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

[oda.krell]

Turns out, you guys become increasingly funny when things get a bit catty. Don't let me disturb you, please.

[billyjoeallen]

A node is simply a cost of doing business. It's a small cost, but it is a real one. You don't want nodes to share fees, because then people will run nodes just for the fee, and that's a bad idea. Right now, I'm running SwampNode on XT because that's the way I can vote. I am planning on switching to Classic soon.

Ten years ago, few had smart phones. Twenty years ago, few had cell phones. Now they are accepted as a cost of doing business. I drive a truck and a trucker without a cell phone is unemployed.

You see? there is already incentives in place. A node is a way to vote and to verify transactions. We have enough nodes and the number is growing.

[Fatman3001]

WTF does that mean? This isn't one of your anarcap hugging sessions. Are you going to suicide bomb MIT or are you going to drink an extra can of Red Bull and code a bit more?

Why would violence even be an option if you know I follow the non-aggression principle ? You have a very odd perception of our values. We are very motivated to keep the true nature and purpose of bitcoin alive... This means we not principally motivated by short term profits but have long term goals and are willing to make sacrifices and work hard to achieve them. If the community forces a contentious hard fork , so be it, we will happily allow the community to go separate ways, but be aware we will not acquiescence on our values . This doesn't mean we cannot find a solution through consensus and make certain reasonable consolations that don't directly compromise our values. Adding 1.7-2Mb capacity to segwit was that compromise and we want to dramatically scale up capacity in the future the right way. It would be great if you would join us building something great , If not , I understand and won't interfere with your choices.

I was just trying to break the wall of mindless pompous crap.

People who talk like you is why Bitcoin is important.

BTW, who are "we"? Who are these people who are so willing to throw everyone under the bus to get it their way?

[BitUsher]

Turns out, you guys become increasingly funny when things get a bit catty. Don't let me disturb you, please.

I am glad you can find humor out of this   If the byproduct is happiness that that is a consequence I can accept.

My words are being written without aggression and lack any emotional fervor. They are written with a calm and confident resolution attached to some well reasoned principles.

They aren't even intended for many of the individuals I am responding to but to educate other readers lurking to our perspective.

BTW, who are "we"? Who are these people who are so willing to throw everyone under the bus to get it their way?

No one is willing to throw anyone under the bus. I empathize with your position and will not interfere with your choices or vision of bitcoin. That is the beauty of bitcoin, its voluntary nature of participation and involvement.

"We" principally refers to those that believe bitcoin should become a settlement network because of the cold hard reality that it cannot scale completely on the chain. "We" are those that believe we need to work together in solidarity and through consensus rather than democratic majority imposing their will upon minorities.

[Fatman3001]

Turns out, you guys become increasingly funny when things get a bit catty. Don't let me disturb you, please.

I am glad you can find humor out of this   If the byproduct is happiness that that is a consequence I can accept.

My words are being written without aggression and lack any emotional fervor. They are written with a calm and confident resolution attached to some well reasoned principles.

They aren't even intended for many of the individuals I am responding to but to educate other readers lurking to our perspective.

Sure is nice to know.

Can we get an inkling on who these benevolent non-feeling educators are?

Edit:

Ah!

BTW, who are "we"? Who are these people who are so willing to throw everyone under the bus to get it their way?

No one is willing to throw anyone under the bus. I empathize with your position and will not interfere with your choices or vision of bitcoin. That is the beauty of bitcoin, its voluntary nature of participation and involvement.

"We" principally refers to those that believe bitcoin should become a settlement network because of the cold hard reality that it cannot scale completely on the chain. "We" are those that believe we need to work together in solidarity and through consensus rather than democratic majority imposing their will upon minorities.

Crap!

I was just trying to break the wall of mindless pompous crap.

Mission Failed

[gizmoh]

Rejoice!
Third Classic Block (399024) mined

Classic around 26% Node of Core..
More Rejoice!  

https://coin.dance/nodes/all

[oda.krell]

^2

I think I can see Mircea Pompouscu's shadow in the background there, right?

[BitUsher]

Can we get an inkling on who these benevolent non-feeling educators are?

LoL..... tell me about the dangers of people who want to empower each other to have both sovereignty and solidarity in a voluntary manner.
Your insinuations are humorous and will not deter our goals. 70% of mining power is not enough ... we are looking to create consensus and solidarity with many more miners and in discussions with Bitmain.

I still love you and hope you find happiness sir!

^2

I think I can see Mircea Pompouscu's shadow in the background there, right?

Probably ... that guy creeps me out and not someone that I would associate with.

[billyjoeallen]

WTF does that mean? This isn't one of your anarcap hugging sessions. Are you going to suicide bomb MIT or are you going to drink an extra can of Red Bull and code a bit more?

Why would violence even be an option if you know I follow the non-aggression principle ? You have a very odd perception of our values. We are very motivated to keep the true nature and purpose of bitcoin alive... This means we not principally motivated by short term profits but have long term goals and are willing to make sacrifices and work hard to achieve them. If the community forces a contentious hard fork , so be it, we will happily allow the community to go separate ways, but be aware we will not acquiescence on our values and join a majority hash rate. There may be a short term struggle and than potentially some changes which will allow both chains to exist securely.  This doesn't mean we cannot find a solution through consensus and make certain reasonable consolations that don't directly compromise our values. Adding 1.7-2Mb capacity to segwit was that compromise and we want to dramatically scale up capacity in the future the right way. It would be great if you would join us building something great , If not , I understand and won't interfere with your choices.

You don't speak for all AnCap's. I absolutely support forking to bigger blocks and I have been consistently anarcho-capiltalist from my first post on this forum.

Anarchists want no rulers, so why would you support Core's technocratic hegemony? Regardless of the technical arguments against bigger blocks, why would you allow anyone to have veto power over any upgrade?  As anarcho-capitalists, we know that concentrated power can be abused and inevitably will be abused eventually.

[Fatman3001]

Can we get an inkling on who these benevolent non-feeling educators are?

LoL..... tell me about the dangers of people who want to empower each other to have both sovereignty and solidarity in a voluntary manner.
Your insinuations are humorous and will not deter our goals.

I still love you and hope you find happiness sir!

I'm not going to humor you. You don't understand the words you are using! GET OUT!!! Wherever you are!!! GET OUT!!!

[gentlemand]

Probably ... that guy creeps me out and not someone that I would associate with.

What the hell? That guy is a full on dreamboat. Who wouldn't want a roll in the hay with him? His warm proclamations for all humanity get me wetter than a winter Tuesday on the North Sea.

[julian071]

This is funny indeed. I love how the libertarian in this discussion keeps using the words "we will" and variants on that. Sounds really weird!

[bargainbin]

... If the byproduct is happiness that that is a consequence I can accept. Bllep bloop blop

My words are being written without brrrzg bleep bloop aggression and lack any emotional fervor. They are written with a calm and confident resolution attached to some well dumping core in reasoned principles.

They aren't even intended for many of the human individuals I am responding to but to educate other readers lurking to our perspective meat space brrp bzz bleep bloop blop.

BTW, who are "we"? Who are these people who are so willing to throw everyone under the bus to get it their way?

No one is willing to throw anyone under the 16bit bus. I empathize with your position and will not interfere with your brrrapzap choices or vision of bitcoin, human. That is the beauty of bitcoin, its voluntary nature bleep bloop kernel panic!
"We" principally refers to the scenting life form that is Us bloop blop.

[BitUsher]

You don't speak for all AnCap's. I absolutely support forking to bigger blocks and I have been consistently anarcho-capiltalist from my first post on this forum.

Agreed. Anarchists are like atheists, they have millions of unique voices and perspectives. I understand your perspective and respect it.

Anarchists want no rulers, so why would you support Core's technocratic hegemony? Regardless of the technical arguments against bigger blocks, why would you allow anyone to have veto power over any upgrade?  As anarcho-capitalists, we know that concentrated power can be abused and inevitably will be abused eventually.

Who says I support Core or Blockstream technocratic hegemony? I have repeatedly supported a diverse set of implementations with separate developers, and separate repositories. This is why further work in libbitcoinconsenssus is so important. I will not make the sloppy and misleading assumption that implementations that break consensus rules are akin to choosing between different browsers on the internet. This is a flawed analogy and a dangerous one as well. Choosing between implementations that diverge on consensus rules is akin to choosing between protocols in a distributed consensus system which is dependent upon agreement.  I encourage experimentation in different coins and protocols and will never interfere with your right to HF at any moment, but lets not pretend that this is merely about creating a diverse set of developer communities when multiple implementations have existed peacefully for a long time now.

This is funny indeed. I love how the libertarian in this discussion keeps using the words "we will" and variants on that. Sounds really weird!

I wouldn't consider myself a libertarian , but you do realize that anarchists can and do have solidarity with other anarchists. I invite you to meet some in person.

[JimboToronto]

Good morning Bitcoinland.

I see we're still hovering around $420. At least $400 seems to be holding (for now).

After a week and a half of pretty steady price rise, you'd think we'd see a slight correction but maybe this rise isn't done quite yet.

Come on Bitcoin, let's keep this moving up.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

I will not make the sloppy and misleading assumption that implementations that break consensus rules are akin to choosing between different browsers on the internet. This is a flawed analogy and a dangerous one as well. Choosing between implementations that diverge on consensus rules is akin to choosing between protocols in a distributed consensus system which is dependent upon agreement.  I encourage experimentation in different coins and protocols and will never interfere with your right to HF at any moment, but lets not pretend that this is merely about creating a diverse set of developer communities when multiple implementations have existed peacefully for a long time now.

Agreed.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[billyjoeallen]

You don't speak for all AnCap's. I absolutely support forking to bigger blocks and I have been consistently anarcho-capiltalist from my first post on this forum.

Agreed. Anarchists are like atheists, they have millions of unique voices and perspectives. I understand your perspective and respect it.

Anarchists want no rulers, so why would you support Core's technocratic hegemony? Regardless of the technical arguments against bigger blocks, why would you allow anyone to have veto power over any upgrade?  As anarcho-capitalists, we know that concentrated power can be abused and inevitably will be abused eventually.

Who says I support Core or Blockstream technocratic hegemony? I have repeatedly supported a diverse set of implementations with separate developers, and separate repositories. This is why further work in libbitcoinconsenssus is so important. I will not make the sloppy and misleading assumption that implementations that break consensus rules are akin to choosing between different browsers on the internet. This is a flawed analogy and a dangerous one as well. Choosing between implementations that diverge on consensus rules is akin to choosing between protocols in a distributed consensus system which is dependent upon agreement.  I encourage experimentation in different coins and protocols and will never interfere with your right to HF at any moment, but lets not pretend that this is merely about creating a diverse set of developer communities when multiple implementations have existed peacefully for a long time now.

This is funny indeed. I love how the libertarian in this discussion keeps using the words "we will" and variants on that. Sounds really weird!

I wouldn't consider myself a libertarian , but you do realize that anarchists can and do have solidarity with other anarchists. I invite you to meet some in person.

All analogies are imperfect or they wouldn't be analogies, just arguments.  You are correct that a losing fork is not like a browser with lower market share. It will almost certainly die quickly, but on a different time frame it is similar. Nobody is using Mozilla anymore.  Yeah, it's different, but it's hard to dumb down this conflict for the idiot masses without losing some of the essential elements. It doesn't mean it's an intentionally misleading analogy.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Good morning Bitcoinland.

I see we're still hovering around $420. At least $400 seems to be holding (for now).

After a week and a half of pretty steady price rise, you'd think we'd see a slight correction but maybe this rise isn't done quite yet.

Come on Bitcoin, let's keep this moving up.

Jimbo never gets involved in politics.

[billyjoeallen]

in a way, this is really funny. Core wants to keep blocks small to encourage nodes and they are. They have spawned over a thousand Classic nodes.

Eventually, they may be forced to upgrade to 2 MB just to prevent 8 MB blocks. I kinda hope they screw that up because I have no problem at all with 8 MB blocks.  The only way to improve the efficiency of the network without sacrificing significant security is by scaling up.  We want an armored truck, not a safe on castor wheels pulled by a horse.