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

[Miz4r]

Most Core developers but also many experts outside the Core community believe that it's important we keep nodes relatively cheap to run in order to keep the most important aspect of Bitcoin which is decentralization.

the problem comes when we try to define "relatively cheep".
BU says " just let the network of nodes define what is acceptable "

what's the problem with that?

if 1MB is the magic number the network will reflect that.

That sounds exploitable to me, these things can be gamed if you let nodes or miners set the limit themselves. Let's just first safely increase the limit through Segwit and see from there. What's wrong with doing that?

[Paashaas]

https://twitter.com/Excellion/status/825967179463921664

[Killerpotleaf]

Most Core developers but also many experts outside the Core community believe that it's important we keep nodes relatively cheap to run in order to keep the most important aspect of Bitcoin which is decentralization.

the problem comes when we try to define "relatively cheep".
BU says " just let the network of nodes define what is acceptable "

what's the problem with that?

if 1MB is the magic number the network will reflect that.

That sounds exploitable to me, these things can be gamed if you let nodes or miners set the limit themselves. Let's just first safely increase the limit through Segwit and see from there. What's wrong with doing that?

i guess LTC might be generous enough to provide some hard data.
i dont mind segwit + LN, actually i'd prefer it as a hard fork so all aspects can be simpler/robust.
basically i want my cake and eat it too.
BU sized blocks with segwit TX fix.
most importantly i'd like to see healthy competition of ideas for all future BIPS, i feel there is somthing dangerous about 1 team getting all the "political power".

[Killerpotleaf]

 
if you've been around long enough this gif is extra funny

[r0ach]

Perhaps at $10000 you will consider it a store of value rather than a processor.

You're just being irrationally biased now.  Everyone knows metals are more fungible, more anti-fragile, and less counter party risk.  This means Bitcoin can never dethrone metals as a store of value or hope to compete with them on Exter's pyramid.  If you're acting as a settlement layer, you're attempting to compete with metals as a store of value and Bitcoin CANNOT do it.  This means Bitcoin has to derive value more from raw transaction flow and being a payment processor instead.  

This is why I think Bitcoin probably doesn't have a value proposition without large scaling.  The lightning network claims to be able to do that, but I'm not convinced it can do so in a decentralized manner when economy of scale already forces centralization in the base bitcoin network in the first place.  Bitcoin did not "solve" the decentralization problem.   Bitcoin is a centralization problem waiting for someone to solve it.

As for solving that centralization problem, to do so you would likely need to engineer it so it's impossible to practice usury in bitcoin.  The only way I can think of to do that is either unprofitable PoW (which probably can't work in practice), or by some really exotic system of decentralized captchas where anyone attempting to solve blocks requires manual human intervention and can't be automated on cruise control via CPUs as I talked about in the thread below.

You cannot have decentralization without engineering bitcoin so automated usury is impossible

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1700073.0

Whether you believe "god" is a person, quantum fluctuation, whatever, metals are a blockchain created by "god"; bitcoin is a blockchain created by people.  The blockchain created by people can never compete because it will always have more flaws or side channel attacks that render it useless.  I have a feeling anything blockchain related will forever be a Rube Goldberg machine that claims to accomplish some type of task, but in reality fails to accomplish that task (decentralization) while doing it an extremely complicated manner.

[bitwitt]

Text Bubbles speak for themselves.  A little humor...

IMAGE EDIT: 

Hey Dumb ask
 I see you found a bunch of saps that listen to your BS.
You are so full of Ship...
Did your wife leave you yet?
Your son is old enough to know your a POS.
How's the Bitcoin farm going, that you bought with the wifes 401k?

Thought you you where going to Washington State ?

I Here the company your Dad started you turned into a joke, people said you are unstable. 

Keep posting your CRAP.

XOXO

[Riddikulo]

This thread went full retard 

[Killerpotleaf]

Perhaps at $10000 you will consider it a store of value rather than a processor.

You're just being irrationally biased now.  Everyone knows metals are more fungible, more anti-fragile, and less counter party risk.  This means Bitcoin can never dethrone metals as a store of value or hope to compete with them on Exter's pyramid.  If you're acting as a settlement layer, you're attempting to compete with metals as a store of value and Bitcoin CANNOT do it.  This means Bitcoin has to derive value more from raw transaction flow and being a payment processor instead.  

This is why I think Bitcoin probably doesn't have a value proposition without large scaling.  The lightning network claims to be able to do that, but I'm not convinced it can do so in a decentralized manner when economy of scale already forces centralization in the base bitcoin network in the first place.  Bitcoin did not "solve" the decentralization problem.   Bitcoin is a centralization problem waiting for someone to solve it.

As for solving that centralization problem, to do so you would likely need to engineer it so it's impossible to practice usury in bitcoin.  The only way I can think of to do that is either unprofitable PoW (which probably can't work in practice), or by some really exotic system of decentralized captchas where anyone attempting to solve blocks requires manual human intervention and can't be automated on cruise control via CPUs as I talked about in the thread below.

You cannot have decentralization without engineering bitcoin so automated usury is impossible

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1700073.0

Whether you believe "god" is a person, quantum fluctuation, whatever, metals are a blockchain created by "god"; bitcoin is a blockchain created by people.  The blockchain created by people can never compete because it will always have more flaws or side channel attacks that render it useless.  I have a feeling anything blockchain related will forever be a Rube Goldberg machine that claims to accomplish some type of task, but in reality fails to accomplish that task (decentralization) while doing it an extremely complicated manner.

point me to the central authority which governs bitcoin TX, or stfu.
 

[JayJuanGee]

Finally, some decent ACTION!!!!


And in the right direction, too.

Hahahahaha...

hopefully there is a sufficient quantity of push behind this that could maybe get us into the upper $900s, at least.

 

[rjclarke2000]

I believe this is most definitely gentleman

[Ibian]

Everyone knows

Argument invalid.

I have no dog in this fight, but taking your own opinion as an axiom annoys me wherever it pops up.

[600watt]

Everyone knows

Argument invalid.

I have no dog in this fight, but taking your own opinion as an axiom annoys me wherever it pops up.

you are right and we all know it. 

[Ted E. Bare]

Yes everyone that is experienced has already bought back in. The latest all-in moment was like a week ago.

[Karartma1]

After a bit of sideways another nice leg up. Cool

[gembitz]

After a bit of sideways another nice leg up. Cool

^yessir the new bitcoin movement is picking up thanks to the UBQ team! 

[soullyG]

See you guys > $1000?

[droizs]

See you guys > $1000?

too soon I think...

[spooderman]

all signs point to gentleman

[jbreher]

1MB = 1024KB.
not 1000KB

Sorry but no. Do to an accident of 2^10 being within a couple % of 10^3, lazy people have misused the kilo prefix to refer to a unit of 1024. However, all standards committees of which I am aware are united in the fact that kilo==1000. Period. If you want a convenient unit to refer to 1024, the world has standardised the unit of kibi, or Ki. Similarly, 2^20 is referred to as mebi or Mi, 2^30 is gibi or Gi etc.

So 1024 bytes is 1 KiB. Not 1 KB. Period.

While this seems pedantic to some at first, the ambiguity of using SI units that approximate powers of two has killed people.

Just. Fucking. Stop. Before it kills again.

[Denker]

See you guys > $1000?

Lets wait a few days to see if this rise is sustainable or not.
Could also just be another short upswing which might correct soon.