Bitcoin Forum
November 02, 2024, 04:59:50 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: When will BTC get back above $70K:
7/14 - 0 (0%)
7/21 - 1 (0.8%)
7/28 - 11 (9.1%)
8/4 - 16 (13.2%)
8/11 - 7 (5.8%)
8/18 - 6 (5%)
8/25 - 8 (6.6%)
After August - 72 (59.5%)
Total Voters: 121

Pages: « 1 ... 14354 14355 14356 14357 14358 14359 14360 14361 14362 14363 14364 14365 14366 14367 14368 14369 14370 14371 14372 14373 14374 14375 14376 14377 14378 14379 14380 14381 14382 14383 14384 14385 14386 14387 14388 14389 14390 14391 14392 14393 14394 14395 14396 14397 14398 14399 14400 14401 14402 14403 [14404] 14405 14406 14407 14408 14409 14410 14411 14412 14413 14414 14415 14416 14417 14418 14419 14420 14421 14422 14423 14424 14425 14426 14427 14428 14429 14430 14431 14432 14433 14434 14435 14436 14437 14438 14439 14440 14441 14442 14443 14444 14445 14446 14447 14448 14449 14450 14451 14452 14453 14454 ... 33873 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion  (Read 26485115 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. (174 posts by 3 users with 9 merit deleted.)
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2352
Merit: 1803


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
January 02, 2016, 05:02:21 AM

Coin



Explanation
Richy_T
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2604
Merit: 2296


1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k


View Profile
January 02, 2016, 05:38:49 AM

Trying to fit more data into the same 1MB is work. Trying to offload txs until they self-cancel, so that the network can scale better is work. Just upping a number is lame.

TIL Rube Goldberg has descendants. Why do something the easy way when you can complicate things and introduce risks of failure?

That it *is* lame and it *is* trivial is what makes it so exasperating that the opposition to it works so hard against it.

Quote
It can be phased in, like:
Code:
if (blocknumber > 115000)
   maxblocksize = largerlimit
It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.
Richy_T
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2604
Merit: 2296


1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k


View Profile
January 02, 2016, 05:44:35 AM

In a stunning display of courage, and with an unwavering commitment to the forging of the truth in the crucible of the dialectical method... Our friend, and highly qualified mentor, has graciously offered to continue the debate of these important ideas rather than retreat like a coward to the wizard's irc clubhouse.

Like those who have not #ragequit under adversity before... may his example continue to inspire us in our efforts to fully realize the potential of this bottom-up, community driven effort towards changing the world through a fully decentralized, dialup and raspberryPi compatible, layer 1 settlement network.


Not fair!

I'm still recovering from new years and now I have to open a bottle of Champagne this soon?
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2352
Merit: 1803


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
January 02, 2016, 06:02:20 AM

Coin



Explanation
AlexGR
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1049



View Profile
January 02, 2016, 06:06:23 AM

Changing a variable from 1MB to 2MB or 20MB is not "work" per se. It's a few bytes of code change.
How can that even classify as some kind of serious work.

The value is not in the "work" per se. The value is in the result.

The result is that Bitcoin still does the same txs per kb as before. There is no actual improvement in scaling, more like a tradeoff where decentralization and network vulnerability to bloat attacks are tuned to "worse" so that more low-to-zero fee txs can go through.

Additionally, the underlying issues that prompted the 1MB limit have not been solved. You have a vulnerability => you issue a patch to defend against the attack vector => without resolving the issue you go ahead and bypass / remove the defense mechanism. And you do that, while blocks aren't even full and by claiming that the sky is falling and that Bitcoin must ...fork in a kind-of-power grab situation. This is lame (in terms of programming) and beyond absurd in terms of the ecosystem and broader dynamics.

I'd like to see some work on how to solve the attack vectors, how to make blockchain use more efficient, how to make the network propagate information faster - stuff like that which represent actual advances.
jbreher
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3038
Merit: 1660


lose: unfind ... loose: untight


View Profile
January 02, 2016, 06:44:34 AM

The result is that Bitcoin still does the same txs per kb as before. There is no actual improvement in scaling, more like a tradeoff where decentralization and network vulnerability to bloat attacks are tuned to "worse" so that more low-to-zero fee txs can go through.

Such would move the hard cap of somewhere around half a million transactions a day to a higher number. If you do not feel that the ability to process more transactions per unit time is an element of scalability, fine. I find such a position absurd, but so be it. If you insist on clinging to such a definition, than I am more interested increasing potential transactions per unit time than in your definition of scalability -- at least at this point in time, when we are rapidly approaching that limit.

And despite your repetitive statements stripping the reality, this has nothing to do with whether the transactions are zero- low- or ouch!-fee. Half a million a day regardless of the fees paid. Period.

Quote
I'd like to see some work on how to solve the attack vectors, how to make blockchain use more efficient, how to make the network propagate information faster - stuff like that which represent actual advances.

You seek technological advances. This is good. But by promoting economic retardation, you are throwing the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak. The ECE is close enough that it can be breached at the next surge of adoption, while SegWit promotors are obviously deluded in claiming it will be in production 1H16.
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2352
Merit: 1803


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
January 02, 2016, 07:02:11 AM

Coin



Explanation
AlexGR
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708
Merit: 1049



View Profile
January 02, 2016, 07:12:37 AM

The result is that Bitcoin still does the same txs per kb as before. There is no actual improvement in scaling, more like a tradeoff where decentralization and network vulnerability to bloat attacks are tuned to "worse" so that more low-to-zero fee txs can go through.

Such would move the hard cap of somewhere around half a million transactions a day to a higher number. If you do not feel that the ability to process more transactions per unit time is an element of scalability, fine. I find such a position absurd, but so be it. If you insist on clinging to such a definition, than I am more interested increasing potential transactions per unit time than in your definition of scalability -- at least at this point in time, when we are rapidly approaching that limit.

And despite your repetitive statements stripping the reality, this has nothing to do with whether the transactions are zero- low- or ouch!-fee. Half a million a day regardless of the fees paid. Period.

It has everything to do with low or zero fees.

If, say, you go from 0.5mn txs per day to 1mn txs per day and a spammer can add 0.5mn txs per day for peanuts to fill the extra capacity where does that leave you? Huh

You'll go back to square 1 and you'll still be crying "ahhh the blocks are full, we need a new increase, my negligible fee doesn't get me confirmed in 5-10-20 confirmations and I need to pay more and more", etc etc.

But not only will you be crying for the same things, you'll now have to deal with double the bloat, more hardware requirements, higher expenses for running nodes, a more centralized network, etc etc.
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2352
Merit: 1803


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
January 02, 2016, 08:02:08 AM

Coin



Explanation
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2352
Merit: 1803


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
January 02, 2016, 09:02:09 AM

Coin



Explanation
Arcteryx
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728
Merit: 500


EtherSphere - Social Games


View Profile
January 02, 2016, 09:52:47 AM

Is this what we would expect from being a stable price for bitcoin Lips sealed
Well it is boring to say the least. Bring some volatility back to it or it is just like any other fiat trading  Cry
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2352
Merit: 1803


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
January 02, 2016, 10:02:08 AM

Coin



Explanation
knightlife999
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 845
Merit: 1000


Whale Watchers and Pinnacle Brilliance founder


View Profile
January 02, 2016, 10:12:46 AM

We'll get more volatility very soon. Just give the market some time to get past the holidays and back to work. 
luckygenough56
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526
Merit: 1012



View Profile
January 02, 2016, 10:13:59 AM

drop already bleepcoin !
coinzat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 250


Young but I'm not that bold


View Profile
January 02, 2016, 10:44:46 AM

Is this what we would expect from being a stable price for bitcoin Lips sealed
Well it is boring to say the least. Bring some volatility back to it or it is just like any other fiat trading  Cry

I like it when the price is stable, but this is not going to last for a long time.
volatility is very normal with bitcoin as we used to see
oda.krell
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470
Merit: 1007



View Profile
January 02, 2016, 10:54:41 AM

Quote
It can be phased in, like:
Code:
if (blocknumber > 115000)
   maxblocksize = largerlimit
It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.

Hehe, that one should be quoted a lot more around here. Like, daily.

I'm not even that fond of arguments from authority -- in the end, Satoshi is just a particularly smart human being, or group thereof, but fallible like everybody else.

The irony is of course that the Little Blockians are also the strongest proponents of 'protocol literalism', trying to preserve the purity of essence and sanctity of bodily fluids, err, I mean: the purity of Satoshi's original vision of sound money & free guns, as enshrined in the original version of the protocol.

Which only means that it must really suck for them that the master himself thought of max blocksize as a trivially easily changeable spam prevention measure, not some grand economic variable that must be protected by the spilling of blood of free Randian Übermenschen once in a while.
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2352
Merit: 1803


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
January 02, 2016, 11:02:09 AM

Coin



Explanation
acquafredda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316
Merit: 1481



View Profile
January 02, 2016, 11:17:53 AM

We'll get more volatility very soon. Just give the market some time to get past the holidays and back to work. 

And let's not forget there has been a nasty dump on Christmas when everybody was celebrating. Stabilty and Bitcoin trading don't rhyme yet and probably never will. So yes, expect some turbulence soon
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2352
Merit: 1803


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
January 02, 2016, 12:02:08 PM

Coin



Explanation
Ayle56
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 185
Merit: 100



View Profile
January 02, 2016, 12:57:00 PM

We'll get more volatility very soon. Just give the market some time to get past the holidays and back to work. 

And let's not forget there has been a nasty dump on Christmas when everybody was celebrating. Stabilty and Bitcoin trading don't rhyme yet and probably never will. So yes, expect some turbulence soon

The Chinese carried on trading at Christmas because it means nothing to them, but they get drunk at New Year so practically nobody was trading then. First the traders need time to get over their hangovers, then after the banks open in two days time volatility should get going again.
Pages: « 1 ... 14354 14355 14356 14357 14358 14359 14360 14361 14362 14363 14364 14365 14366 14367 14368 14369 14370 14371 14372 14373 14374 14375 14376 14377 14378 14379 14380 14381 14382 14383 14384 14385 14386 14387 14388 14389 14390 14391 14392 14393 14394 14395 14396 14397 14398 14399 14400 14401 14402 14403 [14404] 14405 14406 14407 14408 14409 14410 14411 14412 14413 14414 14415 14416 14417 14418 14419 14420 14421 14422 14423 14424 14425 14426 14427 14428 14429 14430 14431 14432 14433 14434 14435 14436 14437 14438 14439 14440 14441 14442 14443 14444 14445 14446 14447 14448 14449 14450 14451 14452 14453 14454 ... 33873 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!