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

[peonminer]

Doubtful $330 will hold this time.

[Cconvert2G36]

I posted this in another thread but it seems relevant to what you guys are talking about.

Do we really have security and decentralization today when a few phone calls from the PRC could shut the whole thing down?

The only security against nation states with hundreds of billions of $ at their disposal is either through obscurity (monero) or through ubiquity (too big and important to attack).

Practically, it seems a compromise to 2MB would buy time to develop and roll out other solutions (segwit, LN, SC, etc) and could allow us to have more productive dialog in the interim. 

[birr]

So what's the probability of Bitcoin becoming the World Reserve Currency if the on chain transaction capacity is 500,000/day? Zero. The IMF's SDR has a higher capacity than that nowand most people don't even know what the hell I'm talking about.

With eight billion people on the planet, that would be only 1 transaction per day for every 8,000 people ( 2 people per xaction).  or one send and one recieve for only 1 in 16,000 people.  That means that almost everything would be handled by middlemen, the same bankster assholes Bitcoin was created to route around.

Not banksters.  We'll use
OpenTransactions
Monetas.net

[billyjoeallen]

A half million transaction/day isn't enough for bitcoin to be anything more than a hobby network.

How many txs do you want it to handle per day?

I want the capacity to go up at a predictable predetermined rate. Entrepreneurs can plan with that.

All the bitcoin developers want Bitcoin to scale and there is 100% consensus on that. This practically guarantees it will happen, despite their differences on whether the blocksize should be raised now, raised temporarily (kicking the can), raised later, have something else done, etc etc.

The precise numbers on how scaling will go down on 5 years, 10 years, 20 years are pretty much unknown but that will not stop investments or businesses.

I don't believe it. Even a 2MB kick-the-can increase would show that they are actually willing to make a permanent fix it at some point. This is far from certain now. If there is 100% consensus that the developers want it to scale, then why haven't they publicly made a joint statement to that effect? 

If there is an actually ongoing rough consensus attack on the network, and I think there is a real possibility that there is, then we would expect to see exactly what we are seeing from core. My ex wife used to deal with beggars not by saying "no", but by saying "not now".  It made them go away easier.  She never gave them any money ever.  It's kinda like that.

[suda123]

I posted this in another thread but it seems relevant to what you guys are talking about.

Do we really have security and decentralization today when a few phone calls from the PRC could shut the whole thing down?

The only security against nation states with hundreds of billions of $ at their disposal is either through obscurity (monero) or through ubiquity (too big and important to attack).

Practically, it seems a compromise to 2MB would buy time to develop and roll out other solutions (segwit, LN, SC, etc) and could allow us to have more productive dialog in the interim. 

Have we considered the fact that a lot of those small-blockers seem to also have a vested interest in the success of a certain altcoin?

which one?

[JimboToronto]

Doubtful $330 will hold this time.

It dropped by $30 so you think it will drop $100 more?  

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Doubtful $330 will hold this time.

It dropped by $30 so you think it will drop $100 more?  

If wishes were horses...

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[nioc]

I posted this in another thread but it seems relevant to what you guys are talking about.

Do we really have security and decentralization today when a few phone calls from the PRC could shut the whole thing down?

The only security against nation states with hundreds of billions of $ at their disposal is either through obscurity (monero) or through ubiquity (too big and important to attack).

Practically, it seems a compromise to 2MB would buy time to develop and roll out other solutions (segwit, LN, SC, etc) and could allow us to have more productive dialog in the interim. 

Have we considered the fact that a lot of those small-blockers seem to also have a vested interest in the success of a certain altcoin?

I am not a small blocker.  I am however clueless so kick the can sounds good to me.

I don't drink coffee.  I don't drink coke, pepsi or cola.

Tea at 3 cents a cup

[PoolMinor]

So what's the probability of Bitcoin becoming the World Reserve Currency if the on chain transaction capacity is 500,000/day? Zero. The IMF's SDR has a higher capacity than that nowand most people don't even know what the hell I'm talking about.

With eight billion people on the planet, that would be only 1 transaction per day for every 8,000 people ( 2 people per xaction).  or one send and one recieve for only 1 in 16,000 people.  That means that almost everything would be handled by middlemen, the same bankster assholes Bitcoin was created to route around.

It seems to be all or nothing with you. So many infinitive statements, do you realize there are many people everyday that don't make any transactions in fiat or otherwise. The population of the planet is one of the extreme stances you take, clearly you can only think in terms of worst case scenarios.

Really starts to become tiresome reading the same level of thinking over and over again; weren't we supposed to be observing a wall or something?

[Cconvert2G36]

I posted this in another thread but it seems relevant to what you guys are talking about.

Do we really have security and decentralization today when a few phone calls from the PRC could shut the whole thing down?

The only security against nation states with hundreds of billions of $ at their disposal is either through obscurity (monero) or through ubiquity (too big and important to attack).

Practically, it seems a compromise to 2MB would buy time to develop and roll out other solutions (segwit, LN, SC, etc) and could allow us to have more productive dialog in the interim. 

Have we considered the fact that a lot of those small-blockers seem to also have a vested interest in the success of a certain altcoin?

Meh, I don't dismiss their concerns completely because of this.

There are real concerns about maliciously formed 8MB blocks made by a dominant selfish miner. IMO it would be a miner acting against their interest in continued income, but the possibility is there, and the worry is not completely unfounded.

It's greatly diminished at 2MB, so I think that's a good compromise to buy some time and allow us to stop obsessing and fighting for a while.

[peonminer]

Doubtful $330 will hold this time.

It dropped by $30 so you think it will drop $100 more?  

If wishes were horses...

Give it a week for sub $330. Steady gradual shame dump inbound. The coins used to pump us up need to get dumped. It will be a hedged ass beating.

[billyjoeallen]

So what's the probability of Bitcoin becoming the World Reserve Currency if the on chain transaction capacity is 500,000/day? Zero. The IMF's SDR has a higher capacity than that nowand most people don't even know what the hell I'm talking about.

With eight billion people on the planet, that would be only 1 transaction per day for every 8,000 people ( 2 people per xaction).  or one send and one recieve for only 1 in 16,000 people.  That means that almost everything would be handled by middlemen, the same bankster assholes Bitcoin was created to route around.

It seems to be all or nothing with you. So many infinitive statements, do you realize there are many people everyday that don't make any transactions in fiat or otherwise. The population of the planet is one of the extreme stances you take, clearly you can only think in terms of worst case scenarios.

Really starts to become tiresome reading the same level of thinking over and over again; weren't we supposed to be observing a wall or something?

Hyperbole isn't intended to be taken literally. It's used to make a point.  If a logical case is still valid at the extremes, it is valid in most other cases also.   offchain, sidechain and altcoin solutions re-introduce middlemen.  That is a form of centralization every bit as dangerous as mining centralization. It also adds friction to transactions which hurts trade.

[PoolMinor]

So what's the probability of Bitcoin becoming the World Reserve Currency if the on chain transaction capacity is 500,000/day? Zero. The IMF's SDR has a higher capacity than that nowand most people don't even know what the hell I'm talking about.

With eight billion people on the planet, that would be only 1 transaction per day for every 8,000 people ( 2 people per xaction).  or one send and one recieve for only 1 in 16,000 people.  That means that almost everything would be handled by middlemen, the same bankster assholes Bitcoin was created to route around.

It seems to be all or nothing with you. So many infinitive statements, do you realize there are many people everyday that don't make any transactions in fiat or otherwise. The population of the planet is one of the extreme stances you take, clearly you can only think in terms of worst case scenarios.

Really starts to become tiresome reading the same level of thinking over and over again; weren't we supposed to be observing a wall or something?

Hyperbole isn't intended to be taken literally. It's used to make a point.  If a logical case is still valid at the extremes, it is valid in most other cases also.   offchain, sidechain and altcoin solutions re-introduce middlemen.  That is a form of centralization every bit as dangerous as mining centralization. It also adds friction to transactions which hurts trade.

Are you also under the impression that BitPay hurts the trade of BTC?

[billyjoeallen]

There are real concerns about maliciously formed 8MB blocks made by a dominant selfish miner. IMO it would be a miner acting against their interest in continued income, but the possibility is there, and the worry is not completely unfounded.

It's greatly diminished at 2MB, so I think that's a good compromise to buy some time and allow us to stop obsessing and fighting for a while.

Yeah, that would give him a big head start  on mining the next block, but at a high risk of getting the big one orphaned.  This is the same kind of concern we heard ad nauseum over mining pools in the first place. The risk isn't zero, but it's pretty small relative to the risks of not allowing bigger blocks.

[Cconvert2G36]

I posted this in another thread but it seems relevant to what you guys are talking about.

Do we really have security and decentralization today when a few phone calls from the PRC could shut the whole thing down?

The only security against nation states with hundreds of billions of $ at their disposal is either through obscurity (monero) or through ubiquity (too big and important to attack).

Practically, it seems a compromise to 2MB would buy time to develop and roll out other solutions (segwit, LN, SC, etc) and could allow us to have more productive dialog in the interim.  

Have we considered the fact that a lot of those small-blockers seem to also have a vested interest in the success of a certain altcoin?

Meh, I don't dismiss their concerns completely because of this.

There are real concerns about maliciously formed 8MB blocks made by a dominant selfish miner. IMO it would be a miner acting against their interest in continued income, but the possibility is there, and the worry is not completely unfounded.

It's greatly diminished at 2MB, so I think that's a good compromise to buy some time and allow us to stop obsessing and fighting for a while.

I have to admit the King Satoshi and his little castle analogy made a lot of sense.

Is there any indication anywhere that Satoshi was aware of difficulties with scaling for mass adoption?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=532.msg6306#msg6306

The current system where every user is a network node is not the intended configuration for large scale.  That would be like every Usenet user runs their own NNTP server.  The design supports letting users just be users.  The more burden it is to run a node, the fewer nodes there will be.  Those few nodes will be big server farms.  The rest will be client nodes that only do transactions and don't generate.

Quote from: bytemaster on July 28, 2010, 08:59:42 PM
Besides, 10 minutes is too long to verify that payment is good.  It needs to be as fast as swiping a credit card is today.

See the snack machine thread, I outline how a payment processor could verify payments well enough, actually really well (much lower fraud rate than credit cards), in something like 10 seconds or less.  If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.
http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=423.msg3819#msg3819

[JimboToronto]

Getting close to that 1000 wall on finex.

Pull or nomnomnom?

[billyjoeallen]

Are you also under the impression that BitPay hurts the trade of BTC?

Not if people have the option of not using it.  Paying for convenience and paying for access are two different things.

[Cconvert2G36]

Doubtful $330 will hold this time.

It dropped by $30 so you think it will drop $100 more?  

If wishes were horses...

Give it a week for sub $330.
-snip-

u liek brass balls too?

[peonminer]

Welcome to degen city.