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

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[brg444]

look at the blocks, all spam.

[marcus_of_augustus]

look at the blocks, all spam.

no-one uses the bitcoin blockchain anymore, it got too crowded.

[Cconvert2G36]

Preach it brothers. Fuggin spammers.

These guise just don't get it. Without Core, Bitcoin will also fail.

[Adrian-x]

the thing is bitcoin won't shrink in size. but it won't grow either. it simply will stay the bonsai size it currently is.

all the money waiting on the sidelines will flow into alt-coins directly.

good luck with your empty bag - so called early adopters of bitcoin.

You don't understand. What's gonna happen is people will transact off-chain, maybe consolidate their paltry txs on pay now buy later Lightning Network, and then pipe dream use Bitcoin as the settlement layer, teh backbone, so to say.

The money will roll right in!

this totally this, I agree with this quote more though  "The free market will win. I just can't tell yet if it means replacing Core or Bitcoin"

[hdbuck]

look at the blocks, all spam.

no-one uses the bitcoin blockchain anymore, it got too crowded.

im waiting for homestead to being soft hard forked.

[hdbuck]

the thing is bitcoin won't shrink in size. but it won't grow either. it simply will stay the bonsai size it currently is.

all the money waiting on the sidelines will flow into alt-coins directly.

good luck with your empty bag - so called early adopters of bitcoin.

You don't understand. What's gonna happen is people will transact off-chain, maybe consolidate their paltry txs on pay now buy later Lightning Network, and then pipe dream use Bitcoin as the settlement layer, teh backbone, so to say.

The money will roll right in!

this totally this, I agree with this quote more though  "The free market will win. I just can't tell yet if it means replacing Core or Bitcoin"

get some mETHereum whilst you can

[gentlemand]

Preach it brothers. Fuggin spammers.

These guise just don't get it. Without Core, Bitcoin will also fail.

I wonder what's happened to that guy. He seems to have had a major funny turn recently. Perhaps a shock from an ASIC scrambled his mind.

[marcus_of_augustus]

Wealth is not linearly distributed but closer to logarithmic with a vast majority of wealth concentrated in a few hands (currently even dangerously so for civic stability considerations), the mainstream is not where wealth is concentrated so for a monetary adoption targeting the mainstream is a losing proposition.

Bitcoin doesn't necessarily need more transactions as much as higher value transactions, the value of a monetary network is not simply the number of connections but the total value of connections, i.e., number * value.

[Adrian-x]

Why fores users onto other competitive systems already this year Alts have grown 6% at the expense of Bitcoin.

Can you show me the transactions these other competitive systems are doing?

I actually tried a block explorer with major altcoins, and their blocks are ghost-towns.

Last 5 blocks (tx count):

litecoin
3-1-1-7-9

dash
3-11-7-9-1

monero
2-1-1-1-1

eth
0-2-0-7-0

btc:
702-1420-2196-2384-2764

as others have pointed out block times are important, and its worth noting most influential Core developers agree that Bitcoin blocks are mostly full of spam.

But Sure it's not going to happen instantly. The market is buying in now in anticipation of the squeeze to come. it's still early high risk but lets see what happens when bitcoin node count drops below 4000 because blocks are full.

If we don't get a block increase before June 2017, I predict that we'll have a node count below 4000 by the end of 2017.

[hdbuck]

Wealth is not linearly distributed but closer to logarithmic with a vast majority of wealth concentrated in a few hands (currently even dangerously so for civic stability considerations), the mainstream is not where wealth is concentrated so for a monetary adoption targeting the mainstream is a losing proposition.

Bitcoin doesn't necessarily need more transactions as much as higher value transactions, the value of a monetary network is not simply the number of connections but the total value of connections, i.e., number * value.

wait so bitcoin does not need more people, just more money?

but what about africa?

[hdbuck]

If we don't get a block increase before June 2017, I predict that we'll have a node count below 4000 by the end of 2017.

mmmnope

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/48bvjy/in_may_2015_gavin_calculated_that_blocks_will_be/

[AlexGR]

Preach it brothers. Fuggin spammers.

These guise just don't get it. Without Core, Bitcoin will also fail.

I wonder what's happened to that guy. He seems to have had a major funny turn recently. Perhaps a shock from an ASIC scrambled his mind.

Technically speaking, he is right although all that has happened have created a spin on the events that if we don't include cheap spam in the blockchain then ...bitcoin won't grow... Like bitcoin needs spam growth and not legit tx growth.

There are a lot of actors in the forum, twitters, news etc, proclaiming the fullblockalypse, but the reality of the matter is that there is no fullblockalypse due to the fact that actual blockchain use is low and the rest of the free space is topped off with spam. That's why fees don't rise. If every tx was legitimate, and there was an actual crowding of txs competing for the limited space, fees would have gone through the roof.

Anyway, instead of NACK, he could say "ACK with the condition that default min fees also rise to combat spam".

[Adrian-x]

Wealth is not linearly distributed but closer to logarithmic with a vast majority of wealth concentrated in a few hands (currently even dangerously so for civic stability considerations), the mainstream is not where wealth is concentrated so for a monetary adoption targeting the mainstream is a losing proposition.

Bitcoin doesn't necessarily need more transactions as much as higher value transactions, the value of a monetary network is not simply the number of connections but the total value of connections, i.e., number * value.

your on to something there, now you just need to explain how we do this with a static number and a static value without increasing the block size?

[gentlemand]

Technically speaking, he is right although all that has happened have created a spin on the events that if we don't include cheap spam in the blockchain then ...bitcoin won't grow... Like bitcoin needs spam growth and not legit tx growth.

I'm not referring to technicalities. I'm referring to the distinctly trollish, catty and defensive edge of his communiques.

[Adrian-x]

If we don't get a block increase before June 2017, I predict that we'll have a node count below 4000 by the end of 2017.

mmmnope

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/48bvjy/in_may_2015_gavin_calculated_that_blocks_will_be/

Bitcoin is under attack, and I'm not sure you see it as your salary probably is dependent on this very state.

it startes with this PR war.


Controversial  - that words been redefined in Bitcoin,
Consensus - well that's been redefined too,
Decentralized - another word with a radically distorted definition
Censored - well that's got a new meaning too,
now
Full blocks  - that's now undergoing a redefinition. Thanks for your contribution.

[blunderer]

Wealth is not linearly distributed but closer to logarithmic with a vast majority of wealth concentrated in a few hands (currently even dangerously so for civic stability considerations), the mainstream is not where wealth is concentrated so for a monetary adoption targeting the mainstream is a losing proposition.

Bitcoin doesn't necessarily need more transactions as much as higher value transactions, the value of a monetary network is not simply the number of connections but the total value of connections, i.e., number * value.

Because what the super-rich really crave is a dysfunctional p2p network at war with itself. They're just waiting for *all* the mining to become centralized in Communist China, and then there'll be no stopping those Wall St. institutional investors. It'll be bigger then Gemini!

[marcus_of_augustus]

Wealth is not linearly distributed but closer to logarithmic with a vast majority of wealth concentrated in a few hands (currently even dangerously so for civic stability considerations), the mainstream is not where wealth is concentrated so for a monetary adoption targeting the mainstream is a losing proposition.

Bitcoin doesn't necessarily need more transactions as much as higher value transactions, the value of a monetary network is not simply the number of connections but the total value of connections, i.e., number * value.

wait so bitcoin does not need more people, just more money?

but what about africa?

Think of it like high-grading that the gold miners do when prices get low. The lower value ore (spam) will be thrown out and the higher value transactions will get preferentially selected. As higher and higher net worth users get selected by the fee market to use the planet's premier secure monetary system the value of the token to use that system will increase. Lower value users will still get to use lower value security systems that aggregate their lower value transactions and anchor them in the blockchain (like first, business and economy classes in a crowded aircraft)

[hdbuck]

Wealth is not linearly distributed but closer to logarithmic with a vast majority of wealth concentrated in a few hands (currently even dangerously so for civic stability considerations), the mainstream is not where wealth is concentrated so for a monetary adoption targeting the mainstream is a losing proposition.

Bitcoin doesn't necessarily need more transactions as much as higher value transactions, the value of a monetary network is not simply the number of connections but the total value of connections, i.e., number * value.

wait so bitcoin does not need more people, just more money?

but what about africa?

Think of it like high-grading that the gold miners do when prices get low. The lower value ore (spam) will be thrown out and the higher value transactions will get preferentially selected. As higher and higher net worth users get selected by the fee market to use the planet's premier secure monetary system the value of the token to use that system will increase. Lower value users will still get to use lower value security systems that aggregate their lower value transactions and anchor them the blockchain (like first, business and economy classes in a crowded aircraft)

im just messing around man, 100% agree.

[Fatman3001]

Technically speaking, he is right although all that has happened have created a spin on the events that if we don't include cheap spam in the blockchain then ...bitcoin won't grow... Like bitcoin needs spam growth and not legit tx growth.

I'm not referring to technicalities. I'm referring to the distinctly trollish, catty and defensive edge of his communiques.

Somewhere along the way he turned from funny to bitchy.