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

[billyjoeallen]

@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree.

The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy.  This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.

The network is ridiculously oversecure for it's current market cap.  How many goddamn exaflops or whatever?

You might be able to snow the noobs with technobabble but I've been around too long. I'm not buying.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree.

The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy.  This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.

The network is ridiculously oversecure for it's current market cap.  How many goddamn exaflops or whatever?

You might be able to snow the noobs with technobabble but I've been around too long. I'm not buying.

I've heard it's way oversecure. Good point. Idk.

I'm not trying to snow a n00b.

[wachtwoord]

@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree.

The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy.  This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.

The network is ridiculously oversecure for it's current market cap.  How many goddamn exaflops or whatever?

You might be able to snow the noobs with technobabble but I've been around too long. I'm not buying.

Security is the most important feature. Without a block subsidy today the Bitcoin network would be extremely insecure. The subsidy is going to go away. I want Bitcoin to work long term. It doesnt seem that those that want to increase the block size want that....

[AlexGR]

If colored coins, title transfers, and timestamps are out, it's just a less useful technology.

Yeah I mean we could fit the world's data in the blockchain and it would be very useful and stuff when it reached a few zillionbytes, but guess what... it doesn't scale and it becomes unusable. When you go for too much you may end up losing even the basic functionality:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1790.msg28935#msg28935

Obviously Satoshi was a cripplecoiner for not wanting his bird to fly as high as it could... so much untapped potential wasted. Right?

[aminorex]

Monkey vision:  Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.

You know this is wrong

Monkey now sees at least one week downtrend, 362 support.

[chopstick]

Monkey vision:  Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.

You know this is wrong

Monkey now sees at least one week downtrend, 362 support.

CONFIRMED

[crossabdd]

 

[billyjoeallen]

@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree.

The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy.  This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.

The network is ridiculously oversecure for it's current market cap.  How many goddamn exaflops or whatever?

You might be able to snow the noobs with technobabble but I've been around too long. I'm not buying.

Security is the most important feature. Without a block subsidy today the Bitcoin network would be extremely insecure. The subsidy is going to go away. I want Bitcoin to work long term. It doesnt seem that those that want to increase the block size want that....

You don't overinsure a house for fire damage. It's called "moral hazard" and it makes the house statistically MORE likely to burn.  You don't put a $1000 case ona $100 phone. It means someone will be MORE likely to steal it. If you put too much armor on an armored truck, you limit it's cargo capacity to the point that you have to make two trips INCREASING the chance of losing the cargo. There IS such a thing as too much security.

[Fatman3001]

Monkey vision:  Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.

You know this is wrong

Monkey now sees at least one week downtrend, 362 support.

The wrong bit was you keeping that monkey in a cage forcing it to watch Bitccoin charts.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Monkey vision:  Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.

You know this is wrong

Monkey now sees at least one week downtrend, 362 support.

The wrong bit was you keeping that monkey in a cage forcing it to watch Bitccoin charts.

And giving it Rage Virus was probably against an international convention or two.

[Meuh6879]

they have tried ... they have fail.

[nioc]

Monkey vision:  Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.

You know this is wrong

Monkey now sees at least one week downtrend, 362 support.

That makes me feel better about my buy @ 427

Best wishes to you and Monkey

[jbreher]

@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree.

The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy.  This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.

I guess I would have thought that would have been self-evident for anybody that pondered the prospect with any seriousness.

[marcus_of_augustus]

...snip ... blah-de-blah bear rant ... snip

So Internet money, not the Internet of money.  This is a mutiny. Imagine what would happen if the Federal Reserve Board of Directors staged a mutiny like that against Janet Yellen. How would the markets react?

so still short then?

[TERA]

Release the Kraken!

[Hyperjacked]

Absolute madness they don't know whether to panic buy or panic sell LOL 

No need for panic selling, it spiked up really fast, makes sense it would drop back into the high 90s. 

...and it hasn't gone past the 2 month Vwap...only kissed it! zoom out...

I doubt it goes much lower but maybe someone smarter can chime in...

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[Meuh6879]

Release the Kraken!

[marcus_of_augustus]

So far in this discussion there's already a lot of housekeeping data required.  It will be much easier if you can freely use all the space you need without worrying about paying fees for expensive space in Bitcoin's chain.

- SN

Space on the Bitcoin blockchain IS intended to be expensive. Anything else is an intention to undermine the security model.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree.

The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy.  This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.

I guess I would have thought that would have been self-evident for anybody that pondered the prospect with any seriousness.

So racist.