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

[MinermanNC]

There has not been any real movement towards BU today? hash/blocks found etc. so I guess nothing has really changed over the last few days. Makes ya wonder why we had that little pump? I suppose it was somewhat manipulated?.....  

[york780]

Well that didn't last long today lol. Lets hope Alts climb back up!  

Yup, Ethereum is already crawling up. When this continues Ethereum will be 50% of bitcoin in a couple of months.

And this is precisely why a fork MUST happen.

If there is no fork, Bitcoin will be replaced COMPLETELY and will end up with a marketshare of 10% or less.

Ethereum, Dash and Monero then completely take the reigns of the Crypto space.

It's your call boys. What do you want to see happen?

yes, lets:

-double our coins
-end the debate
-upgrade the system
-aaaannndd prevent the altcoin take-over

split it, split ASAP!

I agree, split it and cut the rotten part out of btc.
1 step foward and 2 steps back.
Guys the current price is so much utter trash that even Africoins bearish predictions are coming true.
Than you know that we are f*** up.

[Ted E. Bare]

No worries, they want you to sell cheap. It is coming back up already.

[MoinCoin]

Well that didn't last long today lol. Lets hope Alts climb back up!  

Yup, Ethereum is already crawling up. When this continues Ethereum will be 50% of bitcoin in a couple of months.

And this is precisely why a fork MUST happen.

If there is no fork, Bitcoin will be replaced COMPLETELY and will end up with a marketshare of 10% or less.

Ethereum, Dash and Monero then completely take the reigns of the Crypto space.

It's your call boys. What do you want to see happen?

yes, lets:

-double our coins
-end the debate
-upgrade the system
-aaaannndd prevent the altcoin take-over

split it, split ASAP!

Do we really need to split bitcoin the currency?
A compromise with the Bitcoin Network/Blockchain would be better IMHO.

As far as i can tell, the majority is not comfortable with EC blocksize let alone BU.
On the other side I think UASF without 51% miner support is dangerous, because miners could just fake support for UASF and just orphan all blocks, which would actually include segwit transactions, while still adhering to the rules of the UASF/segwit.

So IMHO UASF does not safely work under given circumstances and EC has not enough economic support to do a safe HF.

An incomplete thought:
Why not add emergent consensus on blocksize through soft forked extension blocks and 1MB+segwit on the main blocks?

Another compromise could be main block 1 MB, extension block Core with segwit and max 2.7 MB blockweight and extensionblock with EC blocksize.
So when you'd run core, you'd have the same spam attack surface as with segwit now.
Of course this would mean more work for devs, which want EC, but the potential reward is higher.

The beauty for BU would be that afterwards you could hard-fork on that extension blocks all you want, without having the risk to split the base BTC currency.

P.S. my personal favorite is SBTC with RSK ;oD

[becoin]

Do we really need to split bitcoin the currency?
A compromise with the Bitcoin Network/Blockchain would be better IMHO.

You can't compromise with extortionists. They will always ask for more. The snake must be killed. The sooner the better.

[MoinCoin]

Do we really need to split bitcoin the currency?
A compromise with the Bitcoin Network/Blockchain would be better IMHO.

You can't compromise with extortionists. They will always ask for more. The snake must be killed. The sooner the better.

Yeah.. I don't even know which side you are referring to
Seems to me that this is true for extremist on both sides.
I'm more or less comfortable in the middle of this mess.

[becoin]

Do we really need to split bitcoin the currency?
A compromise with the Bitcoin Network/Blockchain would be better IMHO.

You can't compromise with extortionists. They will always ask for more. The snake must be killed. The sooner the better.

Yeah.. I don't even know which side you are referring to
Seems to me that this is true for extremist on both sides.
I'm more or less comfortable in the middle of this mess.

There is no mess. Bitcoin is in excellent shape.
One of the major mining pools is insolvent (in bitcoins) and is trying to crash bitcoin in order to conceal their insolvency.

[criptix]

Do we really need to split bitcoin the currency?
A compromise with the Bitcoin Network/Blockchain would be better IMHO.

You can't compromise with extortionists. They will always ask for more. The snake must be killed. The sooner the better.

Yeah.. I don't even know which side you are referring to
Seems to me that this is true for extremist on both sides.
I'm more or less comfortable in the middle of this mess.

There is no mess. Bitcoin is in excellent shape.
One of the major mining pools is insolvent (in bitcoins) and is trying to crash bitcoin in order to conceal their insolvency.

How the heck does a pool go bankrupt? 
Can you give a link please.

[HI-TEC99]

Do we really need to split bitcoin the currency?
A compromise with the Bitcoin Network/Blockchain would be better IMHO.

You can't compromise with extortionists. They will always ask for more. The snake must be killed. The sooner the better.

Yeah.. I don't even know which side you are referring to
Seems to me that this is true for extremist on both sides.
I'm more or less comfortable in the middle of this mess.

There is no mess. Bitcoin is in excellent shape.
One of the major mining pools is insolvent (in bitcoins) and is trying to crash bitcoin in order to conceal their insolvency.

How the heck does a pool go bankrupt?  
Can you give a link please.

It's possible, KnCMiner went bankrupt and blamed it on the cost of mining. They said after the halving it would cost them more to mine Bitcoins than they could sell them for.


http://www.coindesk.com/kncminer-declares-bankruptcy-cites-upcoming-bitcoin-subsidy-halving/

Sweden-based bitcoin mining firm KnCMiner, a startup that has raised $32m in venture funding from investors including Accel and Creandum, has declared bankruptcy.

Cole claimed that the primary factor was the upcoming drop in the bitcoin transaction block reward subsidy, set to take place sometime in the middle of July.

Currently, when a miner successfully processes a block, they receive a reward of 25 freshly minted bitcoins. Once the halving takes place, the subsidy will drop to 12.5 BTC – an event that effectively cuts a miner’s bitcoin income by half.

Cole told CoinDesk:

"Effectively our cost of coin – how much we produce the coins for – will be over the market price. The price is now [roughly] $480. With all of our overhead, after July, the cost will be over $480. All of the liabilities we’ll have after that time will be too high."

He said the move to bankruptcy was a pre-emptive one taken by KnC’s board of directors, explaining that the firm wanted to avoid running out of funds prior to the drop in revenue.

[JayJuanGee]

Today's candle was a nailbiter, and just barely closed in the green on Bitstamp - and did not close in the green on some of the other exchanges. Therefore, I am going to put off any prediction regarding whether we are out of the woods yet... .. at least to see one more daily candle - tomorrow's.

At this point, tentatively we could be bouncing around in a price range of $800 to $1,150 for several months.. and I will still assert that I believe that the odds are greater that a break out will go through the top of the range rather than through the bottom.. yet it is seeming possible that we could be in this range for some time.

Actually, if we were to continue downwards in the next 24 hours and support does not hold at $900-ish, then I would possibly change my tentative opinion about $800 holding as well.. but for now, mid-$900s seem to be our temporary and still uncertain price territory.

[Ted E. Bare]

You bunch of panic sellers, it is actually looking good again for the first time.

[lightfoot]

"Effectively our cost of coin – how much we produce the coins for – will be over the market price. The price is now [roughly] $480. With all of our overhead, after July, the cost will be over $480. All of the liabilities we’ll have after that time will be too high."

He said the move to bankruptcy was a pre-emptive one taken by KnC’s board of directors, explaining that the firm wanted to avoid running out of funds prior to the drop in revenue.

[/quote]
KNC blew it in a few ways: They stopped making the Titan, which was probably the longest-lasting profitable miner (2+ years) ever, and they didn't realize the price of bitcoin would just double to account for the halving.

Ah well.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Roger is teaching economics 101 out of his ass. If you're interested:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/61oycs/substitute_goods/

[Killerpotleaf]

Roger is teaching economics 101 out of his ass. If you're interested:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/61oycs/substitute_goods/

no one is buying altcoins!

ahahaha what a dumbass.

[r0ach]

Roger is teaching economics 101 out of his ass. If you're interested:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/61oycs/substitute_goods/

He's kind of right there.  I always thought if bitcoin doesn't scale and fees go too high transactions would bleed into an altcoin like litecoin.  Then once litecoin fees go to high they would bleed into something else.  At this point cryptocurrency would either be a slow march to the graveyard with continuous fracturing of the ecosystem, or you would end up with regional currencies developing to avoid the overhead of outside ecosystems.  

It's possible the common link between each regional currency would be bitcoin, but it's also possible it would be some fiat note or gold/silver/oil whatever instead.  The common link is what other nations would accept in international trade settlement.  They currently accept useless things like tbills, but most people seem to be pushing towards settling international trade in gold.  If you were the king of a country and selling oil to someone else, would you rather have gold or bitcoin?...

I'd probably want something more than imaginary electrons as payment if I was dumping my country's natural resources on the market.  Bitcoin is similar to fiat paper promises in that regard - an IOU to receive goods or services from someone else at a later date.  It requires another party to honor that contract, which is not legally binding nor even a gentlemen's agreement - just an assumption some random guy is going to give you stuff for it some day.  It takes an actual physical commodity based currency that you can hold in your hand and defend with an AR15 to eleminate that counter party risk.

Someone might not agree to be your slave just because you have a bag of gold, but at least you don't end up with a bag of nothing out of the deal.

[numismatist]

You bunch of panic sellers, it is actually looking good again for the first time.

On thirty days backwards we are making lower lows. The hights dropping sharper since eleven days, that marks the transition from bullish into bearish mode.

[JayJuanGee]

You bunch of panic sellers, it is actually looking good again for the first time.

On thirty days backwards we are making lower lows. The hights dropping sharper since eleven days, that marks the transition from bullish into bearish mode.

Sounds like wishful thinking more than anything.

I think that the market is consolidating and trying to figure out which mode it is going to be in. 


May take several weeks to figure out whether we will be returning upwards or not.... The situation is far from certain in either case.

[Killerpotleaf]

Do we really need to split bitcoin the currency?
A compromise with the Bitcoin Network/Blockchain would be better IMHO.

bitcoin  the currency and bitcoin the Network, are one and the same and can't be separated, at least i dont see how that can be done.

As far as i can tell, the majority is not comfortable with EC blocksize let alone BU.
On the other side I think UASF without 51% miner support is dangerous, because miners could just fake support for UASF and just orphan all blocks, which would actually include segwit transactions, while still adhering to the rules of the UASF/segwit.

So IMHO UASF does not safely work under given circumstances and EC has not enough economic support to do a safe HF.

i think UASF is safe if done with a HF-PoW change.
but ya this is more nutty then proposing 1GB block IMO  

An incomplete thought:
Why not add emergent consensus on blocksize through soft forked extension blocks and 1MB+segwit on the main blocks?

oh i see what your saying....
well... that sounds like sapeggit.
i want to say, SF are evil.

Another compromise could be main block 1 MB, extension block Core with segwit and max 2.7 MB blockweight and extensionblock with EC blocksize.
So when you'd run core, you'd have the same spam attack surface as with segwit now.
Of course this would mean more work for devs, which want EC, but the potential reward is higher.

The beauty for BU would be that afterwards you could hard-fork on that extension blocks all you want, without having the risk to split the base BTC currency.

I feel like core devs would love(not hate?) this idea.
But idk a SF which requires miner consensus , and requires nodes to update to make sense of the new "extension block" seems kinda pointless, HF seems cleaner, and the coins in the extension block probably won't be fungible with real BTC ?? idk.

Edit: even with all that said... i think you might be onto somthing, but idk!

P.S. my personal favorite is SBTC with RSK ;oD

RSK probably requires low BTC TX fees to work?
its very interesting.
I got into OMNI a while back, as a way to double down on bitcoin's success.

[Paashaas]

[Torque]

Roger is teaching economics 101 out of his ass. If you're interested:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/61oycs/substitute_goods/

no one is buying altcoins!

ahahaha what a dumbass.

The "free market" as a whole will never accept 'all' the cryptocurrencies out there that have splintered into several hardly distinguishable variants, or even the top 3-5. No fkn way, too much confusion, too much integration, too much hassle. Not worth it for industry merchants to do that and support integrating them all.

If they are even going to do it at all, the world markets and merchants will only consolidate on the ONE cryptocurrency with the most end user popularity, the most industry backing, the largest ecosystem, the strongest brand^TM recognition.

Everything else will just be noise, and probably not even a close second.

We've been through this same competitive shit before.

It was called the enterprise search engine wars. Google won.
It was called the smartphone marketcap wars. Android won.
It was called the commercial desktop OS wars. Microsoft won.
It was called the enterprise backend server wars. Fedora/RHEL linux won.
It was called the social network wars. Facebook won.
It was called the privatized corporate Intranet wars. The free Internet won.