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

[dumbfbrankings]

And that stick is looking fairly flimsy today.

Isn't that alt algo just something Luke-dash-jr said once? What, exactly, would that be?
"Bitcoin: World's least secure, lowest hashrate blockchain!"?

No. The code does exist. Gregory stated "the candidate code is ready".

I think it would have a nice hashrate for a GPU coin, at least shortly after the moment of forking, maybe a bleed off from there. It would probably have a market price. But as we saw today, the vast majority of exchanges and hashrate together, is pretty convincing when it comes to this type of thing.

More likely is that we will see the miners possibly delay segwit, a compromise from Core (lol), or, they could announce in august their own plan and suggestion for hard fork terms that will likely mirror the hk agreement, but with a contingency plan.

The miners could also activate the code, but make the decision to not (yet) fork above 1MB, to extend a grace period for nodes.

[1715106923]

1715106923

[1715106923]

1715106923

[Fatman3001]

Times are changing. It is a dynamic world out there.

The miners got into bed with core, believing they could deliver.

Miners will keep the blockchain, Core can keep their code.

such shit FUD ... Core delivers everytime, >100 high quality contributors serving up huge quantities of quality code

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4tqb59/bitcoin_core_v0130rc1_binaries_are_available_for/

miners have spent not a milliBitcoin producing quality code (or even funding some Core devs (i have no idea why it's a no brainer for wealthy idiot miner to hire a Core dev or two??wtf idiot miners)) so until they do they will the run the best code out there, Core.

Hi Marcus!

I see you're still fighting shadows with brainless lies and misinformation.

https://petertodd.org/2016/btcc-funding


Well, fight the power brother!

[respawn2]

And that stick is looking fairly flimsy today.

Isn't that alt algo just something Luke-dash-jr said once? What, exactly, would that be?
"Bitcoin: World's least secure, lowest hashrate blockchain!"?

No. The code does exist. Gregory stated "the candidate code is ready".

I think it would have a nice hashrate for a GPU coin, at least shortly after the moment of forking, maybe a bleed off from there. It would probably have a market price. But as we saw today, the vast majority of exchanges and hashrate together, is pretty convincing when it comes to this type of thing.

More likely is that we will see the miners possibly delay segwit, a compromise from Core (lol), or, they could announce in august their own plan and suggestion for hard fork terms that will likely mirror the hk agreement, but with a contingency plan.

The miners could also activate the code, but make the decision to not (yet) fork above 1MB, to extend a grace period for nodes.

So many problems with that.
1. The miners don't have to announce their move in advance. Core has to be ready to roll out on a minute's notice. A case where defense is much costlier than offense.
2. The miners can throttle transactions by rapidly escalating tx fees. This is not an attack, legitimate for miners to charge as much as they feel is right. What does Core do when the fees increase by 50-100% a day?
3. BTC will have value, but in the double digits at best.

P.S. Is the code on GitHub? Or is it a secrit?
P.P.S. The whole security through PoW mining thing only works when it is truly decentralized, as in every wallet a mining node, every stakeholder also a miner (like citizen-soldier thing). It starts breaking down as soon as clots develop, and once most users are no longer miners, and most miners are 3 pools, it's a different animal, with things like collective bargaining becoming a thing (no need to say it, once miners are signing agreements with core individuals, we're done).

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

I’m pleased to announce that BTCC has agreed to provide me funding for 14 billable hours a month of Bitcoin development work under my standard contract for the next six months. This funding has been provided on a “no strings attached” basis, with the one condition being that I provide a weekly report on my development efforts.

So here’s what I’ve been working on:

    Pull-req review — A wide variety of smaller and larger pull-reqs, but most importantly review of the recently merged BIP68/112/113 soft-forks.

   Hard-fork discussion with the signers of the Hong Kong agreement (and others).

    python-bitcoinlib — I added support for many of the new script verification flags that have been added to Bitcoin Core, along with the associated script (in)valid unit tests. In that past I’ve found reimplementing Bitcoin Core logic in python-bitcoinlib to be a good way to do in-depth consensus code review, so this work builds towards getting ready to do final segwit review.

Holy slippery Moses!

[marcus_of_augustus]

https://petertodd.org/2016/btcc-funding

14 billable hours a month ... such devving, much coding!

get a grip fatso

[dumbfbrankings]

And that stick is looking fairly flimsy today.

Isn't that alt algo just something Luke-dash-jr said once? What, exactly, would that be?
"Bitcoin: World's least secure, lowest hashrate blockchain!"?

No. The code does exist. Gregory stated "the candidate code is ready".

I think it would have a nice hashrate for a GPU coin, at least shortly after the moment of forking, maybe a bleed off from there. It would probably have a market price. But as we saw today, the vast majority of exchanges and hashrate together, is pretty convincing when it comes to this type of thing.

More likely is that we will see the miners possibly delay segwit, a compromise from Core (lol), or, they could announce in august their own plan and suggestion for hard fork terms that will likely mirror the hk agreement, but with a contingency plan.

The miners could also activate the code, but make the decision to not (yet) fork above 1MB, to extend a grace period for nodes.

So many problems with that.
1. The miners don't have to announce their move in advance. Core has to be ready to roll out on a minute's notice. A case where defense is much costlier than offense.
2. The miners can throttle transactions by rapidly escalating tx fees. This is not an attack, legitimate for miners to charge as much as they feel is right. What does Core do when the fees increase by 50-100% a day?
3. BTC will have value, but in the double digits at best.

P.S. Is the code on GitHub? Or is it a secrit?

1. Fair point, but rushing things and springing them on the confused node operator or investor isn't the best idea either.
2. Nah, that would just serve promote a sense of injustice and tyranny they have no interest in promoting. Clear communication, plenty of time for node operators to upgrade would accomplish much more. No need to fight dirty if you have the backing of the market.
3. keccakcoin? or Bitcoin that had performed the upgrade described by satoshi, with the method he baked in?

P.S yep, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7410/files
P.P.S. I can see why you're out then, it hasn't been that way for a long time.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

This reminds me of mutual assured destruction. I used think that was the height of human folly...
Now I think it's some kind of game theoretical inevitability.

[adamstgBit]

How do you think strikes work?
Step1: Grind BTC to a complete stop
Step2: "Your coin isn't worth dick until you let us have what we want. While we're on strike, we're making only 4% less than when we're working for you. Think about it. Take your time."
Step3: Profit  

miners dont need to Grind BTC to a halt to get what they want
if they have the power to Grind BTC to a halt they have the power to fork it which ever way they want too.
also i forget, what is it the minners want in the hypothetical scenario ?

[Fatman3001]

https://petertodd.org/2016/btcc-funding

14 billable hours a month ... such devving, much coding!

get a grip fatso

...?

So, according to your statement he's working (14h x 6 months = ) 84h for less than "a milliBitcoin"?

With your way with numbers I can understand why the block size issue sounds a bit weird.

[respawn2]

1. Fair point, but rushing things and springing them on the confused node operator or investor isn't the best idea either.

What I'm saying is that unless Core has both production code and hangars full of GPUs ready to go online, miners could grind the network to a halt. This is how you get ants.

2. Nah, that would just serve promote a sense of injustice and tyranny they have no interest in promoting. Clear communication, plenty of time for node operators to upgrade would accomplish much more. No need to fight dirty if you have the backing of the market.

Have tx fee increases  promoted a sense of injustice and tyranny in the past? Do people see the miners as their friends, not businessmen looking to maximize their profits?
The miners may well be everyone's friends, doing it for the community etc., but I'm trying to walk through plausible adversarial scenarios, where each party plays to maximize their rational self-interest win.

[marcus_of_augustus]

^^ I think I spend about 14 billable hours a month going to the toilet ... maybe I should send the bill to Jihan to make him feel more involved?

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

@Fatty
Bitcoin has lots of seemingly arbitrary protocol rules built into it. No one is supposed to be able to change these. What makes the block size such a hot topic? Is it because it's the most kludgy

[marcus_of_augustus]

The only people who 'win' in bitcoin are the ones who stfu and do stuff ... those who decided it was in their interests to talk instead of doing have lost ... e.g. Mike Hearn, Gavin Andresen, Brian Arsstrong, etc, etc

[dumbfbrankings]

1. Fair point, but rushing things and springing them on the confused node operator or investor isn't the best idea either.

What I'm saying is that unless Core has both production code and hangars full of GPUs ready to go online, miners could grind the network to a halt. This is how you get ants.

They would reset the difficulty and there are plenty of shitcoin mining GPU's that would hop over for some fun. This isn't about numbers for them, it's about ideology...

2. Nah, that would just serve promote a sense of injustice and tyranny they have no interest in promoting. Clear communication, plenty of time for node operators to upgrade would accomplish much more. No need to fight dirty if you have the backing of the market.

Have tx fee increases  promoted a sense of injustice and tyranny in the past? Do people see the miners as their friends, not businessmen looking to maximize their profits?
The miners may well be everyone's friends, doing it for the community etc., but I'm trying to walk through plausible adversarial scenarios, where each party plays to maximize their rational self-interest win.

It's not a good idea to spit on your customers... simple as that I think. They will raise fees maybe in the sense of delaying segwit... but arbitrarily giving the finger to users... sounds like a good way to bolster the 1MB altcoin that wants the crown.

[respawn2]

How do you think strikes work?
Step1: Grind BTC to a complete stop
Step2: "Your coin isn't worth dick until you let us have what we want. While we're on strike, we're making only 4% less than when we're working for you. Think about it. Take your time."
Step3: Profit  

miners dont need to Grind BTC to a halt to get what they want
if they have the power to Grind BTC to a halt they have the power to fork it which ever way they want too.
also i forget, what is it the minners want in the hypothetical scenario ?

The miners don't need to, but they *could* grind the network to a halt. That's bargaining power, what gives a threat credibility. Because bargaining from weakness isn't bargaining, it's begging. It's nowhere near as good as bargaining from strengths.

>what is it the minners want in the hypothetical scenario ?
The miners want to make as much money as they can. If that means cutting Blockstream out, so be it.
But I'm sure they also want some getback. I would, if I got punked by private individuals who are totally not core lulz!
Wouldn't you?

[respawn2]

^^ I think I spend about 14 billable hours a month going to the toilet ... maybe I should send the bill to Jihan to make him feel more involved?

It was your finest work, you totally should.

The only people who 'win' in bitcoin are the ones who stfu and do stuff ...

Nice chatting with you, loser?

[DaRude]

Don't we have a not-so-top secret algo change from hell in case of emergencies?

You can start mining a worthless alt with a new algo. Have fun.

This is no different than a typical business/labor dispute, the sort that happens when bosses make promises they don't keep.
Really.
And the slimmer the miner's (it's, like, 9 pool operators, who are we kidding?) current margin is, the more incentive they have to "Unionize" and "strike."

Only when IRL workers strike, they don't get to draw 96% of their paycheck, as the miners will (because block reward).

Step1: Grind BTC to a complete stop
Step2: ??
Step3: Profit  

Think there's a flaw in your logic somewhere

How do you think strikes work?
Step1: Grind BTC to a complete stop
Step2: "Your coin isn't worth dick until you let us have what we want. While we're on strike, we're making only 4% less than when we're working for you. Think about it. Take your time."
Step3: Profit  

You're delusional or trolling if you think this will work. I'm speculation that majority of miners are also hodler, what will that do to the price of BTC and their investment? Good luck trying to find idiots to sign up to that. Here's a shovel start digging your own graves for the greater good  

[travwill]

Man, so the US markets are breaking a new high every day for the last 8 days.  I see the equities doing so strong that BTC isn't as attractive, that can't last and seems like bubble territory in the stock market right now.

This combined with the Japanese probably announcing a 20 trillion Yen stimulus, like 180 Billion USD I think, should really send BTC at least somewhat hire for those not wanting to hold on to the surely devalued Yen.

[adamstgBit]

How do you think strikes work?
Step1: Grind BTC to a complete stop
Step2: "Your coin isn't worth dick until you let us have what we want. While we're on strike, we're making only 4% less than when we're working for you. Think about it. Take your time."
Step3: Profit  

miners dont need to Grind BTC to a halt to get what they want
if they have the power to Grind BTC to a halt they have the power to fork it which ever way they want too.
also i forget, what is it the minners want in the hypothetical scenario ?

The miners don't need to, but they *could* grind the network to a halt. That's bargaining power, what gives a threat credibility. Because bargaining from weakness isn't bargaining, it's begging. It's nowhere near as good as bargaining from strengths.

>what is it the minners want in the hypothetical scenario ?
The miners want to make as much money as they can. If that means cutting Blockstream out, so be it.
But I'm sure they also want some getback. I would, if I got punked by private individuals who are totally not core lulz!
Wouldn't you?

oh ic

ya no they won't bring bitcoin to a halt

they will write a little memo to the community

somthing like

" core proposes to undermine our long term sustainability by first limiting precious BTC TX fees, and then diverting the TX fees to there STILL non existent LN, so we are no longer running core software or supporting their efforts.
"

and then the community will rejoice as they be delivered from the evil grips of core's tyranny.

[respawn2]

1. Fair point, but rushing things and springing them on the confused node operator or investor isn't the best idea either.

What I'm saying is that unless Core has both production code and hangars full of GPUs ready to go online, miners could grind the network to a halt. This is how you get ants.

They would reset the difficulty and there are plenty of shitcoin mining GPU's that would hop over for some fun. This isn't about numbers for them, it's about ideology...

Sure they will reset the difficulty, but GPU miners aren't the Salvation Army, they're mercenary. If forking the shit out of BTC is what pays, that's what they'll do. And it sure will take more than a few hours to deploy a meaningful number of GPU farms to prevent this from happening, GPUs aren't sitting around waiting for the goahead from Core.
That's why countries have standing armies, who do nothing but eat and shit 99% of the time. For times like this.

2. Nah, that would just serve promote a sense of injustice and tyranny they have no interest in promoting. Clear communication, plenty of time for node operators to upgrade would accomplish much more. No need to fight dirty if you have the backing of the market.

Have tx fee increases  promoted a sense of injustice and tyranny in the past? Do people see the miners as their friends, not businessmen looking to maximize their profits?
The miners may well be everyone's friends, doing it for the community etc., but I'm trying to walk through plausible adversarial scenarios, where each party plays to maximize their rational self-interest win.

It's not a good idea to spit on your customers... simple as that I think. They will raise fees maybe in the sense of delaying segwit... but arbitrarily giving the finger to users... sounds like a good way to bolster the 1MB altcoin that wants the crown.

Is there something more than Miss Manners that stands in the way of (2)?
I keep hearing stuff like "it's not nice, be nice" in one ear, and blood-curdling screams of the robbed/buttraped in the other. So having a hard time figuring out if this is a family/friends or a business/let's make some money type of a setup.

How can my "customers" (assuming you mean BTC holders and not exchanges) make an iota of difference here? Why would I care if you have a million BTC in a paper wallet buried under a bird bath?
This is all hypothetical, of course, because I'm really passionate about supporting the Bitcoin community and you just can't put a price on something like that. Because it's priceless.