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

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Ok. I'm flip flopping again. Hold please.

The immaterial incentive is what keeps getting to me. It seems too abstract to be an incentive. Like a tragedy of the commons thing.

Do not get me wrong. I am a die hard capitalist :-) Actually, i am following the self-interested altruism thought school. Which bitcoin shoots perfectly. I do not run nodes because i am "nice". I run it because i have a vested interest in the network's success and survival, for my own selfish goals. And what Adam said, there would be alas 5000 more who would do the same in hours if they would feel their money is in trouble.

That is why, in the future, if we expand this beautiful network to 100millions, 10 and 10 thousands of corporations will run a node, more than today. But, first we need to get there, by let in 100x more economic value/block happening on the blockchain. I hope you understand.

I think so. SegWit. 2MB. Moon?

[adamstgBit]

i have a dream! i dream of large corporations/governments competing for blocks with 100,000's of 0.00001BTC fees

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[billyjoeallen]

i have a dream! i dream of large corporations/governments competing for blocks with 100,000's of 0.00001BTC fees

I have a dream where a bitcoin is worth $400,000 each three halvings from now so the blockreward is over a million bucks and miners still won't care about fees.  

If BTC value doubles more frequently than the blockreward halves, fees will never be needed to sustain miners. Of course BTC can't grow exponentially in purchasing power forever, but it can in nominal terms if the U.S. Dollar ever hyperinflates.

[adamstgBit]

i have a dream! i dream of large corporations/governments competing for blocks with 100,000's of 0.00001BTC fees

I have a dream where a bitcoin is worth $400,000 each three halvings from now so the blockreward is over a million bucks and miners still won't care about fees.  

If BTC value doubles more frequently than the blockreward halves, fees will never be needed to sustain miners.

awesome, peter todd can use reasoning to get poeple believing we don't actually need to grow the amount of fees generated on each block.
wait that might conflict with his idea that, the best way to get more fees is to artificially cap number TX pre block so fee rise.


this is a classic eco. problem, it's like "what is the best price for my product"

to expensive and no one will buy
to cheep and EVERYONE buys, but then your losing profit ( you could have been selling more expensive)

turns out the best price is one that a small % feel is to expensive.

[Chef Ramsay]

i have a dream! i dream of large corporations/governments competing for blocks with 100,000's of 0.00001BTC fees

I have a dream where a bitcoin is worth $400,000 each three halvings from now so the blockreward is over a million bucks and miners still won't care about fees.  

If BTC value doubles more frequently than the blockreward halves, fees will never be needed to sustain miners. Of course BTC can't grow exponentially in purchasing power forever, but it can in nominal terms if the U.S. Dollar ever hyperinflates.

I hear ya and support what you're saying. Time for Core to get w/ the rest of us on making blocks bigger. The fun shall begin again.

[AZwarel]

Miner fees.

It is basic math, fees will only sustain mining if either:
1. 1 BTC will worth so much, that even fractions (or around today's fee) of it will bring profit;
2. By the time coinbase transaction will drop below fees volume (not going to happen till at least 8-12 years -12,5/6,25/3,125/1,5625), will be in equilibrium+1n btc/$ of mining cost.

For both of these, we need way more transaction/block than today - so the network utility will rise the btc/$ value -, but only need those in 8+years. In a natural, healthy market, txs fee+coinbase reward should always profit no less or more than the average profit of any other (real) free market investement/industry on the globe on the mid/long run. Not like we have a free market on the globe...just watch those negative interest rates..

[Cconvert2G36]

Welcome to 1984... citizen.

Are you a suppressive person?

[billyjoeallen]

"The Blockchain" can bring so much utility besides money transactions! And that is exactly what it needs to be - and what most of us were fascinated about, land/property registry, ownership titles, escrow in an uncheatable global ledger, so no, not a settlement layer. "IT IS ON THE BLOCKCHAIN" should be a proverb for "as final as set in stone"- in the 10/100k$ area, because the account units can do more than coffee buys, yet, those daily 100,000 "coffee buys" will be the big thing to bring the first 1 billionth user. The average Joes, who so many look down here, yet, they are 95% of the population. Bitcoin needs them, we can not have a global financial system without the global....

I can not grasp, how experienced - and certainly well meaning, and i am saying this honestly and respectuflly - bitcoiners miss this point, which is: if blockchain can satisfy more than pure value transaction in its p2p concept, it will magnify in value/unit wise, which is all what WE want.

Absolutely! We don't just want to have distributed, decentralized money. We want distributed decentralized everything. 

If the real business of Bitcoin is selling space on an immutable ledger, then the only constraint should be anything that threatens its immutability.  We should sell it as efficiently as possible given that one constraint. 

[billyjoeallen]

Welcome to 1984... citizen.

Are you a suppressive person?



 

"Discussion of a split has already affected price."

Yeah, well lack of scalability has kept us trading at <half ATH 27 months later.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[bitebits]

Dear City Council:

We, the residents, business owners, employees,  developers and tourists would like some clarification on your proposed plan to upgrade the goat trail that leads into town into an actual road. We understand that you plan on only making it one lane until after the skyscrapers are built but will make it a toll road to keep out the riffraff cluttering the highways.

We know you have plans for a Lightning Train some time in the future, but until then you will focus on the goat trail.  Your proposal for almost doubling the capacity by putting extra saddles on each specially modified goat is something we fully support, but we still would like to know when the trail will be paved.

So if you could clear this up for us, that would be great, because elections are coming up in three weeks.  It would be chaotic and probably harmful if there was a change of government and we don't want that to happen. No way. We totally love you guys.

Sincerely,
Everybody.

Briliant, I must admit.

Puts the discussion in perspective, something we will hopefully be able to once laugh about and just nostalgically think back of those good old days when bitcoin still felt ours.

[iCEBREAKER]

i have a dream! i dream of large corporations/governments competing for blocks with 100,000's of 0.00001BTC fees

I have a dream where a bitcoin is worth $400,000 each three halvings from now so the blockreward is over a million bucks and miners still won't care about fees.  

If BTC value doubles more frequently than the blockreward halves, fees will never be needed to sustain miners. Of course BTC can't grow exponentially in purchasing power forever, but it can in nominal terms if the U.S. Dollar ever hyperinflates.

Forget about the (obscurant, biflationary) USD nonsense.  Think in terms of gold oz and oil barrels.  We all know fiat is burning while the BIS throws gas on the fire.

[billyjoeallen]

Seeing a little upward movement.  Why is everyone so optimistic that Core will move off of their entrenched position because of a couple of polite letters?  If they didn't listen to Gavin, Jeff and Mike whom they know, and they didn't listen to reason at the Stalling Bitcoin Conference, what makes everyone so sure they will listen now? 

Is there something I don't know?  This doesn't seem to me to be a time to buy but to wait and see how this plays out. 

Maybe it's just margin shorts losing their nerve. 

[bitebits]

[...]
"The Blockchain" can bring so much utility besides money transactions! And that is exactly what it needs to be - and what most of us were fascinated about, land/property registry, ownership titles, escrow in an uncheatable global ledger, so no, not a settlement layer. "IT IS ON THE BLOCKCHAIN" should be a proverb for "as final as set in stone"- in the 10/100k$ area, because the account units can do more than coffee buys [...]

I can not grasp, how experienced - and certainly well meaning, and i am saying this honestly and respectuflly - bitcoiners miss this point, which is: if blockchain can satisfy more than pure value transaction in its p2p concept, it will magnify in value/unit wise, which is all what WE want.

Really good point and fresh new argument in this whole blocksize discussion. Bitcoin is not just about frictionlessly transferring bitcoins from Alice to Bob. If that is what you think Bitcoin is about then you are completely missing the point, it is like saying that the internet is for emailing.

Being able to permanently store whatever (hashed) information directly on the blockchain is immensely powerful and should not be diluted.

[bitebits]

Today, if someone runs a node (or more than one) would do it even with 20 MB limits (many would do with way more hardware constrains, would even pay for it - like i do - just out of principle).

I think I disagree with this. Bitcoin is an incentives machine. Nobody should be expected to do anything on principle.

there is a huge incentive

imagine tomorrow you wake up and the news is there are only 100nodes up on the network and altho you dont understand everything your read you get that this is NOT GOOD

what do you do next?

thats right [...]

Agree with Adam here. Out of principle / because the altruism makes you feel good / because you want to support your business or investment / insert any other reason. That is why there will always be enough 'unpaid' nodes, whatever the blocksize. I can actually guarantee that there will at least be one  .


Good argument of billyjoeallen added:

[...] No node, no vote. That is [already] incentive enough, no matter which implementation you like. [...]

[iCEBREAKER]

That is a beautiful slide.  Occident and Orient meeting on the common grounds of knowledge and wisdom.  

5,000 year old high culture + liberation technology = WINNING.

So much for the bigoted notion that Bitcoiners in China ("Chinese Bitcoiners") are too subservient, stupid, and greedy to resist the siren song of The Blockchain Alliance Inc's putative authority.

[Cconvert2G36]

That is a beautiful slide.  Occident and Orient meeting on the common grounds of knowledge and wisdom.  

5,000 year old high culture + liberation technology = WINNING.

So much for the bigoted notion that Bitcoiners in China ("Chinese Bitcoiners") are too subservient, stupid, and greedy to resist the siren song of The Blockchain Alliance Inc's putative authority.

Pervert it all you'd like iCE, it won't be Bitcoin when you're done with it. For monero... that's bullish AF.

[bitebits]

i have a dream! i dream of large corporations/governments competing for blocks with 100,000's of 0.00001BTC fees

I am wondering. Could it theoretically happen that corporations/governments want to transact on the blockchain so badly, that they just make sure they own 5% of the hashing power? They will only include their own transactions, and so on average have them added to the blockchain every 20 blocks. That would be horrible.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation