here the whole time.

[kingcolex]

Money coming in !

FFS!
I wanted it to be calm & slow this time. It’s going to be another incoming Tsunami isn’t it

We are on the way to the moon again guys! Slow and steady until the halving.

Slow and steady? Unless I have it backwarss, someone just dumped 10 mil tether and I'm expecting it to go into btc.

[kingcolex]

... jbreher ... come back to team bitcoin.   

'Come back'? I've been here the whole time.

It may share a name but that thing, that is not Bitcoin.

[jbreher]

Blah blah blah larger block blah blah

You have bcash and bsv with larger blocks, go there you have options. What part of we don't want larger blocks is so hard to comprehend

Yeah, I get it. But some here seem utterly oblivious to the consequences thereof.

No need to save us bro.  Go save someone else.

Save? Naah. My only intent is to counter misinformation. Those that are open to thought will save themselves.

[Ibian]

Bitcoin is whatever the largest amount of network power says it is. Your side lost, yogi.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Slow and steady? Unless I have it backwarss, someone just dumped 10 mil tether and I'm expecting it to go into btc.

[kingcolex]

Bitcoin is whatever the largest amount of network power says it is. Your side lost, yogi.

I'd say it's more real marketcap, that shows who the majority believe is worth more and the "real" Bitcoin"

[jbreher]

Blah blah blah larger block blah blah

You have bcash and bsv with larger blocks, go there you have options. What part of we don't want larger blocks is so hard to comprehend

Yeah, I get it. But some here seem utterly oblivious to the consequences thereof.

No need to save us bro.  Go save someone else.

It isn't saving us when he knows who he partners with, the scoundrels looking to manipulate and lie to force their profit.

I don't partner with anyone. Well, except my spouse.

Roger does it through pretending Bcash is Bitcoin, Jihan floated the price with the force use of it for hardware, Craig lies about being Satoshi and having those follow his "vision". It's all bullshit of these scumbags trying to force a profit and have some sort of power and fame.

You know what amuses me no end? People in the Bitcoin Cash space talk about the technical and economic attributes of Bitcoin Cash (and that of Bitcoin Core), while people in the Bitcoin Core space almost invariably speak about Bitcoin Cash in terms of Craig, Roger, and Jihan.

[Ibian]

Bitcoin is whatever the largest amount of network power says it is. Your side lost, yogi.

I'd say it's more real marketcap, that shows who the majority believe is worth more and the "real" Bitcoin"

Those are not different items.

[kingcolex]

Blah blah blah larger block blah blah

You have bcash and bsv with larger blocks, go there you have options. What part of we don't want larger blocks is so hard to comprehend

Yeah, I get it. But some here seem utterly oblivious to the consequences thereof.

No need to save us bro.  Go save someone else.

It isn't saving us when he knows who he partners with, the scoundrels looking to manipulate and lie to force their profit.

I don't partner with anyone. Well, except my spouse.

Roger does it through pretending Bcash is Bitcoin, Jihan floated the price with the force use of it for hardware, Craig lies about being Satoshi and having those follow his "vision". It's all bullshit of these scumbags trying to force a profit and have some sort of power and fame.

You know what amuses me no end? People in the Bitcoin Cash space talk about the technical and economic attributes of Bitcoin Cash (and that of Bitcoin Core), while people in the Bitcoin Core space almost invariably speak about Bitcoin Cash in terms of Craig, Roger, and Jihan.

No people in the Bcash space parrot the same points over and over and claim the devs of core are some evil group sabotaging Satoshi's vision.

[Toxic2040]

i like where this is going.

guess the cargo hatch on my private mars surface to orbit shuttle had a malfunction. drag.

 

To be continued.

+1 WOsMerit

----

Could the first of us here to go to the moon or mars please bring back some rock samples for me?
Or even better, alien artifacts if you should find any.

Yes.

+1 WOsMerit

----

Since I'm the only one here, Ill just sign out and take a nap, see you in the evening.

ok

naps are good

+1 WOsMerit


----

Where I live - $0.

I thought your not allowed to carry cash where your at..that its one step above unlawful.

+1  sympathy WOsMerit

----

Good morning Bitcoinland.

+1 WOsMerit

Good morning Jimmie.

Dreams are what the future is made of.

-----

Scaredy cat pumper-wall coming and going.

Puuuhleaaase



+1 WOsMerit


----

And now the 0900 hours wall report, at 1007 hours....brought to you by HODL. The strognhanded detergent with spring fresh smell!

Good morning fellow hodlers

Despite several attempts by Bear forces to infiltrate our lines, troops have rallied strongly and have met each encroachment with steadfast support. Sympathy to our plight is spreading across the global community like wildfire with crys of "This aggression will not stand, man!" ringing out across the land.

Combat operations are expected to continue throughout the week as hotspots flare up and insurgent shorters continue their efforts to undermine hodlers sustained gainz. Therefor all troops are encouraged to maintain a constant state of readiness until further notice.

In other news.

The enlisted mess tent is down for renovations today after several anonymous complaints about the lack of doughnut selections available.

The showing of "The Black Cat" is being moved from 1800 hours to 1830 hours due to popular demand.


That is all.

------
I would tell you the usual..yada yada yada..sideways...maybe up...maybe down..consolidation...but I dont think anyone is willing to believe me anymore. So......I will just say I think $5.4k to $5.5k sooner rather than later. #dyor
1h


4h

#stronghands'19

[jbreher]

Blah blah blah larger block blah blah

You have bcash and bsv with larger blocks, go there you have options. What part of we don't want larger blocks is so hard to comprehend

Yeah, I get it. But some here seem utterly oblivious to the consequences thereof.

And you feel that you grasp full consequences of bcash and bsv and their unlimited blocks ...?

For the most part, yes. I certainly feel I have a greater than average grasp of such consequences -- upon both Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Core -- than does the average Bitcoiner -- in any of the Bitcoin camps. For evidence of such, I need only look at the near-universally asinine replies issued as 'rebuttals' to the points I make.

[jbreher]

Everybody discussing walls and prices ... bear shows up and shit dumps a bunch of bcash shitposts 

Moi?

In what way is discussing the limitations inherent in the condition of persistently full blocks relevant to Bitcoin Cash? It ain't. Neither BCH nor SV have any concern about the negative effects of persistently full blocks.

Nay, it is BTC that need to contend with such a condition. These are BTC posts.

https://i.ibb.co/x3cmvVd/E256-C9-F1-4979-401-A-8-A0-A-791-B25-F3-FA46.jpg

^^^'Substantive rebuttal' case in point.

[sirsplashalot]

Bitcoin is whatever the largest amount of network power says it is. Your side lost, yogi.

I'd say it's more real marketcap, that shows who the majority believe is worth more and the "real" Bitcoin"

But what constitutes bitcoin, the project was released with one document, that has been completely disregarded and you call that Bitcoin based on a trading markets completely irrelevant to the project itself?

[VB1001]

Electrum Faces Another Fake Wallet Attack, Users Reported to Lose Millions of Dollars

Bitcoin (BTC) wallet service Electrum is facing an ongoing Denial-of-Service (DoS) attack on its servers, the company reported on Twitter on April 7.
According to tech news website The Next Web, the new attack has caused users to lose estimatedly millions of dollars to date, with a single person alone reportedly losing about $140,000.

The ongoing DoS attack was allegedly launched by a malicious botnet of more than 140,000 machines, and aims to steal users’ Bitcoin by referring them to fake versions of Electrum software. Citing an unnamed security researcher, the article says that the recent DoS attack is deployed on a new level and was launched about a week ago.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/electrum-faces-another-fake-wallet-attack-users-reported-to-lose-millions-of-dollars

[jbreher]

WTF are you babbling about? I advocate larger blocks, as I do believe in it as a solution to deal with transaction congestion. Quite a splendid one, in fact.

You actually remind me of r0ach, when you can not defend your position or answer anything, you just go on a tangent and throw out statements which make no sense..

You still haven't mentioned what size blocks you think Bitcoin needs... reminds me of the little do'er carpet commercial, "tell them the price son!, the price!"

"Tell me the blocksize son! the blocksize!"

The _protocol_ needs no maximum on the block size. The miners, being the ones who are affected by the block size, can set it without your soviet. At whatever point makes sense from a market demand and supply perspective.

Let me get this correct, you did advocate for larger blocks, but now you don't. You changed your mind.

You are incorrect. My advocacy has always been for no protocol-determined block limit. For such is exactly equivalent to a centrally-planned production quota. And production quotas -- to the extent that they are enforceable -- are invariably economically inefficient, ensuring crappy outcomes for most participants.

In case you had not noticed, miners have always been happy to mine blocks large enough such that average wait tx latencies were darned near universally next-block or so. That is, until blocks became persistently full, making such performance impossible.

At 1MB in size, blocks are so trivially small that miners' only consideration was in maximizing tx fees in the blocks they are building. Leading to blocks not being persistently full until the number of txs desired by the community became in excess of the block size limit. Obviously, such an issue can be solved by increasing the block size limit.

Of course, at some size (specific size thereof unknowable to the central planners), block size will be problematic. But the market will solve this issue. At the point where block propagation increases due to size leads to a higher incidence of orphaning, that is where the equilibrium point for block size will be set. Again, assuming no centrally-planned max, and that sufficient txs are available to build such large blocks.

What you really want is a "dynamic block size", that Miner's will set themselves, be it Small (80kB) or Large (8GB), doesn't matter.

Absolutely. Now you seem to have caught up.

[micgoossens]

via Imgflip Meme Generator

https://twitter.com/j3todaro/status/1115305169712046080?s=21

[micgoossens]

 People keep asking me why #Bitcoin is up. Over a year of OTC accumulation & big $100m buy order on exchanges. The short term price is driven by fear and greed. The long term story is everybody will need $BTC eventually and there wont be many to go around.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xkBpUL1VDKU

https://twitter.com/simondixontwitt/status/1115142571372752896?s=21

Good a have a small bit of it .... keep accumulating and buying

[kingcolex]

WTF are you babbling about? I advocate larger blocks, as I do believe in it as a solution to deal with transaction congestion. Quite a splendid one, in fact.

You actually remind me of r0ach, when you can not defend your position or answer anything, you just go on a tangent and throw out statements which make no sense..

You still haven't mentioned what size blocks you think Bitcoin needs... reminds me of the little do'er carpet commercial, "tell them the price son!, the price!"

"Tell me the blocksize son! the blocksize!"

The _protocol_ needs no maximum on the block size. The miners, being the ones who are affected by the block size, can set it without your soviet. At whatever point makes sense from a market demand and supply perspective.

Let me get this correct, you did advocate for larger blocks, but now you don't. You changed your mind.

You are incorrect. My advocacy has always been for no protocol-determined block limit. For such is exactly equivalent to a centrally-planned production quota. And production quotas -- to the extent that they are enforceable -- are invariably economically inefficient, ensuring crappy outcomes for most participants.

In case you had not noticed, miners have always been happy to mine blocks large enough such that average wait tx latencies were darned near universally next-block or so. That is, until blocks became persistently full, making such performance impossible.

At 1MB in size, blocks are so trivially small that miners' only consideration was in maximizing tx fees in the blocks they are building. Leading to blocks not being persistently full until the number of txs desired by the community became in excess of the block size limit. Obviously, such an issue can be solved by increasing the block size limit.

Of course, at some size (specific size thereof unknowable to the central planners), block size will be problematic. But the market will solve this issue. At the point where block propagation increases due to size leads to a higher incidence of orphaning, that is where the equilibrium point for block size will be set. Again, assuming no centrally-planned max, and that sufficient txs are available to build such large blocks.

What you really want is a "dynamic block size", that Miner's will set themselves, be it Small (80kB) or Large (8GB), doesn't matter.

Absolutely. Now you seem to have caught up.

and what would you do when groups spam the blocks to make them large and reduce the number of nodes?