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

[hd060053]

Monero dev makes shockingly obvious discovery Ethereum is a centralized scamcoin

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1485051.0

dont post this here, go to altcoin discussion...

[Denker]

a lot of investors are not putting money into bitcoin, because they think that it might not be THE crypto 10 years from now,
they think it could be displaced by ETH or somthing like it.
once ETH falls apart while bitcoin increases capacity that FUD will be removed.
poeple will being to understand that bitcoin IS whatever we want it to be, and thats why nothing can displace it.
the big wow factor will be when >75% hashing power + economic majority HardFork bitcoin to 2MB blocks.

Yepp that's how I see the situation as well.
Good thing is we have a bit more time to accumulate.
And I will definitely do that everytime I can.
Once this baby starts to take off, getting more of it or getting in could become really expensive.

[hd060053]

in the last days, price went up and also shorts on bitfinex went up. It needs some more time but then the pump can be started 

[adamstgBit]

the big wow factor will be when >75% hashing power + economic majority HardFork bitcoin to 2MB blocks.

It's already going to 2MB blocks + segwit with 2017 hard fork anyway, which should be an effective 3.x MB block size.  That's why there's not much of a reason to make a big deal out of it unless someone tries to renig.  Also, weak blocks make raising block size not an actual problem and weak blocks is already planned here:

http://coinjournal.net/blockstream-president-adam-back-shares-roadmap-scaling-bitcoin/

There's not even any argument that Bitcoin will or won't be scaled, it's just that people believe core is doing it too slowly, but that's just how it is when you actually have to develop and test things first for something where you make a mistake would implode billions of dollars.

There is no guarantee it will happen it can only happen if mostly everyone wants it to happen. that much has been made clear as day in the past year. ( to the point were people are afraid nothing can ever happen because getting "mostly everyone" to agree is "impossible" )
when the HF happens and we get our first 2MB block 10mins later.
people's heads will explode.
dont kid yourself the 2MB HF will be a BIG DEAL.

[hdbuck]

the big wow factor will be when >75% hashing power + economic majority HardFork bitcoin to 2MB blocks.

It's already going to 2MB blocks + segwit with 2017 hard fork anyway, which should be an effective 3.x MB block size.  That's why there's not much of a reason to make a big deal out of it unless someone tries to renig.  Also, weak blocks make raising block size not an actual problem and weak blocks is already planned here:

http://coinjournal.net/blockstream-president-adam-back-shares-roadmap-scaling-bitcoin/

There's not even any argument that Bitcoin will or won't be scaled, it's just that people believe core is doing it too slowly, but that's just how it is when you actually have to develop and test things first for something where you make a mistake would implode billions of dollars.

There is no guarantee it will happen it can only happen if mostly everyone wants it to happen. that much has been made clear as day in the past year. ( to the point were people are afraid nothing can ever happen because getting "mostly everyone" to agree is "impossible" )
when the HF happens and we get our first 2MB block 10mins later.
people's heads will explode.
dont kid yourself the 2MB HF will be a BIG DEAL.

lol, big deal yeah, massive dump.

but it aint going to happen, gonna need a tad bit more than a buncha whiny shits to fuck with Bitcoin.

[dumbfbrankings]

...
dont kid yourself the 2MB HF will be a BIG DEAL.

Excited for Segwit Omnibus Changeset hdbuck??! Yay status quo!



Don't worry, your The Realest Bitcoin Client won't understand or validate any of it.



All seven of you...       

[adamstgBit]

SegWit or DIE!

hard to believe core has so much support...

[hv_]

SegWit or DIE!

hard to believe core has so much support...

Is there sb out who can bREAKE the ICE and unfreeze the block size limit?

[AlexGR]

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.

So why the price is stagnating and VC investment is decreasing? Sure you computer geeks folks are cleverer than all the economic minded people on the planet.

"Economic minded people" = the only model they understand is one of centralization, trust and counterparties. Trustless peer to peer economy is a foreign concept.

Well no, economic models tend to account for centralization, trust, and counterparties. Amongst other things. The most discriptive/predictive ones tend to get complex, with maths and stuff.
You, of course, reject them because
1. Decentralization itself is your objective (as opposed to maximizing wealth, knowledge, hippy stuff, etc.). If a model leads to solutions which do not require decentralization, into the trash it goes. Like rating cake recipes by the amount of Drano used. Angel food cake doesn't use Drano decentralization? Bad cake!
2. You simply don't understand conventional economics.

I do not "reject" them. Bitcoin's success *depends* on them.

We are in a town where there are 100 ice-cream shops (bank wires, western union, paypal and paypal clones, mobile payment systems, credit cards etc) but all these shops are offering just one flavor (=centralization).

A new ice-cream shop opens and provides a new flavor, breaking the 100% "monopoly" of the previous flavor.

This creates a booming market for the new entrant which starts at 0% and has enormous growth potential. Even if the new entrant captures ...just 1% of the pie of the centralized system, booom. We are talking about prices in 5 digits. And it will capture it. Why? Because the decentralized system has features that the centralized doesn't. They serve different needs, have different problems / weaknesses and different limitations.

So if somebody wants the new ice-cream flavor, why not? Are you opposed to us having more flavors to choose from? I mean you love your CC but isn't it ok if another one loves his BTC? As the CC suits your needs, BTC serves his needs. The only reason to be unhappy is if you own one of the old ice-cream shops (=banks etc) and fear the loss of the market share that is looming on the horizon, simply because now there is a choice for something different.

[Assmaster2000]

Serious question: Our Bitcoin committee is trying to decide which of Bitcoin's twin greatest minds -- r0ach or JJG -- to nominate for the coveted Nobel Brain Prize in Smartitude.

Frankly, we're torn. Our complicated and pricey laboratory apparata has failed to conclusively differentiate, via rigorous application of scientific methods and procedures, the greater of the two minds, due to them both being so ginormously huge.
Our team is tempted to nominate them both, but we worry: Would forcing two sovereign individuals [who are not gay] to share this, the highest of accolades, dilute and/or cheapen the experience for them?

Thoughts?

[r0ach]

Serious question: Our Bitcoin committee is trying to decide which of Bitcoin's twin greatest minds -- r0ach or JJG -- to nominate for the coveted Nobel Brain Prize in Smartitude.

Frankly, we're torn. Our complicated and pricey laboratory apparata has failed to conclusively differentiate, via rigorous application of scientific methods and procedures, the greater of the two minds, due to them both being so ginormously huge.
Our team is tempted to nominate them both, but we worry: Would forcing two sovereign individuals [who are not gay] to share this, the highest of accolades, dilute and/or cheapen the experience for them?

Thoughts?

[SomaliRebel]

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.

So why the price is stagnating and VC investment is decreasing? Sure you computer geeks folks are cleverer than all the economic minded people on the planet.

"Economic minded people" = the only model they understand is one of centralization, trust and counterparties. Trustless peer to peer economy is a foreign concept.

Well no, economic models tend to account for centralization, trust, and counterparties. Amongst other things. The most discriptive/predictive ones tend to get complex, with maths and stuff.
You, of course, reject them because
1. Decentralization itself is your objective (as opposed to maximizing wealth, knowledge, hippy stuff, etc.). If a model leads to solutions which do not require decentralization, into the trash it goes. Like rating cake recipes by the amount of Drano used. Angel food cake doesn't use Drano decentralization? Bad cake!
2. You simply don't understand conventional economics.

I do not "reject" them. Bitcoin's success *depends* on them.

We are in a town where there are 100 ice-cream shops (bank wires, western union, paypal and paypal clones, mobile payment systems, credit cards etc) but all these shops are offering just one flavor (=centralization).

Arguably, not having "decentralized" doesn't mean those 100 shops are offering "just one flavor."
Cherry Garcia and Chunky Monkey aren't "just one flavor," even though neither one contains chewy gizzards or rusty bolts. I'll even tell you why none of the hundred stores offer Gizzards 'n Bolts flavor: because it's a shitty flavor that no one in his right mind ever buys, that's why.

A new ice-cream shop opens and provides a new flavor, breaking the 100% "monopoly" of the previous flavor.

Again, there is no monopoly, people simply don't like Gizzards 'n Bolts.

This creates a booming market for the new entrant which starts at 0% and has enormous growth potential.

No. The reason a few quarts of Gizzards 'n Bolts got sold is not because it's a flavor the world has been waiting for, but because those quart containers were a convenient way to deal dope and launder money, in plain daylight. Unfortunately, the jackboots are on to that shit, hence dropping sales

Even if the new entrant captures ...just 1% of the pie of the centralized system, booom.

Please trust me when I say this: Gizzards 'n Bolts ice cream is kill, is not gonna catch on, not gonna capture 1% of the market.
Taste it FFS!

[doc12]

So are there any recent news on the segwit update ? Will it be integrated into core next month ?

No news on this topic in the last weeks it seems.

[Fatman3001]

So are there any recent news on the segwit update ? Will it be integrated into core next month ?

No news on this topic in the last weeks it seems.

Yah, where's segwit?

I heard April so only 10.5 months to go. 

[finkelsteinMonster]

Curious fact: Free Piston engines are more common than you think. Diesel pile drivers are a form of free piston engines, and are pretty common, apparently
https://youtu.be/H7mwqHn3G1Y?t=319

[JayJuanGee]

Segwit is agreed to

...by some unquantifiable subset of actual stakeholders...

while 2mb increase is

...by some similarly unquantifiable -- though mostly complementary -- subset of actual stakeholders.

... Therefore, segwit comes first.... why do some people keep whining about matters that are pretty much already settled. 

Obviously because they are not 'pretty much already settled'.

Neither XT nor classic were able to achieve support,

Hmmm. Neither has any implementation of The SegWit Omnibus Proposal as of yet. Funny, that.

so they are currently dead (or pretty close to being dead

I'm still pushing for BU. So sue me.

Both XT and Classic attempted to create artificial deadlines in order to cause an emergency..

Well, no. Don't lie to try to make a point. Both XT and Classic were proposed solutions to what their proposers saw as an actual emergency. I still agree with their viewpoint.

those two fake proposals.

Obviously an improper use of English. What is your definition of 'fake proposal'?

You seem to be attempting to attempting to convince others that your position (to increase the blocksize limit because of a supposed emergency) has some legitimacy because there were biased people opposing your supposedly legitimate position.  That's real baloney to characterize the situation like that when the reality of the matter was that your side could not muster up enough support to persuade bitcoin core developers, miners etc regarding the necessity and/or efficacy of the proposals of your side largely as proposed through XT/Classic, which were the "fake proposals" because they purported to do something (fix a supposed technical problem of 1mb blocksize limit) different from what they actually did (attempt to change bitcoin governance by making it easy to change bitcoin and to more easily implement hardforks - which would have likely killed disruptive and innovative nature of bitcoin - it's decentralized permissionless immutability). 

[AlexGR]

Arguably, not having "decentralized" doesn't mean those 100 shops are offering "just one flavor."

They are. The centralized and trusted flavor. There are multiple consequences of these natures which give the "icecream" of those 100 shops the same taste.

Reversible transactions, funds locked or frozen just because a third party (company or governments) decided so, safety and capital mobility issues with haircuts, capital controls etc etc.

That's the nature of that game. The other game is different.

[r0ach]

A song for the shill Lambchop to mourn over the rise of Bitcoin and the death of Eth:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrMLMV6E4CM

[SomaliRebel]

Arguably, not having "decentralized" doesn't mean those 100 shops are offering "just one flavor."

They are. The centralized and trusted flavor. There are multiple consequences of these natures which give the "icecream" of those 100 shops the same taste.

Reversible transactions, funds locked or frozen just because a third party (company or governments) decided so, safety and capital mobility issues with haircuts, capital controls etc etc.

That's the nature of that game. The other game is different.

No, they're not. Stop stubbornly choking down Gizzards 'n Bolts, cleanse your palate, and soon you too will be able to tell the difference between legacy ice cream flavors. And grasp why the world would rather drink from the dick of a goat than eat your shitty Gizzards 'n Bolts.

Let me repeat: Gizzards 'n Bolts ice cream is gross, is not gonna catch on because disgusting.
Why is this so hard to get across?

[JayJuanGee]

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

You already have by arguing that a fixed cap on block size is anything other than identical to a resource with an inelastic supply.

I made that above-referenced quote by responding to Fatty's post, in which I was pointing out his internal inconsistency.

Regarding my earlier arguments, I will let them stand for themselves because I believe that they were sufficiently made.  Just to repeat in a minor way, in essence my previous points were that the burden is on you and your fellow XT/Classic proponents to point out both that there is a problem (that you want us to assume) and why something that your proposing is an efficacious fix of the problem.  In fact, your peeps are not able to persuasively achieve either, through either logic or presentation of facts.      sucks to be in that camp of misinformed but very vocal naysayers