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

[K~Ehleyr]

Any news on this "agreement" thingy yet?  Where's it being announced?

[criptix]

Any news on this "agreement" thingy yet?  Where's it being announced?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1928093.0

[K~Ehleyr]

Any news on this "agreement" thingy yet?  Where's it being announced?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1928093.0

Ouch, that doesn't look good!  There's no confirmed announcement yet though, is there?  Just speculation based on a "leak" which may or may not be accurate?

[Torque]

Any so called "agreement", privately discussed only by a bunch of suits and not including input from any core devs, will fail.

Period.

Anyone believing otherwise is delusional.

The fact that the suits believe they are in control of anything, or can influence anything, is equally delusional.

[spooderman]

yeah...that agreement is a piece of shit. just another attempt at a delaying tactic.

carry on with #UASF. nothing to see there.

[lost_in_base]

Any news on this "agreement" thingy yet?  Where's it being announced?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1928093.0

Ouch, that doesn't look good!  There's no confirmed announcement yet though, is there?  Just speculation based on a "leak" which may or may not be accurate?

Actually that looks pretty good. Just can not have it all.


+ 1mb to 2mb
+ Segwit signaling
+ lower mempool
+ lower fees
+ price up

- time given to bitmain asicboost
- will bitmain support segwit?
- back to UASF?
- back to where we started

[spooderman]

it's obvious nonsense, just go read up on reddit for a while, plenty of people have torn it to pieces already.

[Torque]

it's obvious nonsense, just go read up on reddit for a while, plenty of people have torn it to pieces already.

Bullet points on a whiteboard talks.

Real solid & tested code walks.

[CoinCube]

So is it an attempt to stop the User activated fork getting traction ?

yes, because the period from august 2017 to november 2017 is the enforced period for Segwit ... not the LOCK period.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0148.mediawiki

so Segwit2Mb is a trap.
they want introduce the 2Mb before SegWit LOCK.

So the folks who want 2Mb don't trust the SegWit people not to break away after SegWit is locked and block a later block size increase?

Sounds understandable given the emotionalism on this issue. It would be very disruptive to activate SegWit and then deactivate it before LOCK. Seems unlikely the miners would do this. It seems far more likely that the SegWit folks would increase their opposition to a block size increase to 2 Mb once they already have what they want.

I am not understanding why this is not a reasonable roadmap forward.

[lost_in_base]

So is it an attempt to stop the User activated fork getting traction ?

yes, because the period from august 2017 to november 2017 is the enforced period for Segwit ... not the LOCK period.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0148.mediawiki

so Segwit2Mb is a trap.
they want introduce the 2Mb before SegWit LOCK.

So the folks who want 2Mb don't trust the SegWit people not to break away after SegWit is locked and block a later block size increase?

Sounds understandable given the emotionalism on this issue. It would be very disruptive to activate SegWit and then deactivate it before LOCK. Seems unlikely the miners would do this. It seems far more likely that the SegWit folks would increase their opposition to a block size increase to 2 Mb once they already have what they want.

I am not understanding why this is not a reasonable roadmap forward.

This roadmap is a new era in bitcoins history.
Soon 2200 USD, today!
Some people just do not want bitcoin to evolve.

[lemmyK]

[becoin]

So is it an attempt to stop the User activated fork getting traction ?

yes, because the period from august 2017 to november 2017 is the enforced period for Segwit ... not the LOCK period.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0148.mediawiki

so Segwit2Mb is a trap.
they want introduce the 2Mb before SegWit LOCK.

So the folks who want 2Mb don't trust the SegWit people not to break away after SegWit is locked and block a later block size increase?

Sounds understandable given the emotionalism on this issue. It would be very disruptive to activate SegWit and then deactivate it before LOCK. Seems unlikely the miners would do this. It seems far more likely that the SegWit folks would increase their opposition to a block size increase to 2 Mb once they already have what they want.

I am not understanding why this is not a reasonable roadmap forward.

Any block size increase is not a reasonable roadmap forward. It solves nothing! It just postpones the inevitable next block size increase - 4mb, 8mb, 16mb... until full centralization. Big blocktards will accept anything just to follow this roadmap.

[Okurkabinladin]

So is it an attempt to stop the User activated fork getting traction ?

yes, because the period from august 2017 to november 2017 is the enforced period for Segwit ... not the LOCK period.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0148.mediawiki

so Segwit2Mb is a trap.
they want introduce the 2Mb before SegWit LOCK.

So the folks who want 2Mb don't trust the SegWit people not to break away after SegWit is locked and block a later block size increase?

Sounds understandable given the emotionalism on this issue. It would be very disruptive to activate SegWit and then deactivate it before LOCK. Seems unlikely the miners would do this. It seems far more likely that the SegWit folks would increase their opposition to a block size increase to 2 Mb once they already have what they want.

I am not understanding why this is not a reasonable roadmap forward.

This roadmap is a new era in bitcoins history.
Soon 2200 USD, today!
Some people just do not want bitcoin to evolve.

I am more interested where will the next correction lead us. 1550 USD/BTC is the floor for now? I think its realistic to say, that we will reach atleast 4000 dollars per bitcoin during this summer, however there will be more bumps along the road, where bitcoin takes deep breath before rising again.

Just my two cents. Seeing proper attempts at technical analysis is rare these days, not the least for the fact, that everyone but to the moon people gets bullied into silence.

[savetherainforest]

Any so called "agreement", privately discussed only by a bunch of suits and not including input from any core devs, will fail.

Period.

Anyone believing otherwise is delusional.

The fact that the suits believe they are in control of anything, or can influence anything, is equally delusional.

Well... basically they still don't realize that everyone can create their own country just with 1 bitcoin and have their separate system.

Bitcoin user be like : "Mom... gonna start my own global banking system with just a thousand bitcoins!"    


(*edit:) The conclusion being that even if a majority decides something, as long as there is a minority with the concept of the crypto (of bitcoin)... They will just decide to part ways and create their own economic union with their parted share and even maybe buying out the penny on the dollar coins that are left... or trying to get them for free from the ones that don't see any value in them anymore. Just for them to have control and majority... And this is how tyrannies are built!!!

[CoinCube]

So is it an attempt to stop the User activated fork getting traction ?

yes, because the period from august 2017 to november 2017 is the enforced period for Segwit ... not the LOCK period.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0148.mediawiki

so Segwit2Mb is a trap.
they want introduce the 2Mb before SegWit LOCK.

So the folks who want 2Mb don't trust the SegWit people not to break away after SegWit is locked and block a later block size increase?

Sounds understandable given the emotionalism on this issue. It would be very disruptive to activate SegWit and then deactivate it before LOCK. Seems unlikely the miners would do this. It seems far more likely that the SegWit folks would increase their opposition to a block size increase to 2 Mb once they already have what they want.

I am not understanding why this is not a reasonable roadmap forward.

Any block size increase is not a reasonable roadmap forward. It solves nothing! It just postpones the inevitable next block size increase - 4mb, 8mb, 16mb... until full centralization. Big blocktards will accept anything just to follow this roadmap.

If it also gets SegWit activated in the process then isn't it solving something?

Increasing the block size to 2Mb is not a slippery slope. It does not necessarily follow that we will then go to 4mb, 8mb, 16mb until full centralization.

[CoinHoarder]

I don't get the negativity. This agreement sounds like a compromise of core/miners to me. Sure, it is a different version of Segwit, but it is Segwit nonetheless. We get Segwit and 2MB blocks... if not just rumors, then the scaling debacle is over. Sounds bullish to me.

Why the sudden shock that miners are in control of Bitcoin protocol implementation? They always have been and always will be- that is how Bitcoin was designed.

[savetherainforest]

If it also gets SegWit activated in the process then isn't it solving something?

Increasing the block size to 2Mb is not a slippery slope. It does not necessarily follow that we will then go to 4mb, 8mb, 16mb until full centralization.

"full centralization" ... the fuk you are smoking there??


I for one if there is a split... I'm gonna use both versions of the coin, encourage and support them! Even the weaker / useless one! Just because I feel like trolling the other one that feels more entitled!

Laughing in portuguese : HueHueHueHueHue!!!

[JayJuanGee]

So is it an attempt to stop the User activated fork getting traction ?

yes, because the period from august 2017 to november 2017 is the enforced period for Segwit ... not the LOCK period.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0148.mediawiki

so Segwit2Mb is a trap.
they want introduce the 2Mb before SegWit LOCK.

So the folks who want 2Mb don't trust the SegWit people not to break away after SegWit is locked and block a later block size increase?

Sounds understandable given the emotionalism on this issue. It would be very disruptive to activate SegWit and then deactivate it before LOCK. Seems unlikely the miners would do this. It seems far more likely that the SegWit folks would increase their opposition to a block size increase to 2 Mb once they already have what they want.

I am not understanding why this is not a reasonable roadmap forward.

This roadmap is a new era in bitcoins history.
Soon 2200 USD, today!
Some people just do not want bitcoin to evolve.

I am more interested where will the next correction lead us. 1550 USD/BTC is the floor for now? I think its realistic to say, that we will reach atleast 4000 dollars per bitcoin during this summer, however there will be more bumps along the road, where bitcoin takes deep breath before rising again.

Just my two cents. Seeing proper attempts at technical analysis is rare these days, not the least for the fact, that everyone but to the moon people gets bullied into silence.

Yeah.. sure a correction is going to come, but it is kind of hard to hear you when we are going up $100 per day...

So the more immediate fact is that the price is going up.. not down.. so you are reflecting facts that are the opposite about what is happening...

So maybe talk about the up before focusing so much on the down..

But you don't believe in the current up.. even though it is happening right in front of your face...

I would like a correction too, ... but gosh, are we going to see one before getting to $2300 or 2400 first?

[Lincoln6Echo]

Back in 2013 I was waiting for a correction too when price went from 10$ to like 50$ and than above 100$. Still not happend...

[Totscha]

Back in 2013 I was waiting for a correction too when price went from 10$ to like 50$ and than above 100$. Still not happend...

I'm still waiting for the double digits I was promised in 2014.