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

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[Elwar]

Coin
Explanation

The 240 $ range seems like the new 220.

If it holds in the 240 range for another 2 weeks or so we can officially declare the bear market dead.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[klee]

[Erdogan]

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that there was no block size limit in Satoshi's software. They added it later. He believed in game theory where things sort themselves out through risk and reward.

Not sure,  but I found this?

"Andresen never mentions the actual reason that Satoshi imposed a block limit. Oleg Andreev, however, does:
Huge blocks could lead to excessive use of bandwidth which could lead to higher percentage of orphaned blocks due to higher synchronization delays."
From: http://cascadianhacker.com/blog/2014/10/25_notes-on-increasing-the-maximum-bitcoin-block-size-or-why-it-aint-happenin.html

If bandwidth is really the only issue then you would think the 8mb compromise will likely gain enough traction to get implemented. After all, even with a 8mb limit, most miners will still be sticking to 750 k - until you provide sufficient incentive to change.

Yeah, exactly. You can have a higher limit or no limit at all and it's still a risk for a miner to build a block that big. It's going to take a longer time to propagate over the internet which means more time for another miner to find another (smaller/faster) block and possibly orphan yours. I'm sure the limit was created to prevent some kind of "large block attack" (to disrupt miners with slow internet?) but in reality, risk and reward will prevent most miners from increasing their block size very much even when the limit is officially increased.

Exactly, a big part of the cost of mining large blocks is the risk.

[oda.krell]

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that there was no block size limit in Satoshi's software. They added it later. He believed in game theory where things sort themselves out through risk and reward.

Not sure,  but I found this?

"Andresen never mentions the actual reason that Satoshi imposed a block limit. Oleg Andreev, however, does:
Huge blocks could lead to excessive use of bandwidth which could lead to higher percentage of orphaned blocks due to higher synchronization delays."
From: http://cascadianhacker.com/blog/2014/10/25_notes-on-increasing-the-maximum-bitcoin-block-size-or-why-it-aint-happenin.html

If bandwidth is really the only issue then you would think the 8mb compromise will likely gain enough traction to get implemented. After all, even with a 8mb limit, most miners will still be sticking to 750 k - until you provide sufficient incentive to change.

Yeah, exactly. You can have a higher limit or no limit at all and it's still a risk for a miner to build a block that big. It's going to take a longer time to propagate over the internet which means more time for another miner to find another (smaller/faster) block and possibly orphan yours. I'm sure the limit was created to prevent some kind of "large block attack" (to disrupt miners with slow internet?) but in reality, risk and reward will prevent most miners from increasing their block size very much even when the limit is officially increased.

Exactly, a big part of the cost of mining large blocks is the risk.

I'm pretty sure that argument only holds in case of "excess capacity" though.

Once sufficient network usage exists, a miner willing to create a block closer to max size will be rewarded higher as well (more tx, more fees), at the risk  mentioned above.

My impression is that miners are a risk averse bunch on average, so perhaps they'll always (on average) stay below the maximum, but I'd expect some form of equilibrium to emerge, a value that most miners see as a good tradeoff between minimizing risk and maximizing fees, and I'm certain that value will eventually be higher than what it is now the max block size, assuming the network continues to grow.


tl;dr "minizing orphan risk" is certainly a consideration of miners, but it is also not the only consideration, otherwise this wouldn't be what we see in reality:

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[Fatman3001]

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that there was no block size limit in Satoshi's software. They added it later. He believed in game theory where things sort themselves out through risk and reward.

Not sure,  but I found this?

"Andresen never mentions the actual reason that Satoshi imposed a block limit. Oleg Andreev, however, does:
Huge blocks could lead to excessive use of bandwidth which could lead to higher percentage of orphaned blocks due to higher synchronization delays."
From: http://cascadianhacker.com/blog/2014/10/25_notes-on-increasing-the-maximum-bitcoin-block-size-or-why-it-aint-happenin.html

If bandwidth is really the only issue then you would think the 8mb compromise will likely gain enough traction to get implemented. After all, even with a 8mb limit, most miners will still be sticking to 750 k - until you provide sufficient incentive to change.

Yeah, exactly. You can have a higher limit or no limit at all and it's still a risk for a miner to build a block that big. It's going to take a longer time to propagate over the internet which means more time for another miner to find another (smaller/faster) block and possibly orphan yours. I'm sure the limit was created to prevent some kind of "large block attack" (to disrupt miners with slow internet?) but in reality, risk and reward will prevent most miners from increasing their block size very much even when the limit is officially increased.

Exactly, a big part of the cost of mining large blocks is the risk.

I'm pretty sure that argument only holds in case of "excess capacity" though.

Once sufficient network usage exists, a miner willing to create a block closer to max size will be rewarded higher as well (more tx, more fees), at the risk  mentioned above.

My impression is that miners are a risk averse bunch on average, so perhaps they'll always (on average) stay below the maximum, but I'd expect some form of equilibrium to emerge, a value that most miners see as a good tradeoff between minimizing risk and maximizing fees, and I'm certain that value will eventually be higher than what it is now the max block size, assuming the network continues to grow.


tl;dr "minizing orphan risk" is certainly a consideration of miners, but it is also not the only consideration, otherwise this wouldn't be what we see in reality:

If miners were risk averse they wouldn't be miners. But when you're in the game it makes sense to minimize risk.

[oda.krell]

If miners were risk averse they wouldn't be miners. But when you're in the game it makes sense to minimize risk.

Agreed. Didn't feel like elaborating, but I think miners are a weird bunch that seem to be extremely favorable towards risk on the higher level decisions (like: should I buy mining gear that will barely break even, instead of buying on the market), but then being rather risk averse on the smaller level decisions.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[mymenace]

If miners were risk averse they wouldn't be miners. But when you're in the game it makes sense to minimize risk.

Agreed. Didn't feel like elaborating, but I think miners are a weird bunch that seem to be extremely favorable towards risk on the higher level decisions (like: should I buy mining gear that will barely break even, instead of buying on the market), but then being rather risk averse on the smaller level decisions.

alot of miners start of with no reward its how bitcoin started its how altcoins continue.

[Calabi–Yau Manifold]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3agk61/ultimate_bitcoin_stress_test_monday_june_22nd/

Why F2Pool blocked transactions? To get only blocks with reward 

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[Fatman3001]

If miners were risk averse they wouldn't be miners. But when you're in the game it makes sense to minimize risk.

Agreed. Didn't feel like elaborating, but I think miners are a weird bunch that seem to be extremely favorable towards risk on the higher level decisions (like: should I buy mining gear that will barely break even, instead of buying on the market), but then being rather risk averse on the smaller level decisions.

Yup, that pretty much sums us up.

[bri912678]

Not sure if this is the right place ask, but what are those dumps all about?  I'm starting to feel a bit uneasy...

I thought the stress test would provoke dumps yesterday and nothing happened. The dumps today might be a delayed reaction to the stress tests. They might have happened anyway, but their timing is quite a coincidence.

[darkangel11]

Not sure if this is the right place ask, but what are those dumps all about?  I'm starting to feel a bit uneasy...

I thought the stress test would provoke dumps yesterday and nothing happened. The dumps today might be a delayed reaction to the stress tests. They might have happened anyway, but their timing is quite a coincidence.

Doesn't look like a lot of selling pressure, just ~2k dumped on finex, move on.

[Natalia_AnatolioPAMM]

Not sure if this is the right place ask, but what are those dumps all about?  I'm starting to feel a bit uneasy...

I've been uneasy for a long time already

[Elwar]

Dollar just gained in value. The EUR/BTC price did not budge.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation