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

[megadeth]

That's the gist of your broken logic. That somehow the "mainstream" sheeps are going to drive Bitcoin success and its price.

Better get this idea out of your head because it's not happening. The average consumer will get in Bitcoin much later in the game.

No shit, Sherlock. But when the sheep get in, microtransactions will be a feature. People with vision will have to continue to build the infrastructure first, and part of that infrastructure will involve microtransactions.

You're starting to piss me off.  I've seen nothing from you to merit your arrogance. Keep it up and you go on the ignore list. Criticism is cheap. Show me some insight.

Talk about flawed logic: Retail isn't interested in Bitcoin, so we shouldn't cater to retail, which isn't interested because we don't cater to retail. Fuck you.

Concur with Billy on this one. Masses need an Xt(ish)coin that lets them transact at the current price per txn, so they can roll in Bitcoin into their daily lives.
Let the fork happen, Bitcoin classic can be used as the store of value, settlement layer. Xt can be the cheap txn, coffee purchasing network.
(Or do the block size increase to buy time and hope for lightning type tech to be built to allow both use cases)

[brg444]

That's the gist of your broken logic. That somehow the "mainstream" sheeps are going to drive Bitcoin success and its price.

Better get this idea out of your head because it's not happening. The average consumer will get in Bitcoin much later in the game.

No shit, Sherlock. But when the sheep get in, microtransactions will be a feature. People with vision will have to continue to build the infrastructure first, and part of that infrastructure will involve microtransactions.

You're starting to piss me off.  I've seen nothing from you to merit your arrogance. Keep it up and you go on the ignore list. Criticism is cheap. Show me some insight.

Talk about flawed logic: Retail isn't interested in Bitcoin, so we shouldn't cater to retail, which isn't interested because we don't cater to retail. Fuck you.

Microtransactions will be handled off chain, either through Lightning or sidechains. I don't see a problem here, Sherlock.

Bitcoin, the foundation layer, should not, ever, cater to retail.

[brg444]

That's the gist of your broken logic. That somehow the "mainstream" sheeps are going to drive Bitcoin success and its price.

Better get this idea out of your head because it's not happening. The average consumer will get in Bitcoin much later in the game.

No shit, Sherlock. But when the sheep get in, microtransactions will be a feature. People with vision will have to continue to build the infrastructure first, and part of that infrastructure will involve microtransactions.

You're starting to piss me off.  I've seen nothing from you to merit your arrogance. Keep it up and you go on the ignore list. Criticism is cheap. Show me some insight.

Talk about flawed logic: Retail isn't interested in Bitcoin, so we shouldn't cater to retail, which isn't interested because we don't cater to retail. Fuck you.

Concur with Billy on this one. Masses need an Xt(ish)coin that lets them transact at the current price per txn, so they can roll in Bitcoin into their daily lives.
Let the fork happen, Bitcoin classic can be used as the store of value, settlement layer. Xt can be the cheap txn, coffee purchasing network.
(Or do the block size increase to buy time and hope for lightning type tech to be built to allow both use cases)

This ignores the whole value of having one uniquer ledger of ownership. We don't need another coin, additional layers can serve these needs equally well.

[billyjoeallen]

Bitcoins are not just some tokens that we trade back and forth. They are real estate on the blockchain ledger.  We will record titles with them, time stamp creative works, etc. The ledger is what gives bitcoins value. It needs to expand because someday we may record damn near ALL titles on it and use it for almost all timestamps. 

The record of almost everything that almost everybody owns will be extremely valuable and worth maintaining, even if it takes up a lot of hard drive space.  When Seward bought Alaska from the Russians, he caught a lot of heat from people who didn't see the potential. That's what bitcoins are now, raw potential.

[billyjoeallen]

Bitcoin, the foundation layer, should not, ever, cater to retail.

Why not? An assertion is not an argument.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[megadeth]

This ignores the whole value of having one uniquer ledger of ownership. We don't need another coin, additional layers can serve these needs equally well.

Bitcoins are not just some tokens that we trade back and forth. They are real estate on the blockchain ledger.  We will record titles with them, time stamp creative works, etc. The ledger is what gives bitcoins value. It needs to expand because someday we may record damn near ALL titles on it and use it for almost all timestamps.  

The record of almost everything that almost everybody owns will be extremely valuable and worth maintaining, even if it takes up a lot of hard drive space.  When Seward bought Alaska from the Russians, he caught a lot of heat from people who didn't see the potential. That's what bitcoins are now, raw potential.

Forking the ledger is not a bad thing: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1161157.0.
If there is enough demand by market forces, there can be two ledgers protected by a varying percentage of hashpower.
Exchanges will help determine the value of each fork. Unfortunately people are currently split on their demands of two orthogonal use cases of Bitcoin, one of which could lead to it being more centralized.

Just to be clear, fork or no fork. Both paths will lead to immense wealth creation enabled by Bitcoin tech.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[billyjoeallen]

This ignores the whole value of having one uniquer ledger of ownership. We don't need another coin, additional layers can serve these needs equally well.

Bitcoins are not just some tokens that we trade back and forth. They are real estate on the blockchain ledger.  We will record titles with them, time stamp creative works, etc. The ledger is what gives bitcoins value. It needs to expand because someday we may record damn near ALL titles on it and use it for almost all timestamps.  

The record of almost everything that almost everybody owns will be extremely valuable and worth maintaining, even if it takes up a lot of hard drive space.  When Seward bought Alaska from the Russians, he caught a lot of heat from people who didn't see the potential. That's what bitcoins are now, raw potential.

Forking the ledger is not a bad thing: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1161157.0.
If there is enough demand by market forces, there can be two ledgers protected by a varying percentage of hashpower.
Exchanges will help determine the value of each fork. Unfortunately people are currently split on their demands of two orthogonal use cases of Bitcoin, one of which could lead to it being more centralized.

Just to be clear, fork or no fork. Both paths will lead to immense wealth creation enabled by Bitcoin tech.

Um, no. Only one fork will survive. The losing fork will be a dead branch, a string of orphaned blocks.

I don't know which fork will prevail, but like the Highlander, there can be only one. If the cripplecoiners get their way, most of the vast potential of Bitcoin will be strangled in the crib. We will have to use a completely different cryptocoin to utilize that potential and progress will be set back years.

Cripplecoiners don't want to be Guardians of the Galaxy. They want to be bouncers at an exclusive club,

[Fatman3001]

This ignores the whole value of having one uniquer ledger of ownership. We don't need another coin, additional layers can serve these needs equally well.

Bitcoins are not just some tokens that we trade back and forth. They are real estate on the blockchain ledger.  We will record titles with them, time stamp creative works, etc. The ledger is what gives bitcoins value. It needs to expand because someday we may record damn near ALL titles on it and use it for almost all timestamps.  

The record of almost everything that almost everybody owns will be extremely valuable and worth maintaining, even if it takes up a lot of hard drive space.  When Seward bought Alaska from the Russians, he caught a lot of heat from people who didn't see the potential. That's what bitcoins are now, raw potential.

Forking the ledger is not a bad thing: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1161157.0.
If there is enough demand by market forces, there can be two ledgers protected by a varying percentage of hashpower.
Exchanges will help determine the value of each fork. Unfortunately people are currently split on their demands of two orthogonal use cases of Bitcoin, one of which could lead to it being more centralized.

Just to be clear, fork or no fork. Both paths will lead to immense wealth creation enabled by Bitcoin tech.

Um, no. Only one fork will survive. The losing fork will be a dead branch, a string of orphaned blocks.

I don't know which fork will prevail, but like the Highlander, there can be only one. If the cripplecoiners get their way, most of the vast potential of Bitcoin will be strangled in the crib. We will have to use a completely different cryptocoin to utilize that potential and progress will be set back years.

Cripplecoiners don't want to be Guardians of the Galaxy. They want to be bouncers at an exclusive club,

"Highlander", "Guardians of the Galaxy". Your nerd power is strong.

[rebuilder]

The flash return rate for BTC swaps is now higher than for USD swaps on Bitfinex. Don't recall seeing that for a while!

[RenegadeMan]

Gavin Andresen is on the latest Epicentre Bitcoin podcast with Brian Fabian Crain & Sébastien Couture talking about The Blocksize And Bitcoin's Governance. Well worth listening to regardless of your beliefs and views on what should be done. The guy is clearly intelligent, balanced and knowledgeable. He also comments on the sheer difficulty of trying to get any changes implemented with the current impasse.

Very glad I listened to this.

https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/epicenter-bitcoin-94-gavin-andresen-on-the-blocksize-and-bitcoins-governance

[jbreher]

Only 338 votes? Come on guys, this poll is important

Well, no.

With regards to XT, the only poll that matters is the one tabulated on the blockchain. You know - what with the 2016, and the 75%, and the two-week average.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[hdbuck]

Gavin Andresen is on the latest Epicentre Bitcoin podcast with Brian Fabian Crain & Sébastien Couture talking about The Blocksize And Bitcoin's Governance. Well worth listening to regardless of your beliefs and views on what should be done. The guy is clearly intelligent, balanced and knowledgeable. He also comments on the sheer difficulty of trying to get any changes implemented with the current impasse.

Very glad I listened to this.

https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/epicenter-bitcoin-94-gavin-andresen-on-the-blocksize-and-bitcoins-governance

lol people are so impressionable, with always this eager to blindly follow sum dude..

FYI, just to make things clear:

 Bitcoin doesn't need governance: Bitcoin is governance.

conclusion: nice try but fork you Gavin!

[Fatman3001]

Gavin Andresen is on the latest Epicentre Bitcoin podcast with Brian Fabian Crain & Sébastien Couture talking about The Blocksize And Bitcoin's Governance. Well worth listening to regardless of your beliefs and views on what should be done. The guy is clearly intelligent, balanced and knowledgeable. He also comments on the sheer difficulty of trying to get any changes implemented with the current impasse.

Very glad I listened to this.

https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/epicenter-bitcoin-94-gavin-andresen-on-the-blocksize-and-bitcoins-governance

Thx, good link

[Fatman3001]

lol people are so impressionable, with always this eager to blindly follow sum dude..

FYI, just to make things clear:

 Bitcoin doesn't need governance: Bitcoin is governance.

conclusion: nice try but fork you Gavin!

Sure, "Be the tree" !

[RenegadeMan]

Gavin Andresen is on the latest Epicentre Bitcoin podcast with Brian Fabian Crain & Sébastien Couture talking about The Blocksize And Bitcoin's Governance. Well worth listening to regardless of your beliefs and views on what should be done. The guy is clearly intelligent, balanced and knowledgeable. He also comments on the sheer difficulty of trying to get any changes implemented with the current impasse.

Very glad I listened to this.

https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/epicenter-bitcoin-94-gavin-andresen-on-the-blocksize-and-bitcoins-governance

lol people are so impressionable, with always this eager to blindly follow sum dude..

FYI, just to make things clear:

 Bitcoin doesn't need governance: Bitcoin is governance.

conclusion: nice try but fork you Gavin!

I'm as dubious as the next person as to people's intentions with this stuff.

I've already challenged billyjoelallen for what I think is rhetoric each time he signs off a post with "scale or die".

I think there's an inordinate amount of black and white thinking going on with these changes to Bitcoin. And responses like yours are also unhelpful as they're overly dismissive and just add to the dissension.

Did you listen to this podcast?

There's genuine concern and care being expressed by Gavin. There may be some over-reach too. And maybe he's gone too far....or maybe not. And I reject your assertion that I'm impressionable and am going to "blindly follow some dude". You know nothing about me, my life experience, skills and knowledge so it's completely and utterly banal of you in the extreme, to make such an assessment.

Either way to just write him off with "fork you Gavin!" summation is hardly fair, decent or helpful.

Perhaps you could consider debating key parts of what you consider to be wrong with his ideas rather than just putting up a blanket "I just don't like it...." wall.

[brg444]

Gavin Andresen is on the latest Epicentre Bitcoin podcast with Brian Fabian Crain & Sébastien Couture talking about The Blocksize And Bitcoin's Governance. Well worth listening to regardless of your beliefs and views on what should be done. The guy is clearly intelligent, balanced and knowledgeable. He also comments on the sheer difficulty of trying to get any changes implemented with the current impasse.

Very glad I listened to this.

https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/epicenter-bitcoin-94-gavin-andresen-on-the-blocksize-and-bitcoins-governance

lol people are so impressionable, with always this eager to blindly follow sum dude..

FYI, just to make things clear:

 Bitcoin doesn't need governance: Bitcoin is governance.

conclusion: nice try but fork you Gavin!

I'm as dubious as the next person as to people's intentions with this stuff.

I've already challenged billyjoelallen for what I think is rhetoric each time he signs off a post with "scale or die".

I think there's an inordinate amount of black and white thinking going on with these changes to Bitcoin. And responses like yours are also unhelpful as they're overly dismissive and just add to the dissension.

Did you listen to this podcast?

There's genuine concern and care being expressed by Gavin. There may be some over-reach too. And maybe he's gone too far....or maybe not. And I reject your assertion that I'm impressionable and am going to "blindly follow some dude". You know nothing about me, my life experience, skills and knowledge so it's completely and utterly banal of you in the extreme, to make such an assessment.

Either way to just write him off with "fork you Gavin!" summation is hardly fair, decent or helpful.

Perhaps you could consider debating key parts of what you consider to be wrong with his ideas rather than just putting up a blanket "I just don't like it...." wall.

Here is what's wrong and what should be obvious to anyone with an once of discernment: this is an all too obvious attempt to "teach the controversy"

"It is not about the block size but this is an issue of Bitcoin governance"

Teaching the controversy is a typical psyop/propaganda tool that amounts to creating an appearance of reasonable debate between informed persons on a given subject. This has for effect of giving credibility to a lie by confusing people into thinking there are two legitimate claims being debated. Here the debate being pushed on us is that Bitcoin governance is somehow subject to be changed.

[oxiyusuf]

ukraine true that would legalize bitcoin? This seems to be an effect on the market