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

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[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.

So racist.

whaaaat!?

[Richy_T]

From my understanding, there is going to be an intentional wait until blocks are full before there will be any increase in capacity so the fee market can develop. That will be interesting. 

Getting popcorn.

I think it's fairly likely at this late stage that we'll see increasing backlogs until the price tanks and miners switch to BIP101 as an emergency measure. Even then, we have at least a 750 block wait. For the first time in 3 years, I'm reconsidering my strong HODL position. Though I might just put some $ on standby.

[marcus_of_augustus]

http://www.space.com/31420-spacex-rocket-landing-success.html

Elon just got himself an immediate $16 million pay day (reusable first stage) and long term big prospects for much cheaper space transport.

[billyjoeallen]

From my understanding, there is going to be an intentional wait until blocks are full before there will be any increase in capacity so the fee market can develop. That will be interesting. 

Getting popcorn.

I think it's fairly likely at this late stage that we'll see increasing backlogs until the price tanks and miners switch to BIP101 as an emergency measure. Even then, we have at least a 750 block wait. For the first time in 3 years, I'm reconsidering my strong HODL position. Though I might just put some $ on standby.

That's a realistic scenario, IMHO.  At least if we see it coming we will be less likely to panic.

[JayJuanGee]

@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.

Sometimes you make really out of touch assertions.


Why the fuck is bitcoin "over" secure?  it's to support a higher priced market cap, both anticipated and likely to happen.  Therefore, when BTC's market cap reaches $200 billion (that is about $15,000 per BTC), then the computing power is going to be able to sustain security for those potential and likely attacks.

In other words, BTC's computing power and/or security is likely already in a position to support a $10k btc, and probably a lot more - which really means that you should be preparing your moon boots, rather than coming up with lame and misfitting analogies.

The market decides how secure bitcoin ought to be by deciding what hash rate we want to pay for. We buy bitcoin, Bitcoin price goes up, more competition for blocks, higher difficulty, higher hash rate.  Now if the price tanks, you can expect the market to be less secure because the difficulty level will go down. 

Well, I for one don't want to pay for security I don't need. I'm not a terrorist or a drug dealer and I think the risk of big block exploitations is smaller than the risk of small block exploitations.  Maybe I'm wrong and somebody's going to get my "cheap" coins. That's fine. All free trade is win-win or it doesn't happen.

Sometimes you are so fucking contradictory that I am not even sure whether you can recognize your own lack of coherence.


You claim to be a libertarian and wanting to allow the free "market" to cause effects within such amorphous powers, then at the same time, you are complaining that the free market is over doing the bitcoin computing power because, in your infinite wisdom, they are too secure and "they" are causing you to have to pay more than is necessary in some amorphous and unsubstantiated claim that you have about having extra costs on yourself and presumably other bitcoin users... and what the fuck does it matter anyhow? even if there happens to develop 10x the computing power (excess capacity) to secure the blockchain, because these various individuals have been making their own internal calculations and they have been deciding to take various risks on the gamble that they are going to profit from such apparently excessive cumulative investment of mining power. 

Who gives a shit?  In the end, if we leave it to such free market and let individuals to decide for themselves if it is worth it to them to keep investing in mining,  it is all going to work itself out, no?, and some balance between price and security will work itself out, no?, without you trying to dictate what you believe is best. 

like you said, you can vote with your feet too, and leave bitcoin, which would surely be nice for you to exercise such option instead of continuing to propound end-of-the world ideas about the bitcoin network supposedly being developed as too secure.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[billyjoeallen]

Sometimes you are so fucking contradictory that I am not even sure whether you can recognize your own lack of coherence.


You claim to be a libertarian and wanting to allow the free "market" to cause effects within such amorphous powers, then at the same time, you are complaining that the free market is over doing the bitcoin computing power because, in your infinite wisdom, they are too secure and "they" are causing you to have to pay more than is necessary in some amorphous and unsubstantiated claim that you have about having extra costs on yourself and presumably other bitcoin users... and what the fuck does it matter anyhow? even if there happens to develop 10x the computing power (excess capacity) to secure the blockchain, because these various individuals have been making their own internal calculations and they have been deciding to take various risks on the gamble that they are going to profit from such apparently excessive cumulative investment of mining power. 

Who gives a shit?  In the end, if we leave it to such free market and let individuals to decide for themselves if it is worth it to them to keep investing in mining,  it is all going to work itself out, no?, and some balance between price and security will work itself out, no?, without you trying to dictate what you believe is best. 

like you said, you can vote with your feet too, and leave bitcoin, which would surely be nice for you to exercise such option instead of continuing to propound end-of-the world ideas about the bitcoin network supposedly being developed as too secure.

Markets, aren't perfect, but they are better than planned economies.  It's Hyek's economic calculation problem.  Prices convey information. I thought I was paying for blockspace when I was paying for bitcoin, but if I have to pay twice, well, that's a price I'm not yet willing to pay.  I guess we'll find out if anyone else is willing to pay twice but I'd rather watch that from the sidelines.

NOBODY HAS YET SHOWN that they are willing to pay high xaction fees. The market WILL decide.

The issue I have to deal with is to get my cash out of a Honk Kong exchange before the network backlog makes that difficult or impossible. So that means I have to sell one here, buy one there to sell the next one here or I expose myself to exchange rate volatility. I suspect that's possibly a reason why the price hasn't tanked yet.

Artificial scarcity of coins in addition to artificial scarcity of blockspace is just too much scarcity for me, so i'm gonna make myself scarce but I gotta cash out first.

[dropt]

Artificial scarcity of coins in addition to artificial scarcity of blockspace is just too much scarcity for me, so i'm gonna make myself scarce but I gotta cash out first.

Too much talk, not enough action.  Sell your coins and MTFO.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[suda123]

Why would US shut down this best honeypot ever? It's NSA's own Roach Motel, but for incompetent criminals instead of scurrying household pests.
No more having to steal ur money (via taxation and civil forfeitures) -- you come to them!
No need for doughnut-devouring legions of doom -- Just a few pasty nerds; to sit & browse bitcointalk/localbitcoin/DNMs/exchanges.

Bonus: mathematically irrefutable blockchain trail to seal your fate.
Bonus bonus: sell stolen coins back to you [for real money]; rinse; repeat
Bonus bonus bonus: busywork for prior-to useless 'computer forensics' dweebs; keeps them from getting underfoot.

@BlindMayorBitcorn: That's what they want you to think.

Where did you get this information from? Only a small minority of people realize this. Pm me your sources.

Why do you engage with or give any credence to newbie and/or lambie accounts regarding their sources?, when we should all realize that they just make things up in order to serve as either click bait or to get members to engage about irrelevant and/or untrue subjects.

yea but I have been reading conspiracies since 2005 Bitcoin ,I heard about Bitcoin before 2008. I shit you not I'm to lazy nor care to convince people from what I have seen, I came to conclusion just to profit out of people then help them it took me years to realize this.

If you really take a closer look at what Bitcoin and the blockchain are and can be you'll notice it's going to Develop about the same as skynet from the terminator.

Skynet was decentralized?  

Aren't you making a bit of a big leap in logic and speculation to assume that somehow bitcoin is going to become centralized?  


At this point Bitcoin is a hell-of-a long way from becoming centralized.... both status quo financial institutions and governments remain somewhat hostile to bitcoin, yet your projected scenario may include some assumptions that either government or status quo financial institutions are clandestinely inserting themselves into bitcoin.. which is a bit of a leap - even though there may be some evidence of such.  


Also, some may presume that the Chinese are going to take over bitcoin and others believe it's parts of the USA government, and in the end BTC remains largely decentralized and no meaningful evidence of centralization with a variety of non-cooperating players dabbling BTC in a variety of ways in one direction and another...  but NOT significantly and/or materially undermining its decentralized nature....


 so your speculation about skynet in the future.. blah, blah,  blah,.......   seems a bit more based in fantasy than reality.

http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/money/nsamint/nsamint.htm

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[TERA]

Huobi down?

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[suda123]

What happens to people who are on welfare or government paid housing for poor people if hyperinflation occurs?

[MatTheCat]

Huobi down?

Down for some....I haven't been able to get into my account for the past 90 minutes, until just then...

Huobi not reporting any volume on bitcoinwisdom for past 90 minutes (until just then), and then all of a sudden, bitcoinwisdom gets a volume history of all the BTC traded on Huobi, whilst nobody could get access to it......

....definitely not FAKE voluime though....as if the Chinese would try to FAKE BTC trades.....a laughable notion!

Edit: Right....just tried to make a trade on Huobi and I am STILL fkn locked out of it......whilst the exchange pumps.....something very fishy about the behaviour of this place the past few days.....(and it is undeniably, the market leader)

[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.

whaaaat!?

Because we were both ripping on colored coins... Dumb joke.

[jbreher]

http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/money/nsamint/nsamint.htm

What the heck does a decades-old report on a theoretical centralized digital cash system have to do with anything?

[Cconvert2G36]

Full blocks and rising fees... settlement network here we come, gentlemen.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/money/nsamint/nsamint.htm

What the heck does a decades-old report on a theoretical centralized digital cash system have to do with anything?