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

[xyzzy099]

I don't really think that the people resisting block-size increase are just interested in creating a transaction-fee market.

I don't work for Blockstream, nor am I a Core developer - but even I can see that there is potentially a heavy price to be paid (in terms of Bitcoin decentralization) if we rush head-long down the path of block-size for scaling - and this could turn out to be a mistake that can't be undone, AND one that does not really solve the problem in the long-term.

I don't see the urgency you do for raising blocksize right now.  Full blocks are still uncommon (except during "stress-tests").

We want users now, we plan to let them join in 3 months stalling block size growth because we dont want centralized nodes 20 years from now is damaging bitcoin - its myopic.  If we hit a growth spurt like in 2013 well see a minimum of 10X transaction growth and the fee pressure will increase disproportionately, limited transaction volume will push feed over $1.00 in value for the smallest transactions. Fees will kill the competitive advantage bitcoin is offering.

small blockests think the fee should be around $7. We the users are paying for low fees by subsidizing miners with inflation of 25BTC every 10 minus. we need economics of scale - more users to reduce fess as inflation subsidies diminish.  Centralization is a concern, but we have 90% of nodes running centralized code the number is actually irrelevant when the code changes are controlled by a centralized few who believe bitcoin can't scale and want to change it to accommodate off block chain transactions. 

Again - full blocks are, as of this writing, still fairly rare.

No one who wants to use Bitcoin is sitting on the sidelines saying "Oh, I'd like to buy this with bitcoin, but darn...  Their blocks are just too darned small!".  Raising the blocksize now is NOT going to cause a stampede of new users.  Bigger blocks MAY be necessary soon, to accomodate new use - if it comes.  Or maybe another solution will be found before that is necessary.

I agree that we need to scale capacity AS NECESSARY - even if that means raising the blocksize somewhat in the short term, due to no other solution being at-hand.  I just don't want to see panic drive the community to prematurely choose a path that does not really solve the bigger problem, and potentially hurts Bitcoin decentralization forever.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

[Fatman3001]

We want users now, we plan to let them join in 3 months stalling block size growth because we dont want centralized nodes 20 years from now is damaging bitcoin - its myopic.  If we hit a growth spurt like in 2013 well see a minimum of 10X transaction growth and the fee pressure will increase disproportionately, limited transaction volume will push feed over $1.00 in value for the smallest transactions. Fees will kill the competitive advantage bitcoin is offering.

small blockests think the fee should be around $7. We the users are paying for low fees by subsidizing miners with inflation of 25BTC every 10 minus. we need economics of scale - more users to reduce fess as inflation subsidies diminish.  Centralization is a concern, but we have 90% of nodes running centralized code the number is actually irrelevant when the code changes are controlled by a centralized few who believe bitcoin can't scale and want to change it to accommodate off block chain transactions. 

This is too good, I'll have to save it.

[marcus_of_augustus]

At this rate exchanges are going to run out of coins in a matter of days.

Griffin good effect ... noone wants it until everyone wants it

[Hyperjacked]

Already down ~$10 from 363 high and selling pressure is continuing. Not sure whose gonna run out of ammo first at this point, the bulls or the bears

Nerve wracking stuff, this one hourly candle is quite the fight

Are you a newbie or what?

Oh, you are... 

Actually bought my first coins in May of 2013, just never cared to register/post here.

You are smarter than most then. 

I remember you and chef Ramsey...of course he scolded me when I said I knew Satmando!
I offer apologies for acting like a fool...Cheers

[spooderman]

forget about trolfi. if price was all we needed to convince him of bitcoin's awesomeness then it's hardly a debate worth having. bitcoin is great for all the same reasons it was great 6 years ago.

[molecular]

Already down ~$10 from 363 high and selling pressure is continuing. Not sure whose gonna run out of ammo first at this point, the bulls or the bears

Nerve wracking stuff, this one hourly candle is quite the fight

Are you a newbie or what?

Oh, you are... 

Actually bought my first coins in May of 2013, just never cared to register/post here.

That time you joined saw much crazier volatility than now.

[yefi]

Ah yes, Bitcoin, push through those resistance lines like Napoleon. Your star rises, and the world has yet to see its perilous heights.

[Hyperjacked]

grandpa always said there'd be days like these and pullbacks...onward and upward is the trend $$$
cheers even for that ego maniac that lives on an island and owns an plane business...

[AlexGR]

The finex BTC6k short still hasn't been covered. Ask side looks very thin need more coins on exchanges or this can go full retard  

The later he has to cover it, the better

[Richy_T]

Here's your 360

[Zarathustra]

A well-reasoned response:

https://medium.com/@btcdrak/full-of-lies-and-desperation-of-someone-who-risked-his-entire-reputation-on-something-and-lost-and-6c206e68d0cf#.i2wtg2uhv

"Lost"

Bitcoin XT was around well before BIP-101 and, those that found it useful (of whom I am not one, FWIW) will no doubt continue to use some incarnation of it, whatever happens.

Meanwhile, BIP-101 is out there and has forced the issue of actually addressing the blocksize instead of hoping nobody notices that we're heading toward a brick wall and the guy who runs the repair shop has not been servicing the brakes.

As a bonus, the idea that the core developers maybe should not be the centralized keepers of the keys to the kingdom has been brought into the consciousness.

Before you declare "won" or "lost" be sure you know which game you're playing.

Exactly

[molecular]

No one who wants to use Bitcoin is sitting on the sidelines saying "Oh, I'd like to buy this with bitcoin, but darn...  Their blocks are just too darned small!".

uhrm...

ever heard of the fidelity problem?

[God Donut]

What is happening with bitcoin right now? What are the reasons for this price rise?

[hdbuck]

If Core can't find a way to scale the network with a reasonable amount of safety and security in TWO YEARS, then they are incompetent and need to make way for better developers.  

How much time is a reasonable amount of time for you?  I really want to know. Give me an actual number.

That is a pretty bold statement about solving a non-trivial computer science problem.  I'm sure your patches will be accepted if you have a solution.

I think the problem is that you assume that increasing the blocksize fixes the problem.

I imagine a future where all manner of services that are currently ad-supported or subscription-based might instead be payed for with bitcoin microtransactions, seamlessly and transparently.  There could be millions, or maybe even billions of transactions per day from all these page views/minutes of video/etc. - vastly more than even Visa handles at peak capacity.  And add to that all the microtransactions that might be generated by devices on the Internet of Things, that none of us know the extent or nature of yet.

I don't see how increasing blocksize will handle this.  Even data-center sized nodes may not be able to handle all those microtransactions.

I don't claim to know what the answer is, but I am pretty sure that block-size alone won't do it - and lurching down that path in a non-judicious way could lead to permanent problems that will be painful to work around in the long term, after a real solution is found.

I'm certain blocksize alone WON'T fix all scaling problems, but it would buy us time. All it would take right now is a doubling of transactions to crash the network.  This problem was important, but now it's urgent as well. A doubling is well withing the realm of possibility in mere months and is approaching the probable.  

Creating a market for transaction fees needs to happen AFTER we reach mainstream adoption or we will never reach it. Yahoo mail, Facebook, Google all knew not to monetize too early.  That's why they're still around. I hope we'll be around when billions of cryto microtransactions becomes an issue.

I don't really think that the people resisting block-size increase are just interested in creating a transaction-fee market.

I don't work for Blockstream, nor am I a Core developer - but even I can see that there is potentially a heavy price to be paid (in terms of Bitcoin decentralization) if we rush head-long down the path of block-size for scaling - and this could turn out to be a mistake that can't be undone, AND one that does not really solve the problem in the long-term.

I don't see the urgency you do for raising blocksize right now.  Full blocks are still uncommon (except during "stress-tests").

We want users now, we plan to let them join in 3 months stalling block size growth because we dont want centralized nodes 20 years from now is damaging bitcoin - its myopic.  If we hit a growth spurt like in 2013 well see a minimum of 10X transaction growth and the fee pressure will increase disproportionately, limited transaction volume will push feed over $1.00 in value for the smallest transactions. Fees will kill the competitive advantage bitcoin is offering.

small blockests think the fee should be around $7. We the users are paying for low fees by subsidizing miners with inflation of 25BTC every 10 minus. we need economics of scale - more users to reduce fess as inflation subsidies diminish.  Centralization is a concern, but we have 90% of nodes running centralized code the number is actually irrelevant when the code changes are controlled by a centralized few who believe bitcoin can't scale and want to change it to accommodate off block chain transactions.  

there is no we.

you are just as ignorant as one of them hobo hanging around with a "the end is near" panel around his neck.

such a clueless pathetic nobody.

also, for the millionth time, increasing the blocksize will not bring moar people to bitcoin.

seriously, what logic is this? you brain dead XT zombie.


we are all here cheering about the price surge, yet the only ones coming around with their fud and conjectures are the XTards, Mikey Hearn doing the dumbest blogpost ever, with all the tears and butthurt he is filled with.

so fork off man, just do it since you are so smart.. then you'll see what consensus and economic majority really means.

[macsga]

No one who wants to use Bitcoin is sitting on the sidelines saying "Oh, I'd like to buy this with bitcoin, but darn...  Their blocks are just too darned small!".

uhrm...

ever heard of the fidelity problem?

Nobody will care in a couple of days, when the price will surge banana-like. Trust me. Whales are coming in, CCMF. Period.

[Lauda]

Bullstamp $359.

[Alley]

At what price will the finex 5k short get margin called?  Was sold at $320.

[Patel]

Nobody will care in a couple of days, when the price will surge banana-like. Trust me. Whales are coming in, CCMF. Period.

[Hyperjacked]

What is happening with bitcoin right now? What are the reasons for this price rise?

what can I say...explosive suppression! Blythe master the legendary silver short has probably had her hands in the mix! Just my observations...among other things of course!

wake up shorts!!! You clearly know that pros are patient...