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

[aztecminer]

i have to reindex the entire blockchain today. a feature of bitcoin. re-index your bloatchain every few months... guess we see how long it takes. .. this should affect the price bigtime today. aztecminer has reload bloatchain causes bitcoin to crash to new lows.

See the bright side: If we had bigger blocks, you'd need more time

yeah.. cuz i still got 22 weeks to go this morning. still syncing.

[aztecminer]

i have to reindex the entire blockchain today. a feature of bitcoin. re-index your bloatchain every few months... guess we see how long it takes. .. this should affect the price bigtime today. aztecminer has reload bloatchain causes bitcoin to crash to new lows.

See the bright side: If we had bigger blocks, you'd need more time

no one is using a full node for private bitcoin payments. either he seeks attention or he is retarded.

i'm not making any payments. I just want to see my cold storage wallet so i can see if i owe any taxes on mining . i know i quit mining early last year. my cold storage wallet has to load the bloatchain .

[aztecminer]

i have to reindex the entire blockchain today. a feature of bitcoin. re-index your bloatchain every few months... guess we see how long it takes. .. this should affect the price bigtime today. aztecminer has reload bloatchain causes bitcoin to crash to new lows.

See the bright side: If we had bigger blocks, you'd need more time

no one is using a full node for private bitcoin payments. either he seeks attention or he is retarded.

I only run bitcoin-qt myself.

that's what i am syncing. can see that in the screenshot. my cold storage runs on top of qt. not sure what he is talking about. i rarely even sync qt anymore.

[aztecminer]

i have to reindex the entire blockchain today. a feature of bitcoin. re-index your bloatchain every few months... guess we see how long it takes. .. this should affect the price bigtime today. aztecminer has reload bloatchain causes bitcoin to crash to new lows.

See the bright side: If we had bigger blocks, you'd need more time

no one is using a full node for private bitcoin payments. either he seeks attention or he is retarded.

     


Mr. Aztec has both things going for him....

He is both seeking attention and retarded, yet once in a while entertaining.  

See more at  gimpyaztec.com    

of course, the insults flow like his intelligence from #juanthegeeguy .... see more at: flouridecoatedbraindamaged.juanthegeeguy.com ... really juanthegeeguy just wants my attention .

[aztecminer]

[blablablablablabla]
Some of the data on that site make little sense to me, however.  I don't really understand how they are calculating average blocksize as compared with median blocksize, and why there would be a difference between those two concepts (except through their definition of such).
[blablablablablabla]

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/mean-median-average/

Hahahahahaha


I will admit that I had a brain fart, and for a moment, I was considering mean and median as the same.  

So, O.k.  I will agree that reviewing information about the median could be helpful to various analysis regarding whether there are block full problems and transaction time problems that are resulting from block fullness, and blockchain.info charts are providing the mean for blocksize, but so far, seem to not be providing the median.  At least, I have not found it, so far.

i think we all know it was more than just a brain fart.... it was more white matter disconnects and grey matter synaptic clipping. just last week juanthegeeguy claimed there were no bloatchain problems with blocks being full.. now he needs to review information .. lol . go jaun review real hard this time!

[aztecminer]

[blablablablablabla]
Some of the data on that site make little sense to me, however.  I don't really understand how they are calculating average blocksize as compared with median blocksize, and why there would be a difference between those two concepts (except through their definition of such).
[blablablablablabla]

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/mean-median-average/

Hahahahahaha


I will admit that I had a brain fart, and for a moment, I was considering mean and median as the same.  

So, O.k.  I will agree that reviewing information about the median could be helpful to various analysis regarding whether there are block full problems and transaction time problems that are resulting from block fullness, and blockchain.info charts are providing the mean for blocksize, but so far, seem to not be providing the median.  At least, I have not found it, so far.

There's lies, damn lies, and then there's statistics. Any statistician will tell you the average is an awful stone age measure, then start talking about mean, median, and standard deviation to decide whether the blocks are truly full or not. However if you can't get your transaction into a block for hours even with a good fee that's all you need to know.

if juans transaction took four days to complete he would still argue with you that everything is fine in #bizarroworld of bitcoin. ...

[xyzzy099]

i have to reindex the entire blockchain today. a feature of bitcoin. re-index your bloatchain every few months... guess we see how long it takes. .. this should affect the price bigtime today. aztecminer has reload bloatchain causes bitcoin to crash to new lows.

See the bright side: If we had bigger blocks, you'd need more time

no one is using a full node for private bitcoin payments. either he seeks attention or he is retarded.

I only run bitcoin-qt myself.

that's what i am syncing. can see that in the screenshot. my cold storage runs on top of qt. not sure what he is talking about. i rarely even sync qt anymore.

FWIW, if you upgrade your client to 0.12.0, it will re-sync considerably faster.

[JimboToronto]

Good morning Bitcoinland.

Still coiling. Movement imminent (hopefully).

[aztecminer]

i have to reindex the entire blockchain today. a feature of bitcoin. re-index your bloatchain every few months... guess we see how long it takes. .. this should affect the price bigtime today. aztecminer has reload bloatchain causes bitcoin to crash to new lows.

See the bright side: If we had bigger blocks, you'd need more time

no one is using a full node for private bitcoin payments. either he seeks attention or he is retarded.

I only run bitcoin-qt myself.

that's what i am syncing. can see that in the screenshot. my cold storage runs on top of qt. not sure what he is talking about. i rarely even sync qt anymore.

FWIW, if you upgrade your client to 0.12.0, it will re-sync considerably faster.

thanks for letting me know. i will upgrade. i have to upgrade two pcs. i need figure out if i can backup the bloatchain so i don't have to download it every time it freaks on monday mornings. i just upgraded my debit card to have the chip.. and next week i am having this silver coin in my pocket upgraded from v.999 to v.9991 which adds holographic capabilities.

[Tzupy]

Boring price action and off topic posts... I may as well post something off topic but interesting (launch of Pascal):
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10225/the-nvidia-gtc-2016-live-blog

[LFC_Bitcoin]

smells like lift-off

Are we sure it's ...safe?

Take it out for a test run Lamby my old friend, what's the worst that could happen?

[bargainbin]

...
Take it out for a test run Lamby my old friend, what's the worst that could happen?

CCMF?

In the shuffling madness Of the locomotive breath Runs the all-time loser Headlong to his death He feels the piston scraping Steam breaking on his brow Mark Karpeles stole the handle And the train it won't stop going No way to slow down Moooooo no! It hurts it hurts it hurt ouch no! Ouch ouch ouch ouch ouch ouch ouch NO! Moo ouch ouch No! Mooo!

[DeathAngel]

$421 boring action man. Somebody wake me up from hibernation if/when we hit $700 or something.

[JayJuanGee]

[blablablablablabla]
Some of the data on that site make little sense to me, however.  I don't really understand how they are calculating average blocksize as compared with median blocksize, and why there would be a difference between those two concepts (except through their definition of such).
[blablablablablabla]

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/mean-median-average/

Hahahahahaha


I will admit that I had a brain fart, and for a moment, I was considering mean and median as the same.  

So, O.k.  I will agree that reviewing information about the median could be helpful to various analysis regarding whether there are block full problems and transaction time problems that are resulting from block fullness, and blockchain.info charts are providing the mean for blocksize, but so far, seem to not be providing the median.  At least, I have not found it, so far.

i think we all know it was more than just a brain fart.... it was more white matter disconnects and grey matter synaptic clipping. just last week juanthegeeguy claimed there were no bloatchain problems with blocks being full.. now he needs to review information .. lol . go jaun review real hard this time!

It seems that you, Mr. Aztec, have some difficulties with reading comprehension.   


In my earlier comment, I conceded that I had not recognized the difference from median and mean in the referred to charts; however, I did not concede that there was any kind of meaningful blockchain fullness problem. 

I also conceded that looking at median blocksize information could potentially allow for various additional arguments regarding blocksize fullness, that may not be as meaningful by using mean blocksize information. 

None of my concessions imply that there is actually in existence convincing information concerning the extent to which some posters tend to argue about "emergency" blockchain fullness issues that would require immediate action beyond various currently ongoing seg wit considerations and later on potential blocksize limit increases that are being considered for sometime after the implementation of seg wit, such as potential blocksize limit increase considerations described in the HongKong agreement.

[JayJuanGee]

[blablablablablabla]
Some of the data on that site make little sense to me, however.  I don't really understand how they are calculating average blocksize as compared with median blocksize, and why there would be a difference between those two concepts (except through their definition of such).
[blablablablablabla]

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/mean-median-average/

Hahahahahaha


I will admit that I had a brain fart, and for a moment, I was considering mean and median as the same.  

So, O.k.  I will agree that reviewing information about the median could be helpful to various analysis regarding whether there are block full problems and transaction time problems that are resulting from block fullness, and blockchain.info charts are providing the mean for blocksize, but so far, seem to not be providing the median.  At least, I have not found it, so far.

There's lies, damn lies, and then there's statistics. Any statistician will tell you the average is an awful stone age measure, then start talking about mean, median, and standard deviation to decide whether the blocks are truly full or not. However if you can't get your transaction into a block for hours even with a good fee that's all you need to know.

if juans transaction took four days to complete he would still argue with you that everything is fine in #bizarroworld of bitcoin. ...

Yes, that is a big "IF".  

My transactions are not taking four days but tend to show up immediately and usually take less than an hour.  In early March, while the blocks were supposedly full, I sent out three transactions with varying fees, and the one with the highest fees (I recall it was $.04) took about 75 minutes to complete, and the two with the low to no fees ($.01 and $.001 respectively) took close to 10 hours to complete.

In other words, you are in a fantasy world, Mr. Aztec, and transactions do not appear to be taking anywhere near 4 days to complete, even when blocks are at their fullest...  and including some small token fees seems to help speed up transaction confirmations.
 

[Laosai]

$421 boring action man. Somebody wake me up from hibernation if/when we hit $700 or something.

Lol! Well I hope you get some time xD

[aztecminer]

[blablablablablabla]
Some of the data on that site make little sense to me, however.  I don't really understand how they are calculating average blocksize as compared with median blocksize, and why there would be a difference between those two concepts (except through their definition of such).
[blablablablablabla]

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/mean-median-average/

Hahahahahaha


I will admit that I had a brain fart, and for a moment, I was considering mean and median as the same.  

So, O.k.  I will agree that reviewing information about the median could be helpful to various analysis regarding whether there are block full problems and transaction time problems that are resulting from block fullness, and blockchain.info charts are providing the mean for blocksize, but so far, seem to not be providing the median.  At least, I have not found it, so far.

There's lies, damn lies, and then there's statistics. Any statistician will tell you the average is an awful stone age measure, then start talking about mean, median, and standard deviation to decide whether the blocks are truly full or not. However if you can't get your transaction into a block for hours even with a good fee that's all you need to know.

if juans transaction took four days to complete he would still argue with you that everything is fine in #bizarroworld of bitcoin. ...

Yes, that is a big "IF".  

My transactions are not taking four days but tend to show up immediately and usually take less than an hour.  In early March, while the blocks were supposedly full, I sent out three transactions with varying fees, and the one with the highest fees (I recall it was $.04) took about 75 minutes to complete, and the two with the low to no fees ($.01 and $.001 respectively) took close to 10 hours to complete.

In other words, you are in a fantasy world, Mr. Aztec, and transactions do not appear to be taking anywhere near 4 days to complete, even when blocks are at their fullest...  and including some small token fees seems to help speed up transaction confirmations.
 

yeah waiting over an hour for a payment to go through rocks.

[JayJuanGee]

[blablablablablabla]
Some of the data on that site make little sense to me, however.  I don't really understand how they are calculating average blocksize as compared with median blocksize, and why there would be a difference between those two concepts (except through their definition of such).
[blablablablablabla]

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/mean-median-average/

Hahahahahaha


I will admit that I had a brain fart, and for a moment, I was considering mean and median as the same.  

So, O.k.  I will agree that reviewing information about the median could be helpful to various analysis regarding whether there are block full problems and transaction time problems that are resulting from block fullness, and blockchain.info charts are providing the mean for blocksize, but so far, seem to not be providing the median.  At least, I have not found it, so far.

There's lies, damn lies, and then there's statistics. Any statistician will tell you the average is an awful stone age measure, then start talking about mean, median, and standard deviation to decide whether the blocks are truly full or not. However if you can't get your transaction into a block for hours even with a good fee that's all you need to know.

if juans transaction took four days to complete he would still argue with you that everything is fine in #bizarroworld of bitcoin. ...

Yes, that is a big "IF".  

My transactions are not taking four days but tend to show up immediately and usually take less than an hour.  In early March, while the blocks were supposedly full, I sent out three transactions with varying fees, and the one with the highest fees (I recall it was $.04) took about 75 minutes to complete, and the two with the low to no fees ($.01 and $.001 respectively) took close to 10 hours to complete.

In other words, you are in a fantasy world, Mr. Aztec, and transactions do not appear to be taking anywhere near 4 days to complete, even when blocks are at their fullest...  and including some small token fees seems to help speed up transaction confirmations.
 

yeah waiting over an hour for a payment to go through rocks.

Nothing wrong with that.  Bitcoin is in an interim stage of development, and we should not be expecting a 6 billion dollar market cap system to compete on the same level as various centralized credit card and other centralized payment systems (in terms of speed).. in these early and expansive days of bitcoin and its various systems.  


And, even so, these days, it seems that bitcoin is allowing a lot of value transfer, control and storage of value in ways that would be extremely expensive and even slow for final confirmation in many instances with traditional payment systems.

A couple of weeks ago, I sent 80 bitcoins (price at the time $416  - therefore $33,280), and it took about 7 minutes to be confirmed, and I was able to use the money in less than 30 minutes.  I did not do anything special on that occasion, and the standard fee was .000187 BTC  (almost $.08).   Personally, I find that transaction to be quite amazing in comparison to any other payment system (and largely decentralized in this circumstance).  

My earlier March tests of three transactions (while the blocks were supposedly full) that took 75 minutes, and nearly 10 hours for the other two, were fairly small level transactions (a little more than $1), and those transaction times and fees were acceptable, as well, yet would depend on use case, whether faster confirmation would be preferred or lower fees would be expected...

Bitcoin is not anywhere near broken, and a lot of further innovations are in the soon-to-be implemented pipeline... this year, and maybe more next year.   So, you FUCD spreaders seem to becoming less and less persuasive with your lame assertions of "emergency" and or to make supposed "brokenness of bitcoin" cries.

[JayJuanGee]

$421 boring action man. Somebody wake me up from hibernation if/when we hit $700 or something.

Even in the best-case scenarios, $700 is going to be a while... Maybe 4 months or longer....?


I would think that if we get into the $480s (and possibly into the $470s would be sufficient), then it is very likely that we would be able to experience the $600s within that same price run... and the $700s seem to be quite a longer shot, especially without some correction (profit-taking) period, first.. which could cause several months of delay... but really, I would like to be wrong, and it does seem difficult to deny that bitcoin is due for some kind of upwards price explosion... I just fear that getting into the $800s would likely require movement to a new ATH (and we may not be quite ready for that, yet?).

[brg444]

$421 boring action man. Somebody wake me up from hibernation if/when we hit $700 or something.

Even in the best-case scenarios, $700 is going to be a while... Maybe 4 months or longer....?


I would think that if we get into the $480s (and possibly into the $470s would be sufficient), then it is very likely that we would be able to experience the $600s within that same price run... and the $700s seem to be quite a longer shot, especially without some correction (profit-taking) period, first.. which could cause several months of delay... but really, I would like to be wrong, and it does seem difficult to deny that bitcoin is due for some kind of upwards price explosion... I just fear that getting into the $800s would likely require movement to a new ATH (and we may not be quite ready for that, yet?).

680 is next stop