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

[Ibian]

Can someone explain why people are complaining about the ability to send any amount of money anywhere in the world in about an hour without having to ask a middleman for permission?

[BitconAssociation]

...
Hmm... From what I know scaling bitcoin on the number of visa tx for example would need blocks of 80GB.
If you do it simply by rising block size.

I'll never be as smart as Einstein, so why bother going to school (or as Patient_Bear says, nirvana fallacy)...

Can someone explain why people are complaining about the ability to send any amount of money anywhere in the world in about an hour without having to ask a middleman for permission?

Because it used to be about ten minutes a few days ago, and going to be fucking impossible soon if this shit keeps up. Also middlemen. You'll need those too

[BitUsher]

Can someone explain why people are complaining about the ability to send any amount of money anywhere in the world in about an hour without having to ask a middleman for permission?

To be fair , Bitcoin has to compete in a sea of alts that many do indeed have lower tx fees and faster conf.... They don't have more secure tx's or more stable currencies than bitcoin however and the reason why it is worthwhile spending 2-4 pennies more to instantly get in the next block.

[Fatman3001]

Can someone explain why people are complaining about the ability to send any amount of money anywhere in the world in about an hour without having to ask a middleman for permission?

To be fair , Bitcoin has to compete in a sea of alts that many do indeed have lower tx fees and faster conf.... They don't have more secure tx's or more stable currencies than bitcoin however and the reason why it is worthwhile spending 2-4 pennies more to instantly get in the next block.

Except if everyone else does it as well. Then you're stuck.

[Ibian]

...
Hmm... From what I know scaling bitcoin on the number of visa tx for example would need blocks of 80GB.
If you do it simply by rising block size.

I'll never be as smart as Einstein, so why bother going to school (or as Patient_Bear says, nirvana fallacy)...

Can someone explain why people are complaining about the ability to send any amount of money anywhere in the world in about an hour without having to ask a middleman for permission?

Because it used to be about ten minutes a few days ago, and going to be fucking impossible soon if this shit keeps up. Also middlemen. You'll need those too

Gonna have to explain that one a bit clearer.

[BitconAssociation]

...
Hmm... From what I know scaling bitcoin on the number of visa tx for example would need blocks of 80GB.
If you do it simply by rising block size.

I'll never be as smart as Einstein, so why bother going to school (or as Patient_Bear says, nirvana fallacy)...

Can someone explain why people are complaining about the ability to send any amount of money anywhere in the world in about an hour without having to ask a middleman for permission?

Because it used to be about ten minutes a few days ago, and going to be fucking impossible soon if this shit keeps up. Also middlemen. You'll need those too

Gonna have to explain that one a bit clearer.

Because transactions *did not* take "about an hour" a few weeks ago.
Because if you wish to use Bitcoin in the future, you will need to use "scaling solutions" like Lightning Network, which is basically*prepaid gift card, for every entity you wish to do business with, which uses Bitcoin as a settlement layer* (i think they call it "open a payment channel").
Would be glad to be more explicit, just ask specific questions.

But that's the techy side of it. The meat of it is that people are catching on to the fact that Bitcoin, like just about everything else, DEPENDS ON OUR TRUST IN PEOPLE. People at the top, people who are ambitious, egomanaical, corruptible. People who, without a clearly defined set of rules (laws) and an enforcement framework (jackbooted thugs) turn into spoiled children and can't be trusted.
People who would for stroking/paltry sums, will sell you out to the highest bidder.
Because rational self-interest.

[BitUsher]

Except if everyone else does it as well. Then you're stuck.

That is not how fee markets work , there are upper limits to how much spammers and users will spend on fees. My wallets adjust just fine and insure I always get in the next block. There is never a moment where I have to worry that my tx will time out within the new 72 hour mempool window.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[mainpmf]

That's not true.

Can't explain. Number of fucks given rapidly approaching zero.

Hmm... From what I know scaling bitcoin on the number of visa tx for example would need blocks of 80GB.
If you do it simply by rising block size.

Anyway zero fuck given won't convince people

Will people get their heads out of their asses and stop talking about VISA and coffee cups. You can't buy anything with Bitcoin, so neither should be a problem.

It's about making sure the darn thing works. NOW!

Well done then cause it works. It works even perfectly so I don't really see what you would want to do against that.

Either you want btc to be able to scale high tx numbers, either you don't. But just rising blocksize is nothing but an emergency measure.

[BitconAssociation]

Except if everyone else does it as well. Then you're stuck.

That is not how fee markets work , there are upper limits to how much spammers and users will spend on fees. My wallets adjust just fine and insure I always get in the next block.

That's because your wallet is running of your solo mining node, which is solar & micro hydro-powered

Either you want btc to be able to scale high tx numbers, either you don't. But just rising blocksize is nothing but an emergency measure.

Yes, increasing blocksize limit IS an emergency measure at this point, after a year of core devs sitting on their asses & pretending  there's no problem, it's an emergency.

And EVERYTHING is a temporary measure. Nothing last forever, that's why.
Doesn't mean you should give up, lie down, and wait for death.

[mainpmf]

Except if everyone else does it as well. Then you're stuck.

That is not how fee markets work , there are upper limits to how much spammers and users will spend on fees. My wallets adjust just fine and insure I always get in the next block. There is never a moment where I have to worry that my tx will time out within the new 72 hour mempool window.

Which means you want to limit btc usage to important tx. Which means btc will never scale and will never be able to be used on an everyday basis.

[BitUsher]

Which means you want to limit btc usage to important tx. Which means btc will never scale and will never be able to be used on an everyday basis.

Correct, We should limit on chain tx's ... this isn't a secret or anything to be ashamed about. The main chain necessarily needs to be treated as a settlement network for payment channels. Do the math yourself and see how far Bitcoin can scale simply by raising the blocksize and making small efficiency scaling improvements even if we assume a continuous 50% bandwidth improvement a year (unrealistic). We need to plan for success and realize the limits of this technology.

[BitconAssociation]

Which means you want to limit btc usage to important tx. Which means btc will never scale and will never be able to be used on an everyday basis.

Correct, We should limit on chain tx's ... this isn't a secret or anything to be ashamed about. The main chain necessarily needs to be treated as a settlement network for payment channels. ...

Because off-chain transactions can be done without Bitcoin, and will be.
Just like the USD has been doing just fine without gold as a "settlement layer."
Thanks for making Bitcoin irrelevant.

[Hunyadi]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1382884.0

small heads up for anyone thinking of shorting ... i'm getting a bit of 'bolt from the blue' scaling solutions vibe that has been building up recently, not just this paper but there has been some interesting novel approaches increasingly out of left field, only a naive pessimist would suggest upgrading bitcoin's capacity is an intractable problem, be careful what you wish for.

How long does it take to implement something like this? Months, years?

[gentlemand]

How long does it take to implement something like this? Months, years?

What's to say it'll be incorporated? There'd be a lot of people to convince first. I guess if its totally mind boggling in every way then it might cruise in. Maybe a few nitpicks will be picked up.

[Sitarow]

Which means you want to limit btc usage to important tx. Which means btc will never scale and will never be able to be used on an everyday basis.

Correct, We should limit on chain tx's ... this isn't a secret or anything to be ashamed about. The main chain necessarily needs to be treated as a settlement network for payment channels. ...

Because off-chain transactions can be done without Bitcoin, and will be.
Just like the USD has been doing just fine without gold as a "settlement layer."
Thanks for making Bitcoin irrelevant.

To me off-chain transactions has been discussed since the early days. The idea is great for payment processors that have transactions that need to be confirmed instantly and the risk taken by the off-chain network. They use quality controls to limit fraud in their system and profit from impatient players.

The benefit to those who wish to profit from providing services using off-chain transactions is obvious. In a capital market its part of risk reward. off-chain transactions can be used for other types of record keeping.

When dealing with the upcoming potential realization of this avenue, the wait and see approach may be the best option at this time.

The timing of the halving and the "supposed" risk of network difficulty adjustment has made things interesting.

Remember that in the code difficulty can go up 4x or down 4x the only question is how will transactions occur during that time? off-chain transactions may be a solution with out the added "core changes".

[Ibian]

...
Hmm... From what I know scaling bitcoin on the number of visa tx for example would need blocks of 80GB.
If you do it simply by rising block size.

I'll never be as smart as Einstein, so why bother going to school (or as Patient_Bear says, nirvana fallacy)...

Can someone explain why people are complaining about the ability to send any amount of money anywhere in the world in about an hour without having to ask a middleman for permission?

Because it used to be about ten minutes a few days ago, and going to be fucking impossible soon if this shit keeps up. Also middlemen. You'll need those too

Gonna have to explain that one a bit clearer.

Because transactions *did not* take "about an hour" a few weeks ago.
Because if you wish to use Bitcoin in the future, you will need to use "scaling solutions" like Lightning Network, which is basically*prepaid gift card, for every entity you wish to do business with, which uses Bitcoin as a settlement layer* (i think they call it "open a payment channel").
Would be glad to be more explicit, just ask specific questions.

But that's the techy side of it. The meat of it is that people are catching on to the fact that Bitcoin, like just about everything else, DEPENDS ON OUR TRUST IN PEOPLE. People at the top, people who are ambitious, egomanaical, corruptible. People who, without a clearly defined set of rules (laws) and an enforcement framework (jackbooted thugs) turn into spoiled children and can't be trusted.
People who would for stroking/paltry sums, will sell you out to the highest bidder.
Because rational self-interest.

What do you mean by a transaction? It's still instant, and confirms are as they always have been for me.

[Dotto]

Monero (+12%), Ethereum (+21%) and maidsafe consistently eating the cap cake.

Seem something could be changing in the ecosystem, stay tuned, biches

[Fatman3001]

Except if everyone else does it as well. Then you're stuck.

That is not how fee markets work , there are upper limits to how much spammers and users will spend on fees. My wallets adjust just fine and insure I always get in the next block. There is never a moment where I have to worry that my tx will time out within the new 72 hour mempool window.

You're right. That's not how it works. Because it doesn't. You're kicking other users off the network by paying higher fees. You're kicking out people who give the network value.

Of course you can get txs through. You're a programmer who's been reading BIPs and have been involved with the scaling debate.

But all those 0.0001 tx people who's shitting their pants because their $5K takes several hours to confirm; for them, the fee market doesn't work. Their txs aren't less important than yours. If they knew they would have to up that fee to 0.001, they would have done so.

Not changing the 1MB limit is an attack on Bitcoin. Not changing the 1MB limit is disruption. Not changing the limit is to rewrite what Bitcoin is. Not changing the 1MB limit is to change consensus.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation