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

[DaRude]

Small blockists are killing Bitcoin.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

Which fee should I use?

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 40 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 226 bytes, this results in a fee of 9,040 satoshis (0.03$).

It's short-sighted.

What is important is not today but the future.

VC and price speculator think ahead and they don't like what they see.

Currently block space is perfectly inelastic, that's scary. In due time, this will cause a dramatic rise in fees and delays, and a decrease in demand. That's how the market deal with shortage: prices, delays and lowering of the demand.

Already see a shop in a communist country? Well the same will happen in Bitcoin.

The future is bleak. Everyone with an economic focused brain understand that. Meanwhile small blockists congratulated themselves because fees are low today.

What's important is to keep it as decentralized as possible without F'ing up. The true use case is still pretty low and adoption has slowed a bit. Segwit and 2mb fork are in the works, even if we have an explosive natural growth next few months worst case i'm willing to pay $0.06 for a transaction instead of $0.03 when the blocks get crowded

On what data relies your assumption that an increase in blocksize will decrease decentralization?

Why decentralization is more important than network survival?

Why do you think you will be able to defeat an economic shortage by paying more?

So much question that you won't be able too answer.

How about first you prove me that pushing that lever will NOT fuck things up? You know stuff that engineers do, and not, well, we can't conclusively prove to a 100% that it will blow up so fuck it lets try it and see what happens.

Silly whabit because if there's one thing everyone (except for you?) can agree on is that there is no survival without decentralization. This would be a horrifically ineffective paypal#2

Think i was able TO answer no?

[DaRude]

Small blockists are killing Bitcoin.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

Which fee should I use?

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 40 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 226 bytes, this results in a fee of 9,040 satoshis (0.03$).

It's short-sighted.

What is important is not today but the future.

In the future there'll be more capacity to satisfy actual txs (not spammy near-zero cost txs). That much is a given.

Yeah... frequently there are these quasi abstract criticisms suggesting that core is not looking into the future enough... but really?

You gotta walk before you run, and segwit seems to be the next best step, and there seems to be no real question that there will be timely scaling.. and yeah, if there were a real and actual emergency, some kind of actual blocksize limit could be implemented.  

The assertion of  emergency has been exaggerated.

"quasi abstract"

Yes some people are thinking while other are just parroting what their superior in the engineering pecking order told them.

Gee lets see technological fuck up could be catastrophic on a $6B market, but sure lets rush it in to solve that non yet existing problem that may potentially come a bit sooner than expected through this explosive organic growth in next few months, and make everyone pay few cents more  

Technological fuck up?

2MB increase is safer than SegWit (way less complexities).

On the contrary an economic fuck up is looming. All small blockists are in deny regarding that's problem. The clock is ticking but no need to panick, it's already too late.

Ohhh no!! Are you saying that bitcoin is dead? http://bitcoinobituaries.com/

[Fatman3001]

Small blockists are killing Bitcoin.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

Which fee should I use?

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 40 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 226 bytes, this results in a fee of 9,040 satoshis (0.03$).

It's short-sighted.

What is important is not today but the future.

VC and price speculator think ahead and they don't like what they see.

Currently block space is perfectly inelastic, that's scary. In due time, this will cause a dramatic rise in fees and delays, and a decrease in demand. That's how the market deal with shortage: prices, delays and lowering of the demand.

Already see a shop in a communist country? Well the same will happen in Bitcoin.

The future is bleak. Everyone with an economic focused brain understand that. Meanwhile small blockists congratulated themselves because fees are low today.

What's important is to keep it as decentralized as possible without F'ing up. The true use case is still pretty low and adoption has slowed a bit. Segwit and 2mb fork are in the works, even if we have an explosive natural growth next few months worst case i'm willing to pay $0.06 for a transaction instead of $0.03 when the blocks get crowded

On what data relies your assumption that an increase in blocksize will decrease decentralization?

Why decentralization is more important than network survival?

Why do you think you will be able to defeat an economic shortage by paying more?

So much question that you won't be able too answer.

How about first you prove me that pushing that lever will NOT fuck things up? You know stuff that engineers do, and not, well, we can't conclusively prove to a 100% that it will blow up so fuck it lets try it and see what happens.

Silly whabit because if there's one thing everyone (except for you?) can agree on is that there is no survival without decentralization. This would be a horrifically ineffective paypal#2

Think i was able TO answer no?

To have decentralization you need to add enough value to the network to keep competitive forces alive. Right now BTC is one of the most centralized cryptos out there. The decision to go for Core instead of Classic was made in a small conference room in HK by a handful of people who clearly don't give a flying fudge about decentralization. Stagnation leads to centralization.

[JayJuanGee]

Small blockists are killing Bitcoin.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

Which fee should I use?

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 40 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 226 bytes, this results in a fee of 9,040 satoshis (0.03$).

It's short-sighted.

What is important is not today but the future.

In the future there'll be more capacity to satisfy actual txs (not spammy near-zero cost txs). That much is a given.

Yeah... frequently there are these quasi abstract criticisms suggesting that core is not looking into the future enough... but really?

You gotta walk before you run, and segwit seems to be the next best step, and there seems to be no real question that there will be timely scaling.. and yeah, if there were a real and actual emergency, some kind of actual blocksize limit could be implemented.  

The assertion of  emergency has been exaggerated.

"quasi abstract"

Yes some people are thinking while other are just parroting what their superior in the engineering pecking order told them.

Gee lets see technological fuck up could be catastrophic on a $6B market, but sure lets rush it in to solve that non yet existing problem that may potentially come a bit sooner than expected through this explosive organic growth in next few months, and make everyone pay few cents more  

Technological fuck up?

2MB increase is safer than SegWit (way less complexities).

For some reason, I had thought that you were reasonable bidswtTrs, and continuing with loony and fantastical speculations.

The practical of the matter is that Segwit is agreed to, while 2mb increase is not... Therefore, segwit comes first.... why do some people keep whining about matters that are pretty much already settled.  Neither XT nor classic were able to achieve support, so they are currently dead (or pretty close to being dead - except for the ongoing whining of people about make believe shit).

On the contrary an economic fuck up is looming.

Yeah right.  We are going to crash our way up to the mid $600s, and transactions are going to continue.. maybe they will take 10 minutes rather than 6 minutes, and maybe cost up to $.10, to the extent that folks want to prioritize them.

All small blockists are in deny regarding that's problem.

What's the denial, there is a lacking of any evidence of any major problem.. the only problem that I see are various folks whining and exaggerating about non-existing problems.

The clock is ticking but no need to panick, it's already too late.

It's not too late.... Things are fine.  Both XT and Classic attempted to create artificial deadlines in order to cause an emergency.. but almost all of that was fabricated, but some folks want to keep attempting to suggest an emergency in order to save face for supporting the ideas behind those two fake proposals.

[BldSwtTrs]

Small blockists are killing Bitcoin.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

Which fee should I use?

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 40 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 226 bytes, this results in a fee of 9,040 satoshis (0.03$).

It's short-sighted.

What is important is not today but the future.

In the future there'll be more capacity to satisfy actual txs (not spammy near-zero cost txs). That much is a given.

Yeah... frequently there are these quasi abstract criticisms suggesting that core is not looking into the future enough... but really?

You gotta walk before you run, and segwit seems to be the next best step, and there seems to be no real question that there will be timely scaling.. and yeah, if there were a real and actual emergency, some kind of actual blocksize limit could be implemented.  

The assertion of  emergency has been exaggerated.

"quasi abstract"

Yes some people are thinking while other are just parroting what their superior in the engineering pecking order told them.

well hopefully you can keep some sense of humor about this, but I put myself in the group of thinkers, rather than parrots.  

I gather that you already understand the idea of Quasi-abstract, but are having fun with my description choice.

I don't buy your assumption of inelastic supply, and especially your assumption that some kind of tragedy is going to come from a few more months or even years delay in scaling.. I think that there is enough in the pipeline and development to keep us busy for a while, and this baby is likely going to go up in price, even if some folks continue to suggest that there are tragic emergencies (which I believe are much more imaginary rather than real.. so therefore, they sound good in theory, but are not as big of an issue as they are made out to be by the hypers).  Lot's of great work is continuing to be done by coders, miners, developers and lots of folks in this space.  

Inelastic supply is not an assumption, it's a fact.

With a blocksize limit enforced at the protocol level there is nothing that can be done to increase the blockspace supply. Not even paying more, not even waiting. It's the textbook definition of a shortage. Usually shortage only happen in communist countries.

Bitcoin have become porn for computer geeks "But developers are developing, it's going to be awesome!". No doubt they are very going at coding, at congratulating each other about how good they are at coding, and at gathering a crowd of fanboys ecstatic about their coding ability. I have some serious doubt about their ability to ancipate real world problems and deliver functionnal solutions though.

[JayJuanGee]

Small blockists are killing Bitcoin.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

Which fee should I use?

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 40 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 226 bytes, this results in a fee of 9,040 satoshis (0.03$).

It's short-sighted.

What is important is not today but the future.

VC and price speculator think ahead and they don't like what they see.

Currently block space is perfectly inelastic, that's scary. In due time, this will cause a dramatic rise in fees and delays, and a decrease in demand. That's how the market deal with shortage: prices, delays and lowering of the demand.

Already see a shop in a communist country? Well the same will happen in Bitcoin.

The future is bleak. Everyone with an economic focused brain understand that. Meanwhile small blockists congratulated themselves because fees are low today.

What's important is to keep it as decentralized as possible without F'ing up. The true use case is still pretty low and adoption has slowed a bit. Segwit and 2mb fork are in the works, even if we have an explosive natural growth next few months worst case i'm willing to pay $0.06 for a transaction instead of $0.03 when the blocks get crowded

On what data relies your assumption that an increase in blocksize will decrease decentralization?

Why decentralization is more important than network survival?

Why do you think you will be able to defeat an economic shortage by paying more?

So much question that you won't be able too answer.

How about first you prove me that pushing that lever will NOT fuck things up? You know stuff that engineers do, and not, well, we can't conclusively prove to a 100% that it will blow up so fuck it lets try it and see what happens.

Silly whabit because if there's one thing everyone (except for you?) can agree on is that there is no survival without decentralization. This would be a horrifically ineffective paypal#2

Think i was able TO answer no?

To have decentralization you need to add enough value to the network to keep competitive forces alive. Right now BTC is one of the most centralized cryptos out there. The decision to go for Core instead of Classic was made in a small conference room in HK by a handful of people who clearly don't give a flying fudge about decentralization. Stagnation leads to centralization.

Yes. Let's just argue that Black is white.      

[BldSwtTrs]

Small blockists are killing Bitcoin.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

Which fee should I use?

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 40 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 226 bytes, this results in a fee of 9,040 satoshis (0.03$).

It's short-sighted.

What is important is not today but the future.

VC and price speculator think ahead and they don't like what they see.

Currently block space is perfectly inelastic, that's scary. In due time, this will cause a dramatic rise in fees and delays, and a decrease in demand. That's how the market deal with shortage: prices, delays and lowering of the demand.

Already see a shop in a communist country? Well the same will happen in Bitcoin.

The future is bleak. Everyone with an economic focused brain understand that. Meanwhile small blockists congratulated themselves because fees are low today.

What's important is to keep it as decentralized as possible without F'ing up. The true use case is still pretty low and adoption has slowed a bit. Segwit and 2mb fork are in the works, even if we have an explosive natural growth next few months worst case i'm willing to pay $0.06 for a transaction instead of $0.03 when the blocks get crowded

On what data relies your assumption that an increase in blocksize will decrease decentralization?

Why decentralization is more important than network survival?

Why do you think you will be able to defeat an economic shortage by paying more?

So much question that you won't be able too answer.

How about first you prove me that pushing that lever will NOT fuck things up? You know stuff that engineers do, and not, well, we can't conclusively prove to a 100% that it will blow up so fuck it lets try it and see what happens.

Silly whabit because if there's one thing everyone (except for you?) can agree on is that there is no survival without decentralization. This would be a horrifically ineffective paypal#2

Think i was able TO answer no?

Even Maxwell have said that 2Mb is safe for the network. You seem ill-informed.

[Fatman3001]

Small blockists are killing Bitcoin.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

Which fee should I use?

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 40 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 226 bytes, this results in a fee of 9,040 satoshis (0.03$).

It's short-sighted.

What is important is not today but the future.

In the future there'll be more capacity to satisfy actual txs (not spammy near-zero cost txs). That much is a given.

Yeah... frequently there are these quasi abstract criticisms suggesting that core is not looking into the future enough... but really?

You gotta walk before you run, and segwit seems to be the next best step, and there seems to be no real question that there will be timely scaling.. and yeah, if there were a real and actual emergency, some kind of actual blocksize limit could be implemented.  

The assertion of  emergency has been exaggerated.

"quasi abstract"

Yes some people are thinking while other are just parroting what their superior in the engineering pecking order told them.

Gee lets see technological fuck up could be catastrophic on a $6B market, but sure lets rush it in to solve that non yet existing problem that may potentially come a bit sooner than expected through this explosive organic growth in next few months, and make everyone pay few cents more  

Technological fuck up?

2MB increase is safer than SegWit (way less complexities).

On the contrary an economic fuck up is looming. All small blockists are in deny regarding that's problem. The clock is ticking but no need to panick, it's already too late.

Yup, I'm expecting a purely speculation driven pump soon. If Segwit and LN isn't ready by the time that bubble bursts I fear Bitcoin will lose its place in crypto. I hope these small block retards haven't diversified by then. But it looks like most of them are Monero shills anyhow.

[Fatman3001]

Small blockists are killing Bitcoin.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

Which fee should I use?

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 40 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 226 bytes, this results in a fee of 9,040 satoshis (0.03$).

It's short-sighted.

What is important is not today but the future.

VC and price speculator think ahead and they don't like what they see.

Currently block space is perfectly inelastic, that's scary. In due time, this will cause a dramatic rise in fees and delays, and a decrease in demand. That's how the market deal with shortage: prices, delays and lowering of the demand.

Already see a shop in a communist country? Well the same will happen in Bitcoin.

The future is bleak. Everyone with an economic focused brain understand that. Meanwhile small blockists congratulated themselves because fees are low today.

What's important is to keep it as decentralized as possible without F'ing up. The true use case is still pretty low and adoption has slowed a bit. Segwit and 2mb fork are in the works, even if we have an explosive natural growth next few months worst case i'm willing to pay $0.06 for a transaction instead of $0.03 when the blocks get crowded

On what data relies your assumption that an increase in blocksize will decrease decentralization?

Why decentralization is more important than network survival?

Why do you think you will be able to defeat an economic shortage by paying more?

So much question that you won't be able too answer.

How about first you prove me that pushing that lever will NOT fuck things up? You know stuff that engineers do, and not, well, we can't conclusively prove to a 100% that it will blow up so fuck it lets try it and see what happens.

Silly whabit because if there's one thing everyone (except for you?) can agree on is that there is no survival without decentralization. This would be a horrifically ineffective paypal#2

Think i was able TO answer no?

To have decentralization you need to add enough value to the network to keep competitive forces alive. Right now BTC is one of the most centralized cryptos out there. The decision to go for Core instead of Classic was made in a small conference room in HK by a handful of people who clearly don't give a flying fudge about decentralization. Stagnation leads to centralization.

Yes. Let's just argue that Black is white.      

I neither expressed surprise at this resolution nor attempted to dissuade her from it. "The vocation will fit you to a hair," I thought: "much good may it do you!"

When we parted, she said: "Good-bye, cousin Jane Eyre; I wish you well: you have some sense."

I then returned: "You are not without sense, cousin Eliza; but what you have, I suppose, in another year will be walled up alive in a French convent. However, it is not my business, and so it suits you, I don't much care."

"You are in the right," said she; and with these words we each went our separate way. As I shall not have occasion to refer either to her or her sister again, I may as well mention here, that Georgiana made an advantageous match with a wealthy worn-out man of fashion, and that Eliza actually took the veil, and is at this day superior of the convent where she passed the period of her novitiate, and which she endowed with her fortune.

How people feel when they are returning home from an absence, long or short, I did not know: I had never experienced the sensation. I had known what it was to come back to Gateshead when a child after a long walk, to be scolded for looking cold or gloomy; and later, what it was to come back from church to Lowood, to long for a plenteous meal and a good fire, and to be unable to get either. Neither of these returnings was very pleasant or desirable: no magnet drew me to a given point, increasing in its strength of attraction the nearer I came. The return to Thornfield was yet to be tried.

My journey seemed tedious--very tedious: fifty miles one day, a night spent at an inn; fifty miles the next day. During the first twelve hours I thought of Mrs. Reed in her last moments; I saw her disfigured and discoloured face, and heard her strangely altered voice. I mused on the funeral day, the coffin, the hearse, the black train of tenants and servants--few was the number of relatives--the gaping vault, the silent church, the solemn service. Then I thought of Eliza and Georgiana; I beheld one the cynosure of a ball-room, the other the inmate of a convent cell; and I dwelt on and analysed their separate peculiarities of person and character. The evening arrival at the great town of--scattered these thoughts; night gave them quite another turn: laid down on my traveller's bed, I left reminiscence for anticipation.

I was going back to Thornfield: but how long was I to stay there? Not long; of that I was sure. I had heard from Mrs. Fairfax in the interim of my absence: the party at the hall was dispersed; Mr. Rochester had left for London three weeks ago, but he was then expected to return in a fortnight. Mrs. Fairfax surmised that he was gone to make arrangements for his wedding, as he had talked of purchasing a new carriage: she said the idea of his marrying Miss Ingram still seemed strange to her; but from what everybody said, and from what she had herself seen, she could no longer doubt that the event would shortly take place. "You would be strangely incredulous if you did doubt it," was my mental comment. "I don't doubt it."

[JayJuanGee]

Small blockists are killing Bitcoin.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

Which fee should I use?

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 40 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 226 bytes, this results in a fee of 9,040 satoshis (0.03$).

It's short-sighted.

What is important is not today but the future.

In the future there'll be more capacity to satisfy actual txs (not spammy near-zero cost txs). That much is a given.

Yeah... frequently there are these quasi abstract criticisms suggesting that core is not looking into the future enough... but really?

You gotta walk before you run, and segwit seems to be the next best step, and there seems to be no real question that there will be timely scaling.. and yeah, if there were a real and actual emergency, some kind of actual blocksize limit could be implemented.  

The assertion of  emergency has been exaggerated.

"quasi abstract"

Yes some people are thinking while other are just parroting what their superior in the engineering pecking order told them.

well hopefully you can keep some sense of humor about this, but I put myself in the group of thinkers, rather than parrots.  

I gather that you already understand the idea of Quasi-abstract, but are having fun with my description choice.

I don't buy your assumption of inelastic supply, and especially your assumption that some kind of tragedy is going to come from a few more months or even years delay in scaling.. I think that there is enough in the pipeline and development to keep us busy for a while, and this baby is likely going to go up in price, even if some folks continue to suggest that there are tragic emergencies (which I believe are much more imaginary rather than real.. so therefore, they sound good in theory, but are not as big of an issue as they are made out to be by the hypers).  Lot's of great work is continuing to be done by coders, miners, developers and lots of folks in this space.  

Inelastic supply is not an assumption, it's a fact.

With a blocksize limit enforced at the protocol level there is nothing that can be done to increase the blockspace supply. Not even paying more, not even waiting. It's the textbook definition of a shortage. Usually shortage only happen in communist countries.

Bitcoin have become porn for computer geeks "But developers are developing, it's going to be awesome!". No doubt they are very going at coding, at congratulating each other about how good they are at coding, and at gathering a crowd of fanboys ecstatic about their coding ability. I have some serious doubt about their ability to ancipate real world problems and deliver functionnal solutions though.

They are doing a good job, and this is not apples, it is internet.... the supply moves along with demand to cause more elasticity than you assume and fees adjust or waiting time adjusts... It will all work out because there are major developments in the pipeline, and if we have some time periods of bottle necking, that is much better, as Darude also suggests, to implement matters with thought and preservation and testing rather than to just throw it out there willy nilly....

You keep suggesting to assume a problem, and the actual evidence does not support such problem that you want us to assume.

[BldSwtTrs]

For some reason, I had thought that you were reasonable bidswtTrs, and continuing with loony and fantastical speculations.

The practical of the matter is that Segwit is agreed to, while 2mb increase is not... Therefore, segwit comes first.... why do some people keep whining about matters that are pretty much already settled.  Neither XT nor classic were able to achieve support, so they are currently dead (or pretty close to being dead - except for the ongoing whining of people about make believe shit).

Not whinning. I destroy the argument that 2Mb may cause a technological fuck up.

SegWit is way riskier than 2Mb, so the argument is nonsensical.

Yeah right.  We are going to crash our way up to the mid $600s, and transactions are going to continue.. maybe they will take 10 minutes rather than 6 minutes, and maybe cost up to $.10, to the extent that folks want to prioritize them.

That's an assumption.

What's the denial, there is a lacking of any evidence of any major problem.. the only problem that I see are various folks whining and exaggerating about non-existing problems.

Smart people think ahead.

It's not too late.... Things are fine.  Both XT and Classic attempted to create artificial deadlines in order to cause an emergency.. but almost all of that was fabricated, but some folks want to keep attempting to suggest an emergency in order to save face for supporting the ideas behind those two fake proposals.

Things are fine until they are not.

[JayJuanGee]

Small blockists are killing Bitcoin.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

Which fee should I use?

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 40 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 226 bytes, this results in a fee of 9,040 satoshis (0.03$).

It's short-sighted.

What is important is not today but the future.

VC and price speculator think ahead and they don't like what they see.

Currently block space is perfectly inelastic, that's scary. In due time, this will cause a dramatic rise in fees and delays, and a decrease in demand. That's how the market deal with shortage: prices, delays and lowering of the demand.

Already see a shop in a communist country? Well the same will happen in Bitcoin.

The future is bleak. Everyone with an economic focused brain understand that. Meanwhile small blockists congratulated themselves because fees are low today.

What's important is to keep it as decentralized as possible without F'ing up. The true use case is still pretty low and adoption has slowed a bit. Segwit and 2mb fork are in the works, even if we have an explosive natural growth next few months worst case i'm willing to pay $0.06 for a transaction instead of $0.03 when the blocks get crowded

On what data relies your assumption that an increase in blocksize will decrease decentralization?

Why decentralization is more important than network survival?

Why do you think you will be able to defeat an economic shortage by paying more?

So much question that you won't be able too answer.

How about first you prove me that pushing that lever will NOT fuck things up? You know stuff that engineers do, and not, well, we can't conclusively prove to a 100% that it will blow up so fuck it lets try it and see what happens.

Silly whabit because if there's one thing everyone (except for you?) can agree on is that there is no survival without decentralization. This would be a horrifically ineffective paypal#2

Think i was able TO answer no?

To have decentralization you need to add enough value to the network to keep competitive forces alive. Right now BTC is one of the most centralized cryptos out there. The decision to go for Core instead of Classic was made in a small conference room in HK by a handful of people who clearly don't give a flying fudge about decentralization. Stagnation leads to centralization.

Yes. Let's just argue that Black is white.      

I neither expressed surprise at this resolution nor attempted to dissuade her from it. "The vocation will fit you to a hair," I thought: "much good may it do you!"

When we parted, she said: "Good-bye, cousin Jane Eyre; I wish you well: you have some sense."

I then returned: "You are not without sense, cousin Eliza; but what you have, I suppose, in another year will be walled up alive in a French convent. However, it is not my business, and so it suits you, I don't much care."

"You are in the right," said she; and with these words we each went our separate way. As I shall not have occasion to refer either to her or her sister again, I may as well mention here, that Georgiana made an advantageous match with a wealthy worn-out man of fashion, and that Eliza actually took the veil, and is at this day superior of the convent where she passed the period of her novitiate, and which she endowed with her fortune.

How people feel when they are returning home from an absence, long or short, I did not know: I had never experienced the sensation. I had known what it was to come back to Gateshead when a child after a long walk, to be scolded for looking cold or gloomy; and later, what it was to come back from church to Lowood, to long for a plenteous meal and a good fire, and to be unable to get either. Neither of these returnings was very pleasant or desirable: no magnet drew me to a given point, increasing in its strength of attraction the nearer I came. The return to Thornfield was yet to be tried.

My journey seemed tedious--very tedious: fifty miles one day, a night spent at an inn; fifty miles the next day. During the first twelve hours I thought of Mrs. Reed in her last moments; I saw her disfigured and discoloured face, and heard her strangely altered voice. I mused on the funeral day, the coffin, the hearse, the black train of tenants and servants--few was the number of relatives--the gaping vault, the silent church, the solemn service. Then I thought of Eliza and Georgiana; I beheld one the cynosure of a ball-room, the other the inmate of a convent cell; and I dwelt on and analysed their separate peculiarities of person and character. The evening arrival at the great town of--scattered these thoughts; night gave them quite another turn: laid down on my traveller's bed, I left reminiscence for anticipation.

I was going back to Thornfield: but how long was I to stay there? Not long; of that I was sure. I had heard from Mrs. Fairfax in the interim of my absence: the party at the hall was dispersed; Mr. Rochester had left for London three weeks ago, but he was then expected to return in a fortnight. Mrs. Fairfax surmised that he was gone to make arrangements for his wedding, as he had talked of purchasing a new carriage: she said the idea of his marrying Miss Ingram still seemed strange to her; but from what everybody said, and from what she had herself seen, she could no longer doubt that the event would shortly take place. "You would be strangely incredulous if you did doubt it," was my mental comment. "I don't doubt it."

Yeah, very scholarly to cut and paste some non-sense, which could possibly make more sense than if you had chosen your own words to explain whatever it is that you want to say.

[mymenace]

Wall Observer

http://bitcoincharts.com/markets/bitstampUSD_depth.html

that's a nice wall, I like that wall

[BldSwtTrs]

Small blockists are killing Bitcoin.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

Which fee should I use?

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 40 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 226 bytes, this results in a fee of 9,040 satoshis (0.03$).

It's short-sighted.

What is important is not today but the future.

In the future there'll be more capacity to satisfy actual txs (not spammy near-zero cost txs). That much is a given.

Yeah... frequently there are these quasi abstract criticisms suggesting that core is not looking into the future enough... but really?

You gotta walk before you run, and segwit seems to be the next best step, and there seems to be no real question that there will be timely scaling.. and yeah, if there were a real and actual emergency, some kind of actual blocksize limit could be implemented.  

The assertion of  emergency has been exaggerated.

"quasi abstract"

Yes some people are thinking while other are just parroting what their superior in the engineering pecking order told them.

well hopefully you can keep some sense of humor about this, but I put myself in the group of thinkers, rather than parrots.  

I gather that you already understand the idea of Quasi-abstract, but are having fun with my description choice.

I don't buy your assumption of inelastic supply, and especially your assumption that some kind of tragedy is going to come from a few more months or even years delay in scaling.. I think that there is enough in the pipeline and development to keep us busy for a while, and this baby is likely going to go up in price, even if some folks continue to suggest that there are tragic emergencies (which I believe are much more imaginary rather than real.. so therefore, they sound good in theory, but are not as big of an issue as they are made out to be by the hypers).  Lot's of great work is continuing to be done by coders, miners, developers and lots of folks in this space.  

Inelastic supply is not an assumption, it's a fact.

With a blocksize limit enforced at the protocol level there is nothing that can be done to increase the blockspace supply. Not even paying more, not even waiting. It's the textbook definition of a shortage. Usually shortage only happen in communist countries.

Bitcoin have become porn for computer geeks "But developers are developing, it's going to be awesome!". No doubt they are very going at coding, at congratulating each other about how good they are at coding, and at gathering a crowd of fanboys ecstatic about their coding ability. I have some serious doubt about their ability to ancipate real world problems and deliver functionnal solutions though.

They are doing a good job, and this is not apples, it is internet.... the supply moves along with demand to cause more elasticity than you assume and fees adjust or waiting time adjusts... It will all work out because there are major developments in the pipeline, and if we have some time periods of bottle necking, that is much better, as Darude also suggests, to implement matters with thought and preservation and testing rather than to just throw it out there willy nilly....

You keep suggesting to assume a problem, and the actual evidence does not support such problem that you want us to assume.

No offense but you are an economic illiterate (we have all weak spot, myself I am bad at computer science and coding).

What you are saying about supply moving along with demand makes no sense whatsoever in the context of the blocksize limit. You don't understand what perfectly inelastic means, it means fixed with no way to moving it. In order to learn you first need to understand what you know and what you don't know.

[JayJuanGee]

For some reason, I had thought that you were reasonable bidswtTrs, and continuing with loony and fantastical speculations.

The practical of the matter is that Segwit is agreed to, while 2mb increase is not... Therefore, segwit comes first.... why do some people keep whining about matters that are pretty much already settled.  Neither XT nor classic were able to achieve support, so they are currently dead (or pretty close to being dead - except for the ongoing whining of people about make believe shit).

Not whinning. I destroy the argument that 2Mb may cause a technological fuck up.

SegWit is way riskier than 2Mb, so the argument is nonsensical.

Yeah right.  We are going to crash our way up to the mid $600s, and transactions are going to continue.. maybe they will take 10 minutes rather than 6 minutes, and maybe cost up to $.10, to the extent that folks want to prioritize them.

That's an assumption.

What's the denial, there is a lacking of any evidence of any major problem.. the only problem that I see are various folks whining and exaggerating about non-existing problems.

Smart people think ahead.

It's not too late.... Things are fine.  Both XT and Classic attempted to create artificial deadlines in order to cause an emergency.. but almost all of that was fabricated, but some folks want to keep attempting to suggest an emergency in order to save face for supporting the ideas behind those two fake proposals.

Things are fine until they are not.

Looks like we disagree.  Maybe down the road we can revisit this subject to see how varlous developments work out. 

I have confidence in the current path that seems to be in the works, and you seem to not have confidence in such current path...

In either case, the current path continues to be a work in progress anyhow, even though you may be suggesting that it is stagnant or needs some urgent adjustments... I disagree, and in the end, we will probably see how some of these matters play out in the coming months.... doesn't seem to be over.... so to be continued..   

[DaRude]

Small blockists are killing Bitcoin.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

Which fee should I use?

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 40 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 226 bytes, this results in a fee of 9,040 satoshis (0.03$).

It's short-sighted.

What is important is not today but the future.

VC and price speculator think ahead and they don't like what they see.

Currently block space is perfectly inelastic, that's scary. In due time, this will cause a dramatic rise in fees and delays, and a decrease in demand. That's how the market deal with shortage: prices, delays and lowering of the demand.

Already see a shop in a communist country? Well the same will happen in Bitcoin.

The future is bleak. Everyone with an economic focused brain understand that. Meanwhile small blockists congratulated themselves because fees are low today.

What's important is to keep it as decentralized as possible without F'ing up. The true use case is still pretty low and adoption has slowed a bit. Segwit and 2mb fork are in the works, even if we have an explosive natural growth next few months worst case i'm willing to pay $0.06 for a transaction instead of $0.03 when the blocks get crowded

On what data relies your assumption that an increase in blocksize will decrease decentralization?

Why decentralization is more important than network survival?

Why do you think you will be able to defeat an economic shortage by paying more?

So much question that you won't be able too answer.

How about first you prove me that pushing that lever will NOT fuck things up? You know stuff that engineers do, and not, well, we can't conclusively prove to a 100% that it will blow up so fuck it lets try it and see what happens.

Silly whabit because if there's one thing everyone (except for you?) can agree on is that there is no survival without decentralization. This would be a horrifically ineffective paypal#2

Think i was able TO answer no?

Even Maxwell have said that 2Mb is safe for the network. You seem ill-informed.

As been mentioned countless times, it's not a binary GOOD/BAD outcome, but a sliding scale. Bigger blocks lead to more centralization, that's a fact. Thus the argument is not if it's safe or not but rather how much worse will it be, that's the part that's debatable. And like you said worst case if BTC all of the sudden becomes a world currency reserve and banks are fighting for a space in a block i'm thinking it wouldn't take too long to swap a 1 for a 2 in the code

[Fatman3001]

Small blockists are killing Bitcoin.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

Which fee should I use?

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 40 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 226 bytes, this results in a fee of 9,040 satoshis (0.03$).

It's short-sighted.

What is important is not today but the future.

VC and price speculator think ahead and they don't like what they see.

Currently block space is perfectly inelastic, that's scary. In due time, this will cause a dramatic rise in fees and delays, and a decrease in demand. That's how the market deal with shortage: prices, delays and lowering of the demand.

Already see a shop in a communist country? Well the same will happen in Bitcoin.

The future is bleak. Everyone with an economic focused brain understand that. Meanwhile small blockists congratulated themselves because fees are low today.

What's important is to keep it as decentralized as possible without F'ing up. The true use case is still pretty low and adoption has slowed a bit. Segwit and 2mb fork are in the works, even if we have an explosive natural growth next few months worst case i'm willing to pay $0.06 for a transaction instead of $0.03 when the blocks get crowded

On what data relies your assumption that an increase in blocksize will decrease decentralization?

Why decentralization is more important than network survival?

Why do you think you will be able to defeat an economic shortage by paying more?

So much question that you won't be able too answer.

How about first you prove me that pushing that lever will NOT fuck things up? You know stuff that engineers do, and not, well, we can't conclusively prove to a 100% that it will blow up so fuck it lets try it and see what happens.

Silly whabit because if there's one thing everyone (except for you?) can agree on is that there is no survival without decentralization. This would be a horrifically ineffective paypal#2

Think i was able TO answer no?

To have decentralization you need to add enough value to the network to keep competitive forces alive. Right now BTC is one of the most centralized cryptos out there. The decision to go for Core instead of Classic was made in a small conference room in HK by a handful of people who clearly don't give a flying fudge about decentralization. Stagnation leads to centralization.

Yes. Let's just argue that Black is white.      

I neither expressed surprise at this resolution nor attempted to dissuade her from it. "The vocation will fit you to a hair," I thought: "much good may it do you!"

When we parted, she said: "Good-bye, cousin Jane Eyre; I wish you well: you have some sense."

I then returned: "You are not without sense, cousin Eliza; but what you have, I suppose, in another year will be walled up alive in a French convent. However, it is not my business, and so it suits you, I don't much care."

"You are in the right," said she; and with these words we each went our separate way. As I shall not have occasion to refer either to her or her sister again, I may as well mention here, that Georgiana made an advantageous match with a wealthy worn-out man of fashion, and that Eliza actually took the veil, and is at this day superior of the convent where she passed the period of her novitiate, and which she endowed with her fortune.

How people feel when they are returning home from an absence, long or short, I did not know: I had never experienced the sensation. I had known what it was to come back to Gateshead when a child after a long walk, to be scolded for looking cold or gloomy; and later, what it was to come back from church to Lowood, to long for a plenteous meal and a good fire, and to be unable to get either. Neither of these returnings was very pleasant or desirable: no magnet drew me to a given point, increasing in its strength of attraction the nearer I came. The return to Thornfield was yet to be tried.

My journey seemed tedious--very tedious: fifty miles one day, a night spent at an inn; fifty miles the next day. During the first twelve hours I thought of Mrs. Reed in her last moments; I saw her disfigured and discoloured face, and heard her strangely altered voice. I mused on the funeral day, the coffin, the hearse, the black train of tenants and servants--few was the number of relatives--the gaping vault, the silent church, the solemn service. Then I thought of Eliza and Georgiana; I beheld one the cynosure of a ball-room, the other the inmate of a convent cell; and I dwelt on and analysed their separate peculiarities of person and character. The evening arrival at the great town of--scattered these thoughts; night gave them quite another turn: laid down on my traveller's bed, I left reminiscence for anticipation.

I was going back to Thornfield: but how long was I to stay there? Not long; of that I was sure. I had heard from Mrs. Fairfax in the interim of my absence: the party at the hall was dispersed; Mr. Rochester had left for London three weeks ago, but he was then expected to return in a fortnight. Mrs. Fairfax surmised that he was gone to make arrangements for his wedding, as he had talked of purchasing a new carriage: she said the idea of his marrying Miss Ingram still seemed strange to her; but from what everybody said, and from what she had herself seen, she could no longer doubt that the event would shortly take place. "You would be strangely incredulous if you did doubt it," was my mental comment. "I don't doubt it."

Yeah, very scholarly to cut and paste some non-sense, which could possibly make more sense than if you had chosen your own words to explain whatever it is that you want to say.

That's a bit harsh. I chose Jane Eyre specifically for you.

[JayJuanGee]

Wall Observer

http://bitcoincharts.com/markets/bitstampUSD_depth.html

that's a nice wall, I like that wall

Walls can sometimes be reverse indicators..

that ask-side wall has been there most of the time up from $443 to $449... and continues to be there, despite apparent ongoing upward price pressures

[DaRude]

Wall Observer

http://bitcoincharts.com/markets/bitstampUSD_depth.html

that's a nice wall, I like that wall

Huh where? The BTC200 order

[JayJuanGee]

No offense but you are an economic illiterate (we have all weak spot, myself I am bad at computer science and coding).

What you are saying about supply moving along with demand makes no sense whatsoever in the context of the blocksize limit. You don't understand what perfectly inelastic means, it means fixed with no way to moving it. In order to learn you first need to understand what you know and what you don't know.

I might not be expressing myself very well, but I know economics sufficiently well, and actually I had done quite a bit of work around various economic ideas in the past... so you seem to be making wrong assumptions about me.

  Currently, I am attempting to use layman's expressions to describe that there is no problem rather than getting caught up in technicalities in which you are suggesting various technicalities without explaining what you mean, so instead of suggesting that I don't know what I am talking about possibly you need to explain what you perceive is the problem.. and explain the problem because you are the one suggesting that there is a problem and that we should be concerned about it.  So the burden is on you to show the problem and to convince others about the problem that you perceive.  Such burden is not on me to identify the problem that you perceive.

 I am suggesting that behavior is going to change with a shrinking supply that will allow for sufficient and acceptable adapting that will be sufficient to manage while seg wit and any other changes are being implemented that may not include a blocksize limit increase, and you are suggesting that some unacceptable results will occur if the block limit is not increased.   Ultimately we disagree about impact and we also disagree about whether there is currently a problem... so it may not really matter whether I am using one term differently from you... because we are going to likely come to different conclusions.  I think that many people in this space understand the issues sufficiently and disagree on the means forward, and XT/classic supporters are still arguing about a case they lost... but don't want to give up.