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

[JayJuanGee]

Who's we? I can assure you it's not me, I didn't sign on for this, at least not in this crufty soft-fork-via-opcode-sneak-mode form.

We are born into systems that have a lot of rules, and the status quo has some power.  

"There you go again"
- Ronnie Raygun

We've been over this. The status quo is completely violated by The SegWit Omnibus Changeset.

Ignorance or obstinance on your part?

Yes, jbreher, we've been over some variation of this topic, and we disagree mostly because you are making shit up and not really attempting to have any kind of civilized conversation.

I am not making anything up. The SegWit Omnibus Changeset is a far larger change to Bitcoin protocol than is a simple maxblocksize bump. Period. To assert otherwise is insanity. Or stupidity. Or obstinance. So which is it in your case?

Look at your language in the above sentences.  It says, I want to be correct no matter what.  Nothing wrong with that, but you have a tendency to attempt to divert into non issues and to just strive for combat for the mere sake of it.

When you assert that raising the blocksize limit would have been much simplier, so therefore it is logical that the blocksize limit should have been raised, you are continuing to attempt to argue about an issue that was rejected. XT and classic were rejected, or better put, they failed to achieve adequate support in order to be implemented... in other words, they are ded, at the moment.  Surely, they may come up again or some variation of raising the blocksize limit may be entertained, but at this point, there is no meaningful evidence that either a blocksize limit is necessary or that logic is convincing.  You are the one that is stubborn and want to keep on beating a ded horse... yes yes yes.. let's see how seg wit plays out first, and maybe revisit the blocksize limit matter later, if the blocksize limit is an issue at such a later point, oooooo kay?  okey dokey?  can you go along with what is currently happening or work on contributing to what is currently happening rather than just arguing about spilled milk and what you believe should have happened (you, BJA and your friends at reddit rbtc)?

In fact, Seg wit is largely a non-controversial

Well, no. The fact that the discussion is still occurring is evidence of controversy. By definition. English much?

Yes, the argument persists in some circles, but does not make the argument material and important, especially if neither facts nor logic is adding any additional reason to reopen the already mostly closed and ded topic.  The argument persists also regarding aliens landing in roswell, too, but we are not continuing to pursue such arguments because roswell alien arguments are largely being made by marginalized groups and not part of mainstream policy and thinking and discussing, even though a small number of folks continue to vocalize that subject matter.

[jbreher]

Who's we? I can assure you it's not me, I didn't sign on for this, at least not in this crufty soft-fork-via-opcode-sneak-mode form.

We are born into systems that have a lot of rules, and the status quo has some power.  

"There you go again"
- Ronnie Raygun

We've been over this. The status quo is completely violated by The SegWit Omnibus Changeset.

Ignorance or obstinance on your part?

Yes, jbreher, we've been over some variation of this topic, and we disagree mostly because you are making shit up and not really attempting to have any kind of civilized conversation.

I am not making anything up. The SegWit Omnibus Changeset is a far larger change to Bitcoin protocol than is a simple maxblocksize bump. Period. To assert otherwise is insanity. Or stupidity. Or obstinance. So which is it in your case?

you have a tendency to attempt to divert into non issues and to just strive for combat for the mere sake of it.

Complete and utter reading comprehension fail. You claimed that the status quo is segwit. I just pointed out that The SegWit Omnibus Changeset is far and away a larger change to Bitcoin -- the technology, the protocol, and the economics -- than a simple maxblocksize bump would be. Your assertion is a complete falsehood. I am not inventing things against which to combat. I am simply pointing out your ... umm... inaccuracy.

In fact, Seg wit is largely a non-controversial

Well, no. The fact that the discussion is still occurring is evidence of controversy. By definition. English much?

Yes, the argument persists in some circles, but does not make the argument material and important, ...

*ahem!* Again, I am merely pointing out that your statement that the situation is settled is a complete fabrication. Why you persist on going off on tangents is beyond me. Read my words, JJG. Quit misrepresenting what I am saying. It could not be more clear. I am merely pointing out that controversy does indeed exist.

[adamstgBit]

well fuck. this is the end.
we are dooomed i tell you DOOOOOOOOMMMED!  

[JimboToronto]

Good morning Bitcoinland.

Can't seem to break out of the $650-$690 range.



How much longer will the market keep "catching its breath" before we move on?

[Sitarow]

well fud. this is the end.
we are dooomed i tell you DOOOOOOOOMMMED!  

That settles it Bitcoin project has died... But wait! Tune it next week to see how it lives!

[Elwar]

Price below $666. Is this the end?

[adamstgBit]

[tomothy]

I'll certainly admit that the recent drop doesn't look good, but as long as we stay above 660 shouldn't the trend be intact and this be ok? Seems that bitcoins death has been greatly exaggerated, again. No?

[Torque]

So have we left the 640's for good?

Nope

So sure are we?

[JayJuanGee]

Maybe you are making my point for me?

Yesterday, you were asserting that the "ONLY" way is up, and now it appears that the "ONLY" way is down.   

[respawn2]

I'll certainly admit that the recent drop doesn't look good, but as long as we stay above 660 shouldn't the trend be intact and this be ok? Seems that bitcoins death has been greatly exaggerated, again. No?

Oh sure. We'll be just fine... Look how nicely we're rebounding.

[AlexGR]

I'll certainly admit that the recent drop doesn't look good, but as long as we stay above 660 shouldn't the trend be intact and this be ok? Seems that bitcoins death has been greatly exaggerated, again. No?

It doesn't matter if it goes below 660. You already know where it'll go after a while: 666

[adamstgBit]

Maybe you are making my point for me?

Yesterday, you were asserting that the "ONLY" way is up, and now it appears that the "ONLY" way is down.   

imagine if i said one thing and did another

i'd be rich!

[JayJuanGee]

Who's we? I can assure you it's not me, I didn't sign on for this, at least not in this crufty soft-fork-via-opcode-sneak-mode form.

We are born into systems that have a lot of rules, and the status quo has some power.  

"There you go again"
- Ronnie Raygun

We've been over this. The status quo is completely violated by The SegWit Omnibus Changeset.

Ignorance or obstinance on your part?

Yes, jbreher, we've been over some variation of this topic, and we disagree mostly because you are making shit up and not really attempting to have any kind of civilized conversation.

I am not making anything up. The SegWit Omnibus Changeset is a far larger change to Bitcoin protocol than is a simple maxblocksize bump. Period. To assert otherwise is insanity. Or stupidity. Or obstinance. So which is it in your case?

you have a tendency to attempt to divert into non issues and to just strive for combat for the mere sake of it.

Complete and utter reading comprehension fail. You claimed that the status quo is segwit. I just pointed out that The SegWit Omnibus Changeset is far and away a larger change to Bitcoin -- the technology, the protocol, and the economics -- than a simple maxblocksize bump would be. Your assertion is a complete falsehood. I am not inventing things against which to combat. I am simply pointing out your ... umm... inaccuracy.

In fact, Seg wit is largely a non-controversial

Well, no. The fact that the discussion is still occurring is evidence of controversy. By definition. English much?

Yes, the argument persists in some circles, but does not make the argument material and important, ...

*ahem!* Again, I am merely pointing out that your statement that the situation is settled is a complete fabrication. Why you persist on going off on tangents is beyond me. Read my words, JJG. Quit misrepresenting what I am saying. It could not be more clear. I am merely pointing out that controversy does indeed exist.

I have no problem conceding that we are at logger heads, and we have been at logger heads for some time.

Accordingly, each of us largely speak in conclusions in respect to the facts upon which we rely. 

I assert that seg wit is a decent developing next step that is in the process of unwinding and is largely non controversial, and I assert that so far there has been inadequate facts, logic or support to push XT/Classic or any of the other blocksize limit raising changes forward, therefore those proposals are largely dead at the moment, even though the arguments could be raised again. 

More or less, you take the opposite position to suggest that the blocksize limit debate is still alive and well (supposedly) and to assert that there is some kind of seg wit controversy (supposedly).

Whenever new facts develop, each of us picks the facts that support our view and emphasize those facts, and neither one of us either wants to engage in additional research or to provide additional explanation for our positions, except maybe to the extent that we stumble upon such evidence or logic in our normal course of the day (in other words, we are not going out of the way to research or to respond to one another).  That seems to be a kind of loggerheads.

You said that you want to keep calling my supposed "bullshit", and I could give a ratt's ass that you feel such necessity, except I guess I need to respond to you to the extent that my responses may seem necessary to clarify some matters from time to time, even though it seems to be a repeated dialogue and a kind of waste of time.. maybe for both of us, if i give you some benefit of the doubt that you are actually being genuine in what appears to me to be largely nonsense?

[savetherainforest]

NOPE!






The time of the Ice men is here!!!

I'll certainly admit that the recent drop doesn't look good, but as long as we stay above 660 shouldn't the trend be intact and this be ok? Seems that bitcoins death has been greatly exaggerated, again. No?

NOPE! Again...


My friends the Ice men... said they are going to squeeze the cow a little bit more then they are gonna do anal with all the bears that think they saw any patterns in this fake rollercoaster!

[aminorex]

How much longer will the market keep "catching its breath" before we move on?

My monkey says its probably the start of a 2-3 month slow-ish uptrend about now.

[JayJuanGee]

How much longer will the market keep "catching its breath" before we move on?

My monkey says its probably the start of a 2-3 month slow-ish uptrend about now.

I think I kind of understand what your monkey is pronouncing, yet monkey likely needs to get slapped upside the head a few times to provide a few more specifics.  

For example, how does monkey characterize the following:

1) was the BTC price move from about $230 in September 2015 to lower $400s in much of early 2016 a "slow-ish uptrend"? if not why?

2) was the BTC price move from lower to mid $400s in late May 2016 to our current price of about mid $600s  a "slow-ish uptrend"?  if not why?

3) Does a slow-ish uptrend in the next 2-3 months bring BTC prices passed $720, or passed $750, or passed $770?  

Regarding point # 3 above, I'm afraid to ask whether monkey believes prices to be going passed $850 because, likely even monkey realizes that going passed $850 would likely cause a kind of transformation in current  BTC market dynamics, and the difference in BTC market dynamics could possibly be triggered at lower BTC price points, possibly in the lower $800s.

In the end, thank you to monkey, even though half the time he needs to be spanked, but in times like these, it is appreciated to get any kind of feedback, even when the feedback comes off as a bit disagreeable. 

[adamstgBit]

its been over a year now and my monkey is still saying >32,000 in < 2 years

cant lie, starting to think he might be wrong.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

How much longer will the market keep "catching its breath" before we move on?

My monkey says its probably the start of a 2-3 month slow-ish uptrend about now.

I'd welcome that with open arms, far better than unsustainable pumps that inevitably get dumped. Lets see a slow climb.

[dumbfbrankings]

Well, the coin that shall not be named had a very contentious hard fork this morning, splitting the currency into two and destroying its value!

it would seem it was not very contentious at all, hash rate has not drop significantly.
http://www.coinwarz.com/network-hashrate-charts/ethereum-network-hashrate-chart

That Nakamoto character might have been on to something...