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

[Brewins]

What happened now?

I was expecting further fall, but 213 is lower than I would expect and a dangerous level

[1714244659]

1714244659

[1714244659]

1714244659

[1714244659]

1714244659

[Spaceman_Spiff]

talk about block size limit is getting more and more Insane. conspiracy theories everywhere!

It seems somewhat logical that people who are generally more distrustful see the appeal of a "trustless" currency, and constitute a significant portion of the early adopters.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[becoin]

The issue is, first of all, who will be in control of bitcoin's evolution: Blockstream, or other people?

Then there is the question of whether saturation and its consequences ("fee market", long delays) are "good" or "bad".   Blockstream definitely wants saturation and does not seem willing to accept any compromise.  Their motivations are not clear, though.

Blaming Blockstream for side chains and their, you say, not clear motivations is like blaming Satoshi Nakamoto for definitely wanting saturation while creating Bitcoin with not clear motivations?

[Jammalan the Prophet]

it is its robustness against human miscalculations, its decentralization, its permission-less-ness and its network's security that matters.

ROFl at the so  called decentralization when you have 6 or 7 people in two camps who can decide the faith of the code and 4-5 mining pools controlling more than 75% of the hash rate.

[hdbuck]

it is its robustness against human miscalculations, its decentralization, its permission-less-ness and its network's security that matters.

ROFl at the so  called decentralization when you have 6 or 7 people in two camps who can decide the faith of the code and 4-5 mining pools controlling more than 75% of the hash rate.

better than *if* large blocks: https://blockchain.info/pools

[julian071]

a few words.. to get things as clear as i see them:


people seems not to grasp the complexity of the matter: it is indeed highly political.

mass adoption will not improve bitcoin's store of value, it is quite the opposite actually, it will flood and drown it.

but this mass thing is so not going to happen anyway, even if you "scale it" in advance. sry people wake up, bitcoin is out of the reach of regular sheeple.

people are too much anticipating, buying the fake dreams of them antonopoulos, gavin et al, saving the planet with free insta-frappucinos.

but it's its scarcity both in cap and transaction that will allow it to surpass any regular investment.

i mean fuck look at the damned financial markets all around the world that are on the edge of a massive collapse!

it is its robustness against human miscalculations, its decentralization, its permission-less-ness and its network's security that matters.

why always this urge of Quantitative Easing everything?

that is so wrong on so many levels and in total opposition with bitcoin's fundamentals.

i do hope its antifragility would make bitcoin rise up from xt's hashes.

but for now, gavin et al had exactly what they wanted, that is dividing the community and induce fear that it is not such a good investment.

the rules should be set in stone, and not subject to any major modification and by anyone, or that would create a precedent.

for example, just look at what them politicians are doing with the euro and greece! they rightfully fear to create that precedent of exiting that stinky zone!

but hopefully, not like the euro, bitcoin is an investment! not cash, not pocket money!

it is a Privilege, as in the privilege of securing your wealth from the banksters and bypass them!

so bitcoin is bound not to be free to transact with. nevermind, just HODL ffs!

otherwise it will just be a pale copy of visa/mastercard/paypal and it will sink, because it simply cant compete.

thats why its price is stalling now. you cant have both an investment and pocket money. by definition it is not the same.

so get your shit straight and tell them egomaniac forkers to gtfo of bitcoin! starting with them two usg moles gavin and hearn.



regards, from a fellow bitcoiner.

When I started reading I thought for a bit your shift-keys were broken, but later on I guessed you are just trying to not wear out your keyboard prematurely by using certain keys too much. Very wise.

Why are you not 100% into Unobtanium if you want a crypto just as a store of value?

I for one enjoyed paying my beer with Bitcoin when on holliday in Berlin =D

[hdbuck]

a few words.. to get things as clear as i see them:


people seems not to grasp the complexity of the matter: it is indeed highly political.

mass adoption will not improve bitcoin's store of value, it is quite the opposite actually, it will flood and drown it.

but this mass thing is so not going to happen anyway, even if you "scale it" in advance. sry people wake up, bitcoin is out of the reach of regular sheeple.

people are too much anticipating, buying the fake dreams of them antonopoulos, gavin et al, saving the planet with free insta-frappucinos.

but it's its scarcity both in cap and transaction that will allow it to surpass any regular investment.

i mean fuck look at the damned financial markets all around the world that are on the edge of a massive collapse!

it is its robustness against human miscalculations, its decentralization, its permission-less-ness and its network's security that matters.

why always this urge of Quantitative Easing everything?

that is so wrong on so many levels and in total opposition with bitcoin's fundamentals.

i do hope its antifragility would make bitcoin rise up from xt's hashes.

but for now, gavin et al had exactly what they wanted, that is dividing the community and induce fear that it is not such a good investment.

the rules should be set in stone, and not subject to any major modification and by anyone, or that would create a precedent.

for example, just look at what them politicians are doing with the euro and greece! they rightfully fear to create that precedent of exiting that stinky zone!

but hopefully, not like the euro, bitcoin is an investment! not cash, not pocket money!

it is a Privilege, as in the privilege of securing your wealth from the banksters and bypass them!

so bitcoin is bound not to be free to transact with. nevermind, just HODL ffs!

otherwise it will just be a pale copy of visa/mastercard/paypal and it will sink, because it simply cant compete.

thats why its price is stalling now. you cant have both an investment and pocket money. by definition it is not the same.

so get your shit straight and tell them egomaniac forkers to gtfo of bitcoin! starting with them two usg moles gavin and hearn.



regards, from a fellow bitcoiner.

When I started reading I thought for a bit your shift-keys were broken, but later on I guessed you are just trying to not wear out your keyboard prematurely by using certain keys too much. Very wise.

Why are you not 100% into Unobtanium if you want a crypto just as a store of value?

I for one enjoyed paying my beer with Bitcoin when on holliday in Berlin =D

yea, you can enjoy this for now, and i do also..

but ultimately, dont you want a sweet 100k/BTC? because thats what im talking about here.


edit: as for unobtahing.. never heard of it, but why wouldnt you use litecoin or even dogecoin to pay your beers also?

[julian071]

I do want that, but I know I will have to wait for quite some time! I also know that there will be quite some growing pains until we reach those numbers. And I am of the opinion, contrary to you, that to reach those numbers, Bitcoin MUST be in use as a currency, not just a store of value. I find it hard to imagine it reaching such highs without mass adoption.

You genuinely should check out Unobtanium, it's a good project.

Edit: I don't see much added value in Dogecoin and LTC. I do use NLG tho, being Dutch 'n all.

[Jammalan the Prophet]

trollbox-e at 202 

[hdbuck]

I do want that, but I know I will have to wait for quite some time! I also know that there will be quite some growing pains until we reach those numbers. And I am of the opinion, contrary to you, that to reach those numbers, Bitcoin MUST be in use as a currency, not just a store of value. I find it hard to imagine it reaching such highs without mass adoption.

You genuinely should check out Unobtanium, it's a good project.

ok lemme try another angle.. what is the currency the most used on the planet? dollar right? why do you think it isnt worht 100K euros for exmaple?

because it is not an investment. its a currency! or you have to buy a lot of dollars to consider it an investment. even tho it will crash at some point once they'll be done with QE and you will loose money. cant have both man, its all about how people perceive bitcoin. either a currency.. or a safe-haven investment, a personnal unbreakable safe for when the rest of the financial world approach doom.

so if the latter be sure moon will be on sight

[BldSwtTrs]

Down we go again.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[JayJuanGee]

Down we go again.

I surely see the downward momentum.. yet I find it somewhat surprising that bitcoin prices seem to be gong down at a very similar, if NOT greater rate than fiat markets.. ...

Yes, yes yes... fork issues...

Nonetheless.. in spite of fork issues, I would have expected BTC prices to move somewhat contrary to fiat markets... whether short term or long term...  and in spite of fork issues...

Bitcoin should be a good hedge.. and a decent investment...   Accordingly, Fiat markets going down should indicate that BTC are to be going up... no?

[AlexGR]

Other than the spam attack average block size at around 0.4 MB.  Absolutely no where near full blocks

If you look at the last 2 years you will see that the daily average it has doubled in the last 12 months.  Even if the growth is linear rather than exponential, if it continues at that pace it will be 0.60  MB/block by mid-2016.

This proves the point that there was no rush to get ...20MB or 8MB blocks.

Moreover, a "spam attack" now is very cheap because the attacker only needs to generate more than the average free capacity, that is 0.35 MB/block, to create a permanent traffic jam.  By mid-2016, he will need only 0.15 MB/block.

That's more like a DOS attack that is temporary and can be circumvented by someone paying higher fees to get confirmed immediately.

Spam attack, in the sense of bloating the blockchain for the lolz, would be far cheaper with larger blocks as no competition means that a spammer could easily push through a few megabytes, with almost zero fees. And that kind of spam attack leaves a permanent imprint for the future. And then there is also the possibility that some third party actually wants to spend money in fees just to spam the blockchain for years worth of transactions, in a couple of weeks.

The blocks will not get 18 times bigger with BIP101.  The will continue to be 0.40 MB now, and will continue to grow at the same pace as they would with 1 MB limit.  The effect of BIP101 will start to be felt only sometime in the first half of 2016, when traffic will get to 0.55 MB/block close to the 0.75 MB capacity.  With the 1 MB limit, there would start to be recurrent jams and long waits; whereas, with the 8 MB limit, the traffic will just continue growing beyond that value, at its natural rate, and maybe reach 1 MB/block in 2017.

The bolded part is an assumption. Assumption is the mother of all fuckups, and, when network abuse is concerned, it will be a guaranteed disaster.

Security assumptions like "noone is going to spam the blockchain" cannot be taken for granted. If they do, then bitcoin XT is DOA. Such a level of irresponsibility and wishful thinking is unacceptable for a multibillion dollar project that wants to rival the traditional money system.

The attack vectors surrounding a system like Bitcoin, from a game theory perspective, are wider than the Bitcoin ecosystem itself.

For example, from a game theory perspective, and if we look at this only from inside the ecosystem, a spam attack that costs a few BTC per day to make the blockchain bloated doesn't make sense, so it's illogical and would not happen.

But if we look at it from the broader financial ecosystem, a rival (a bank, a credit card, the governments etc etc) might want to do just that and be willing to pay the few BTCs in fees to bloat the hell out of the blockchain. And make sure that they do that as cheaply as possible, and with as little pruning potential as possible, by designing the proper "transactions". So they pay a few hundred BTCs per day in fees just to make the blockchain unusable.

In what financial world is it acceptable for a multibillion project to be under threat through such cheap attack vectors?

The alternative attack vector of DoSing the transactions confirmed by fee competition is far more acceptable because it doesn't leave a permanent imprint and it can be bypassed by the user who wants transaction priority.

If user A wants to pay user B 10 BTCs and the confirmation can be done in one block with 0.002 instead of 0.001 btc, if he so decides to pay them, he'll pay them and get on with it.

Block size should increase in parallel with actual usage to prevent the bloat-vector conducted by a Bitcoin enemy. Scaling should be primarily improved through work in the underlying protocol or data storage.

Fee measures should already be taken to eliminate dust and spam due to this:

Most of the space is spam and dust anyway so even if we had full blocks the correct fee would get your transaction through no problem.  

That is true.  If a minimum fee of (say) 0.001 BTC = 0.20 USD was imposed on each transaction, the traffic would probably drop by 80% or more, and the block size limit would not be a pressing issue for a couple of years, at least.  But neither camp wants to see hat, for several reasons...

[Jammalan the Prophet]

Down we go again.

I surely see the momentum.. yet I find it somewhat surprising that bitcoin seems to be gong down at a very similar, if NOT greater rate than fiat markets..


In other words, I would have expected BTC to move somewhat contrary to fiat markets... whether short term or long term...

Fiat markets going down should indicate that BTC is going up... no?

Do you think that after a nuclear blast people will rush to buy helmets?

[julian071]

I do want that, but I know I will have to wait for quite some time! I also know that there will be quite some growing pains until we reach those numbers. And I am of the opinion, contrary to you, that to reach those numbers, Bitcoin MUST be in use as a currency, not just a store of value. I find it hard to imagine it reaching such highs without mass adoption.

You genuinely should check out Unobtanium, it's a good project.

ok lemme try another angle.. what is the currency the most used on the planet? dollar right? why do you think it isnt worht 100K euros for exmaple?

because it is not an investment. its a currency! or you have to buy a lot of dollars to consider it an investment. even tho it will crash at some point once they'll be done with QE and you will loose money. cant have both man, its all about how people perceive bitcoin. either a currency.. or a safe-haven investment, a personnal unbreakable safe for when the rest of the financial world approach doom.

so if the latter be sure moon will be on sight

A good point at first sight, however there's quite a lot of dollars created out of thin air on a daily basis. The inflation with BTC is also quite high but it is in keeping with the growing demand.

And that is exactly the point, the value can only rise if demand becomes much much higher. I can only imagine that happening if a whole lot of new people start using it. Hundreds of millions preferably. If it's only a couple of investors' toy it will never be worth much, at least not for a long stretch of time.

Edit: consider the scenario where there were only 21m dollars created in the first couple of years of it's usage, but then the demand for dollars kept growing like it did?

[hdbuck]

I do want that, but I know I will have to wait for quite some time! I also know that there will be quite some growing pains until we reach those numbers. And I am of the opinion, contrary to you, that to reach those numbers, Bitcoin MUST be in use as a currency, not just a store of value. I find it hard to imagine it reaching such highs without mass adoption.

You genuinely should check out Unobtanium, it's a good project.

ok lemme try another angle.. what is the currency the most used on the planet? dollar right? why do you think it isnt worht 100K euros for exmaple?

because it is not an investment. its a currency! or you have to buy a lot of dollars to consider it an investment. even tho it will crash at some point once they'll be done with QE and you will loose money. cant have both man, its all about how people perceive bitcoin. either a currency.. or a safe-haven investment, a personnal unbreakable safe for when the rest of the financial world approach doom.

so if the latter be sure moon will be on sight

A good point at first sight, however there's quite a lot of dollars created out of thin air on a daily basis. The inflation with BTC is also quite high but it is in keeping with the growing demand.

And that is exactly the point, the value can only rise if demand becomes much much higher. I can only imagine that happening if a whole lot of new people start using it. Hundreds of millions preferably. If it's only a couple of investors' toy it will never be worth much, at least not for a long stretch of time.

show me this demand growing data. there is none.

but even if the demand do increase, and i hope it will, that would be good because of bitcoin's being capped.

otoh transactions number is not relevant to its price.

people should be happy to pay fees to securly and without permission to send *huge* amounts across the globe.

for the rest, there is eurocard/mastercard. or even any altcoin for that matter.

[gentlemand]

A good point at first sight, however there's quite a lot of dollars created out of thin air on a daily basis. The inflation with BTC is also quite high but it is in keeping with the growing demand.

And that is exactly the point, the value can only rise if demand becomes much much higher. I can only imagine that happening if a whole lot of new people start using it. Hundreds of millions preferably. If it's only a couple of investors' toy it will never be worth much, at least not for a long stretch of time.

I'd say something can only be a widely used currency once it's become a trusted store of value, especially when it's entirely voluntary like Bitcoin always will be. Regardless of shenanigans and debasement, that's what the USD means to people all around the world. They know it'll still be worth something at the end of the month and that's why they swap their local currencies for it wherever they can.

[Topbanker]

only a nutcase would step into BTC right now...