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

[lama-hunter]

Coin



Explanation

little dropout like i think at the asking price what do you think? MAybe the op can post an actuall version. But there was a downing this night. MAybe it will rise over the Day again;)

regards
lama-hunter

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[billyjoeallen]

Economic considerations should also be given for developing countries where bandwidth costs are high, as are imported technological goods like hard disks, ram and high end CPUs/mobos. The western world doesn't really understand the problem.

Serious question as a 'western world citizen'. How do developing countries use the Internet nowadays? Do they have big hubs and data centers like in the west? Or do they just make use of the Internet as it is hosted in the more developed countries?

Without taking a position in the debate, I can't judge it well enough, it seems like sending and receiving a few kilobytes is plenty for making a transaction.

Gimme a break. My node cost me $118 bucks.

Good contribution to the cause but don't you think that for someone who bought in a 6$, maintaining a node at the price is very cheap? Unless you are out of money and in that case I'd understand.

The reason I have money is because I'm cheap. That's how real capital formation is done. 

[lama-hunter]

Bitcoin going for antoher rising today?
What do you think guys?

Would be ghreat to hear about

regards
lama-hunter

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

First of all, my opinion: I'm in favor of increasing the block size limit in a hard fork, but very much against removing the limit entirely. Bitcoin is a consensus of its users, who all agreed (or will need to agree) to a very strict set of rules that would allow people to build global decentralized payment system. I think very few people understand a forever-limited block size to be part of these rules.

However, with no limit on block size, it effectively becomes miners who are in control of _everyone_'s block size. As a non-miner, this is not something I want them to decide for me. Perhaps the tragedy of the commons can be avoided, and long-term rational thinking will kick in, and miners can be trusted with choosing an appropriate block size. But maybe not, and if just one miner starts creating gigabyte blocks, while all the rest agrees on 10 MiB blocks, ugly block-shunning rules will be necessary to avoid such blocks from filling everyone's hard drive (yes, larger block's slower relay will make them unlikely to be accepted, but it just requires one lucky fool to succeed...).

I think retep raises very good points here: the block size (whether voluntarily or enforced) needs to result in a system that remains verifiable for many. What those many are will probably change gradually. Over time, more and more users will probably move to SPV nodes (or more centralized things like e-wallet sites), and that is fine. But if we give up the ability for non-megacorp entities to be able to verify the chain, we might as well be using those a central clearinghouse. There is of course wide spectrum between "I can download the entire chain on my phone" and "Only 5 bank companies in the world can run a fully verifying node", but I think it's important that we choose what point in between there is acceptable.

My suggestion would be a one-time increase to perhaps 10 MiB or 100 MiB blocks (to be debated), and after that an at-most slow exponential further growth. This would mean no for-eternity limited size, but also no way for miners to push up block sizes to the point where they are in sole control of the network. I realize that some people will consider this an arbitrary and unnecessary limit, but others will probably consider it dangerous already. In any case, it's a compromise and I believe one will be necessary.

Great posts from Mike and Gavin in this thread. There's indeed no reason to panic over "too much centralization". Actually, setting an arbitrary limit (or an arbitrary formula to set the limit) is the very definition of "central planning", while letting it get spontaneously set is the very definition of "decentralized order".

Then I think you misunderstand what a hard fork entails. The only way a hard fork can succeed is when _everyone_ agrees to it. Developers, miners, merchants, users, ... everyone. A hard fork that succeeds is the ultimate proof that Bitcoin as a whole is a consensus of its users (and not just a consensus of miners, who are only given authority to decide upon the order of otherwise valid transactions).

Realize that Bitcoin's decentralization only comes from very strict - and sometimes arbitrary - rules (why this particular 50/25/12.5 payout scheme, why ECDSA, why only those opcodes in scripts, ...) that were set right from the start and agreed upon by everyone who ever used the system. Were those rules "central planning" too?

[hdbuck]

Sorry, Guys. You can have high prices or you can have high transaction fees, but you can't have both. 
Just hold the price above $400 until I can get my old coins out of cold storage.

I'm outie.

[QuestionAuthority]

Sorry, Guys. You can have high prices or you can have high transaction fees, but you can't have both. 
Just hold the price above $400 until I can get my old coins out of cold storage.

I'm outie.

Yeah, me too. I was going to try waiting till the 21st to see what the price is but if it's going to hover here I may as well buy presents now. I'm outie for Christmas. I'll be back.

[Fatman3001]

Yes it is , hdbuck. Just walk through it and never look back.

Oh, and please don't violate Star Trek like that.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Isn't a public ledger grand

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=94475.msg1059272#msg1059272

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlJkec-CQRM

[Fatman3001]

Isn't a public ledger grand

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=94475.msg1059272#msg1059272

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlJkec-CQRM

Theymos?

Moral disengagement?

Never!!!

[QuestionAuthority]

Isn't a public ledger grand

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=94475.msg1059272#msg1059272

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlJkec-CQRM

That thread is chocked full of scumbags. How funny! Even cablepair got his scummy name included at the end. It's really interesting how all those characters that were worshiped in 2011, like DnT, are shit now.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[Fatman3001]

New lambie candidate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMM_HjKlrOI

[pinger]

Isn't a public ledger grand

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=94475.msg1059272#msg1059272

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlJkec-CQRM

LOL never again I would trust Bitcointalk advertising ever 0_0! If where admin, I would simple take that 80 BTC and return to the scammed.

[Wekkel]

Next 24hrs are critical.

[rebuilder]

That thread is chocked full of scumbags. How funny! Even cablepair got his scummy name included at the end. It's really interesting how all those characters that were worshiped in 2011, like DnT, are shit now.

You mean you disagree with DeathandTaxes on some issue, or that they scammed someone?

[niktitan132]

Next 24hrs are critical.

I agree. Never been a more crucial 24h in bitcoin as it is now. Either we going to moon or we going to drop hard. I've got my okcoin loaded and ready to act as soon as I see that movement.
Personally I think we're going up but thats a little bias as of course I want to see it move up.

[Luthier]

This fractal shit is freaking me out  Going to break soon either way.