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

[JayJuanGee]

I hope that Segwit+2MB gets enough support to finally end this absurd war. At this time it looks as the only non contentious alternative. I don't like the idea of non unanimous hard forks, nor UASF. Whatever is supported by an almost unanimous majority is ok to me at this time (Well, except BU/EC as I am totally against it).

Seemed like a decent compromise to me. Core programmers snubbing it was disappointing.

Agreed, the total lack of ability to make a compromise, even one that doesn't seem to have big drawbacks is disappointing.

So, no comment from anyone at Core at all.  Is it totally dead in the water?

If Core is invited into the discussion to merely rubberstamp an agreement, then why should they participate more?

They are not going to agree to a hardfork, so why come up with an agreement that involves a hardfork.. and if there is a hardfork, that means a change in governance.. why would they participate in that?  Core members say these kinds of things, but no one seems to want to hear them, and act as if they are not responding and come up with some kind of supposed compromise that include "no go" and unnecessary terms.

[Meuh6879]

So, no comment from anyone at Core at all.
Is it totally dead in the water?

Install or not, your choice.



If you want a comment, read github commits.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/v0.14.1...master

[Richy_T]

Ah, the classic Luke-jr bullshit data which appears (can't tell cause methodology not published) to count all nodes from all time and all IPs while every other node counting service in existence has a total node count in the mid to high thousands.

https://coin.dance/nodes
https://bitnodes.21.co/nodes/
http://nodecounter.com/#all_nodes

And where block signalling (unsibylable) is around 40% for bigger blocks.

[Asrael999]

The 2MB + segwit proposal looks to me like a deliberate delaying tactic to prevent the implementation of UASF and other upgrades and maintain the status quo.  The way the proposal works is that nothing changes until Segwit activation is signalled - since the miners can prevent Segwit signalling more or less forever the proposal effectively means no change to the Bitcoin protocol and therefore 1MB blocks remaining for the foreseeable future. It's a simple delaying tactic designed to prevent the UASF gaining traction and preserving the miners profitability for a longer timescale.

[Wekkel]

[Meuh6879]

Oh yeah ... it's coming.

[luckygenough56]

what a boring bulltrap

eth is so overpriced also

need a good old dump to start fresh

[sirazimuth]

what a boring bulltrap

eth is so overpriced also

need a good old dump to start fresh

i wouldn't mind a little sideways action for more than a day tbqh...

[FractalUniverse]

dead cat bounce or genuine uptrend continuation?

[Qartada]

I hope that Segwit+2MB gets enough support to finally end this absurd war. At this time it looks as the only non contentious alternative. I don't like the idea of non unanimous hard forks, nor UASF. Whatever is supported by an almost unanimous majority is ok to me at this time (Well, except BU/EC as I am totally against it).

Seemed like a decent compromise to me. Core programmers snubbing it was disappointing.

Agreed, the total lack of ability to make a compromise, even one that doesn't seem to have big drawbacks is disappointing.

So, no comment from anyone at Core at all.  Is it totally dead in the water?

If Core is invited into the discussion to merely rubberstamp an agreement, then why should they participate more?

They are not going to agree to a hardfork, so why come up with an agreement that involves a hardfork.. and if there is a hardfork, that means a change in governance.. why would they participate in that?  Core members say these kinds of things, but no one seems to want to hear them, and act as if they are not responding and come up with some kind of supposed compromise that include "no go" and unnecessary terms.

A hard fork wouldn't necessarily require a change in governance.  It could easily be implemented by the Core team, and I would personally feel more secure if it was.  

Their incentives to avoid a hard fork aren't really to do with power, more to do with what their preferred method of scaling is (offchain scaling combined with a fee market on the chain, from what I can gather).

[HI-TEC99]

dead cat bounce or genuine uptrend continuation?

It's impossible to say as of today. About a week after a big dump we often get an indication of which way the price will go. However, sometimes it simply goes sideways for months leaving everyone guessing.

A number of exchanges are overwhelmed with new users creating new accounts, so there's new money flowing into Bitcoin. Maybe that will continue the uptrend.

[craked5]

what a boring bulltrap

eth is so overpriced also

need a good old dump to start fresh

i wouldn't mind a little sideways action for more than a day tbqh...

You don't say!!!
I mean I like volatility otherwise I wouldn't be here but.;. DAMN!

Let's keep a bit of calm people. 2000$ is perfectly fine. Still an impressive increase in a short period of time. What do you say if we all just sit at a table, drink a bit and let miners do their job for some time? I'd like a bit of tranquility. Right now every day when I woke up I'm either 20% times richer or I've seen a quarted of my investments gone in the night.
It's not relaxing xD

[gentlemand]

It's not relaxing xD

If you want relaxing I think you arrived at least two decades too early. It's going to carry on flicking your earlobe until you go batty.

[JayJuanGee]

I hope that Segwit+2MB gets enough support to finally end this absurd war. At this time it looks as the only non contentious alternative. I don't like the idea of non unanimous hard forks, nor UASF. Whatever is supported by an almost unanimous majority is ok to me at this time (Well, except BU/EC as I am totally against it).

Seemed like a decent compromise to me. Core programmers snubbing it was disappointing.

Agreed, the total lack of ability to make a compromise, even one that doesn't seem to have big drawbacks is disappointing.

So, no comment from anyone at Core at all.  Is it totally dead in the water?

If Core is invited into the discussion to merely rubberstamp an agreement, then why should they participate more?

They are not going to agree to a hardfork, so why come up with an agreement that involves a hardfork.. and if there is a hardfork, that means a change in governance.. why would they participate in that?  Core members say these kinds of things, but no one seems to want to hear them, and act as if they are not responding and come up with some kind of supposed compromise that include "no go" and unnecessary terms.

A hard fork wouldn't necessarily require a change in governance.  It could easily be implemented by the Core team, and I would personally feel more secure if it was.  

Their incentives to avoid a hard fork aren't really to do with power, more to do with what their preferred method of scaling is (offchain scaling combined with a fee market on the chain, from what I can gather).

Their preference is security, because we saw the disasterous instability of a hardfork in ethereum when it had less than 1/30 the value of BTC's current marketcap.  Don't try to dilute away the governance issue, and hardforks are no little "play thing"  If you implement a hardfork and you don't have a vast majority of folks on-board, such as 95% - ish, then the minority group is going to screw up stability, involving value in terms of the market cap and also value in terms of folks already invested in various kinds of development and ongoing projects. 

The big blocker nut jobs play around as if these matters are trivial... and that there is some justification to make unnecessary changes for the mere sake of change... that is called changing governance - which is also not easy... we do not want bitcoin to be easy to change, merely because there are a bunch of whiners and hostage takers who are threatening further damages.

[Miz4r]

A hard fork wouldn't necessarily require a change in governance.  It could easily be implemented by the Core team, and I would personally feel more secure if it was.  

Their incentives to avoid a hard fork aren't really to do with power, more to do with what their preferred method of scaling is (offchain scaling combined with a fee market on the chain, from what I can gather).

Well onchain scaling can only take us so far, and can quickly become a slippery slope turning Bitcoin into Paypal 2.0. I understand their reasoning perfectly well, and even Segwit with 2MB blocks (with blocks of up to 4MB max under certain conditions) was already something not every Core developer was happy with but they still implemented due to pressure on them from the community to allow bigger blocks. I am not against hard forks, but I think it would be wise to see the results of Segwit first before deciding on how and when to hard fork. Rushed hard forks are not a good thing, but if there is to be one in 6 months after Segwit activation it should be the amended proposal made by Calvin Rechner as explained here: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-May/014445.html
This proposal actually has the support of some Core devs as well so I think it has the best chance to succeed as a compromise.

[rjclarke2000]

It's not relaxing xD

If you want relaxing I think you arrived at least two decades too early. It's going to carry on flicking your earlobe until you go batty.

Earlobe flicking!! Ha ha. Excellent.

[HI-TEC99]

It's not relaxing xD

If you want relaxing I think you arrived at least two decades too early. It's going to carry on flicking your earlobe until you go batty.

It depends on your attitude to Bitcoin. JimboToronto finds it relaxing, he just keeps buying the dips and hodling. Some of us go for days without sleep watching the charts, or set alarms to wake us up for big price movements. At the same time JimboToronto misses out a few whole days of even checking the price.

Good morning Bitcoinland.

Missed a couple of days but we seem to be consolidating to a nice point... currently $2250USD (Bitcoinaverage).

I missed the bottom but I did manage to buy a bit more under $2000. Hopefully the correction is over and we can continue with the uptrend.

At least we finished the week in the green.

[matrix zion]

It's not relaxing xD

If you want relaxing I think you arrived at least two decades too early. It's going to carry on flicking your earlobe until you go batty.

It depends on your attitude to Bitcoin. JimboToronto finds it relaxing, he just keeps buying the dips and hodling. Some of us go for days without sleep watching the charts, or set alarms to wake us up for big price movements. At the same time JimboToronto misses out a few whole days of even checking the price.

Good morning Bitcoinland.

Missed a couple of days but we seem to be consolidating to a nice point... currently $2250USD (Bitcoinaverage).

I missed the bottom but I did manage to buy a bit more under $2000. Hopefully the correction is over and we can continue with the uptrend.

At least we finished the week in the green.

Yeah but Jimbo is just obviously creating his own retirement funds xD

I mean I don't think I've ever seen him selling anything.
Then of course it's relaxing, he's just putting money on the side and the money is growing on its own!
Maybe I should do like Jimbo and just stop trying to predict anything. You just stop giving a fuck and when your salary comes at the end of the month you put 10% on a bank account waiting for price to dump then you go buy a load on localbtc...

[gentlemand]

It depends on your attitude to Bitcoin. JimboToronto finds it relaxing, he just keeps buying the dips and hodling. Some of us go for days without sleep watching the charts, or set alarms to wake us up for big price movements. At the same time JimboToronto misses out a few whole days of even checking the price.

It also depends on when you got in. Mr. Toronto is a man with relaxation baked in due to his timing. He's already been vindicated. I'm sure newcomers will too eventually but if you're a relatively recent arrival you'll still be in the flitting stage.

If you move to the vindication stage then you start fretting about becoming worth too much and whether you should cash out. Then you start suspecting your cat of looking for your private keys. Then you finish up drooling while wearing a hockey helmet.

[Ted E. Bare]

Jimbo is a real class act.