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

[JayJuanGee]

Is there going to be a BCC fork no matter what conditions?  I heard some people say that it would only be if UASF split off or something?  I am a bit out of the loop.

From what I understand, it is a done deal.

While the BIP91 activation took the wind out of UASF's sails, there is a growing perception that many simply lied about the 2X portion. This creates incentive to carry through with the BCC fork. Having a viable BCC when the Nov 2X date rolls around changes the game theory significantly.

However this plays out, it'll be a good show. And while Bitcoin may take a temporary hit in the process, it will likely come out the other end stronger. For the market will have informed the proper course of action.

Your premise about bigblockers being tricked through the segwit2x in terms of the 2x not being intended is ridiculous.  With the whole segwit2x matter, there was an attempt of the bigblockers to trick others to adopt a 2x, a hardfork and a change in consensus - however, even their plan seemed to go in a direction that they did not expect because the fact of the matter is that there is little to no support for the 2x, the hardfork and the change in governance - but the fact that there is little to no support is not going to stop the various bigblock nutjobs to continue to whine about being tricked.. when they are merely distorting reality to attempt to make it looks like their following is much greater than it actually is.

Just clarifying for the sake of truth. Depending upon the sequencing of things, Bitcoin Cash may be no more altcoin than is SegWit coin (which is somewhat playfully starting to be referred to as Bitcoin-Jr)

You and your big blocker buddies seem really angry, to be devolving into new name calling and spin terms to attempt to perpetuate various made up bullshit.

Well, JJG, you remain as clueless as ever. How do you get 'angry' out of the above? And what exactly is the bullshit? Either choice going forward is a change to Bitcoin. If one path forward is an alt, then so is the other.

Well maybe I am exaggerating a little bit to make a point about your seemingly ongoing bitterness towards Core personalities, or maybe your mistaken belief that there is a large level consensus out there for bigblocks than the reality of the matter?

You certainly don't come off as a dumb person - but you just seem to be engaged in ongoing nonsense of pushing your various conclusions about the supposed preferability of big blocks - and likely you remain deluded based on getting caught up in politics and a lack of willingness to accept the core process as legit and fair.

When is segwit likely to be activated?

it is approximately   2480  blocks   (464 blocks left in this period plus 2016 blocks in the next period)
and if there are 144 blocks per day, then that is approximately 17.2 days from today.  That means about August 10 - ish ( or 9-ish or 11-ish).  No?

Well, your reasoning is good, but your 144 blocks/day figure is low. Hashpower growth has been outrunning difficulty again. Recent intervals are averaging closer to 8-1/2 minutes. If this continues, you'll get your segwit locked in that much sooner.

I likely agree with you here. 

For the reasons stated by you above and for other reasons, I thought that the 144 blocks per day was too low, but I was using that approximate figure based on a suggestion of Marcus de augustus.... ... so yeah considering about 8.5 minutes per block would change the calculation by a day or two.. and I was merely speaking about some kind of general estimate anyhow, I suppose.

[r0ach]

Nothing lasts forever. Not even Bitcoin.

We can only hope it doesn't last much longer since it's main purpose is simply going to be escalation in the "de-cashing" of society and integration of you into this:

https://steemit.com/news/@r0achtheunsavory/the-r0ach-report-19-the-mainstream-media-broke-all-records-in-malthusian-propaganda-today-rfid-chipping

[JayJuanGee]

Someone (jgarzik?) should submit a BIP for miners to vote same as it has been done with BIP91 but for the 2MB blocksize increase. I am sure miners will keep the agreement and make it pass too.

You really believe that nonsense, bitserve?

Neither JGarzik nor any of the other bigblocker nutjobs want to clarify matters because they likely have less than 30% votes. The only way that they can create the appearance of having consensus is by engaging in tricks and deception.  If they make matters more clear, then they will actually demonstrate their lacking in support.  They don't want to do that.  They thrive off of ambiguity and FUD and threats and also part of their agenda is hidden (not about technical but about governance and personalities).  They really give a ratt's ass about supposed actual technical deficiencies in bitcoin because those technical deficiencies are pretextual or otherwise exaggerations of their fantasy thinking.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

so someone on reddit says "bitcoin will not fork"
then i say, " segwit is cancelled? "

it was not well received  

Go home, Adam. You're drunk.

[r0ach]

i see r0ach

Adam, you need to stop shilling.  99% of this board is so clueless about economics and money it's absurd.  Here's the Syscoin dev earlier trying to pretend it's even possible for bitcoin to be fungible and why I have to explain to him why it's not, and hence not possible to be money either:

CT and schnorr sigs will make btc fungible.

Cryptocurrency is NOT fungible.  You're trying to make believe that if coins can be tumbled it's somehow fungible but there is more to it than that.  If anything about the protocol at all can be altered via a strongman or banana republic voting to take over it's exposed power vacuum it's not fungible.  Anonymint even agreed on this at one point in time but he has probably cucked out and did a 180 now that he wants to release a cryptocurrency of his own.

Money = has objective, static traits

Currency = random arbitrary bullshit some guy makes up and constantly fiddles with like fiat or bitcoin. If it's possible for your money to "hard fork", or randomly morph from one thing to another, it's not fungible, and hence not money. In that circumstance you are involved in some type of scheme with a schemer ruling over you.

It doesn't matter if said forks are orchestrated by a banana republic of miners in a voting process. There is no Nash equilibrium in cryptocurrency, only a power vacuum to be filled by a top down hierarchy or strongman. To escape this master and servant hierarchy you have to use real money that cannot be altered or tampered with by third parties.

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

maybe it's an inevitable consequence of core fixing that which is not broken?

segwit2x has >90% support from miners dose it not? it also had many exchanges sign up to it no? do you appose the 2mb HF which is supported by all these people?

Dearest Adam...    I think that you are considerably deluded if you believe that currently (as I type) there is anywhere near 90% support for a 2mb HF any time in the near future (within the next few months)... and if we go further into the future, then we have to consider the facts and the circumstances before we can conclude whether such consensus levels will exits or not..    Accordingly, we don't know whether a 2mb hardfork will be justifiable based on facts that may change several months down the road.   

Otherwise, things are looking really wonderful to have segwit right around the corner... bullish as fuck... !!!!!!!

[jbreher]

To scale to visa/mastercard transactions per second, the blocks can never be big enough (if I remember correctly we need about 6Gig per block),

Never? Have you forgotten the mechanics of compound interest?

Internet bandwidth is growing by 24% CAGR. (http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/vni-hyperconnectivity-wp.html)

There is a ratio of 6000 between 1MB and 6GB. This is less than 12 doublings.

If 1MB was small enough for 2010, then 6GB will be small enough in the year 2045 or so. Dominant payment mechanism in 30 years? I like the sound of that. You really think adoption will move that fast?

[PoolMinor]

out of all the forums on the internet, you choose this one to shill for your beloved gold.

.... smart move buddy, well played.

What is even smarter.......writing stories on Steemit and getting paid in cryptocurrency.  He gets cryptocurrency for his nonsense, and then comes here and tries to pretend that it has no value.

[jbreher]

look at this fool trying to sell PUTs for BCC

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6p579e/offering_bcc_put_options_to_sell_bcc_at_100/

what a lunatic 

Notably, the originator of this very WO thread. What a maroon.

[infofront]

To scale to visa/mastercard transactions per second, the blocks can never be big enough (if I remember correctly we need about 6Gig per block),

Never? Have you forgotten the mechanics of compound interest?

Internet bandwidth is growing by 24% CAGR. (http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/vni-hyperconnectivity-wp.html)

There is a ratio of 6000 between 1MB and 6GB. This is less than 12 doublings.

If 1MB was small enough for 2010, then 6GB will be small enough in the year 2045 or so. Dominant payment mechanism in 30 years? I like the sound of that. You really think adoption will move that fast?

Having blocks that large presents many other technical hurdles that may very well exponentially compound the expenses of running the bitcoin network.

It's a moot point though. LN and other sidechains will provide more than enough bandwidth for Visa-like transaction volume.

[r0ach]

out of all the forums on the internet, you choose this one to shill for your beloved gold.

.... smart move buddy, well played.

There is no shilling required, only objective facts:

Cryptocurrency is not fungible by definition because it can be changed via power vacuum, while gold and silver are fungible because elements on the periodic table are immune to things like democracy or authoritarianism.

[jbreher]

Your premise about bigblockers being tricked through the segwit2x in terms of the 2x not being intended is ridiculous.

You can try to characterize this as big blockers getting 'tricked'. You're still not getting it.

BCC renders any such shenanigans impotent.

Well maybe I am exaggerating a little bit to make a point about your seemingly ongoing bitterness towards Core personalities,

Exaggerating. Indeed. But what "ongoing bitterness towards Core personalities" is this of which you speak?

or maybe your mistaken belief that there is a large level consensus out there for bigblocks than the reality of the matter?

No. The only belief that I have about some 'large level of consensus for bigblocks' is that it is larger than one would assume if one never ventured out of the BCT.org walled garden.

But here's the deal. I fight for what I believe to be good for Bitcoin. I'm not trying to win some popularity contest, nor be a happy lemming. I'm just energized that after years of inaction, or non-solutions being argued as the way forward, there appears on the horizon the potential of a Bitcoin drawn in the principles that I believe satoshi outlined.

You certainly don't come off as a dumb person - but you just seem to be engaged in ongoing nonsense of pushing your various conclusions about the supposed preferability of big blocks - and likely you remain deluded based on getting caught up in politics and a lack of willingness to accept the core process as legit and fair.

Fair? Fair is an alien concept in a permissionless environment. Do. Or do not. There is no try.

(Incidentally, your labeling of it as the 'core process' (again, in a permissionless environment) belies the blinders upon your eyes)

They really give a ratt's ass about supposed actual technical deficiencies in bitcoin

"There you go again."
- R. Raygun

so someone on reddit says "bitcoin will not fork"
then i say, " segwit is cancelled? "

it was not well received  

Legendary, by any name.

It's a moot point though. LN and other sidechains will provide more than enough bandwidth for Visa-like transaction volume.

Yes.

In an off-chain network* that exposes you to severe security holes. Even if you are online 24/7.

*If anybody ever manages to invent a  trustless routing algorithm that works in an environment of random joins and random disjoins.

[r0ach]

Cryptocurrency is not fungible by definition because it can be changed via power vacuum, while gold and silver are fungible because elements on the periodic table are immune to things like democracy or authoritarianism.

you dont have to work to hard, when your argument is right eh.

well markets will stay irrational longer then you can stay solvent.
will you cry when bitcoin breaks above 4000$

I'm entirely aware bitcoin can be pump and dumped to a larger number (or maybe it dies first) while having no fundamentals whatsoever in comparison to gold and silver as "money", and it's fundamentals as even a "currency" instead of money are also bad because you would have to get rid of the blockchain entirely in order to scale and convert to some emunie-like system with no state recovery at all, hence being even more unsound and fragile as a monetary instrument.

All I really care about is picking the asymmetric trade in the long run, and since bitcoin's fundamentals are poor as both money and currency, this definitely disqualifies it in the asymmetric trade aspect.  People here like to pretend it's inevitable bitcoin goes to some absurd number like John McAfee, and what I'm saying is, no, there are no fundamentals backing that viewpoint at all.  The only place I can find fundamentals like that are in gold and silver (mostly silver).

[Elwar]

To scale to visa/mastercard transactions per second, the blocks can never be big enough (if I remember correctly we need about 6Gig per block),

Never? Have you forgotten the mechanics of compound interest?

Internet bandwidth is growing by 24% CAGR. (http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/vni-hyperconnectivity-wp.html)

There is a ratio of 6000 between 1MB and 6GB. This is less than 12 doublings.

If 1MB was small enough for 2010, then 6GB will be small enough in the year 2045 or so. Dominant payment mechanism in 30 years? I like the sound of that. You really think adoption will move that fast?

https://lightning.network/

Scalability. Capable of millions to billions of transactions per second across the network. Capacity blows away legacy payment rails by many orders of magnitude.

[jbreher]

To scale to visa/mastercard transactions per second, the blocks can never be big enough (if I remember correctly we need about 6Gig per block),

Never? Have you forgotten the mechanics of compound interest?

Internet bandwidth is growing by 24% CAGR. (http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/vni-hyperconnectivity-wp.html)

There is a ratio of 6000 between 1MB and 6GB. This is less than 12 doublings.

If 1MB was small enough for 2010, then 6GB will be small enough in the year 2045 or so. Dominant payment mechanism in 30 years? I like the sound of that. You really think adoption will move that fast?

https://lightning.network/

Scalability. Capable of millions to billions of transactions per second across the network. Capacity blows away legacy payment rails by many orders of magnitude.

And the point of blowing way past any conceivable takeup is ... ... ... what, exactly?

The security tradeoffs are not worth it to me. And as mentioned before, there's that entire lack of a working routing mechanism thing.

Oh - and you didn't answer my question, did you?

[Elwar]

To scale to visa/mastercard transactions per second, the blocks can never be big enough (if I remember correctly we need about 6Gig per block),

Never? Have you forgotten the mechanics of compound interest?

Internet bandwidth is growing by 24% CAGR. (http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/vni-hyperconnectivity-wp.html)

There is a ratio of 6000 between 1MB and 6GB. This is less than 12 doublings.

If 1MB was small enough for 2010, then 6GB will be small enough in the year 2045 or so. Dominant payment mechanism in 30 years? I like the sound of that. You really think adoption will move that fast?

https://lightning.network/

Scalability. Capable of millions to billions of transactions per second across the network. Capacity blows away legacy payment rails by many orders of magnitude.

And the point of blowing way past any conceivable takeup is ... ... ... what, exactly?

The security tradeoffs are not worth it to me. And as mentioned before, there's that entire lack of a working routing mechanism thing.

Oh - and you didn't answer my question, did you?

Lightning Network...this ones goes to a billion.

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

maybe it's an inevitable consequence of core fixing that which is not broken?

segwit2x has >90% support from miners dose it not? it also had many exchanges sign up to it no? do you appose the 2mb HF which is supported by all these people?

Dearest Adam...    I think that you are considerably deluded if you believe that currently (as I type) there is anywhere near 90% support for a 2mb HF any time in the near future (within the next few months)... and if we go further into the future, then we have to consider the facts and the circumstances before we can conclude whether such consensus levels will exits or not..    Accordingly, we don't know whether a 2mb hardfork will be justifiable based on facts that may change several months down the road.    

Otherwise, things are looking really wonderful to have segwit right around the corner... bullish as fuck... !!!!!!!

i said miners, 90% support from miners, i'm basing this on the NYA signaling:
https://coin.dance/blocks
hmm....
it was above 90% signaling NYA before.
now its dropped to ~86%
maybe its all true, maybe many miners will backstab the NYA agreement.

well we do agree on one thing.

segwit, around the corner is bullish as fuck.

I understand that when you asserted 90% support for 2x and hardfork you were referring to miners, but even you should realize that is a compound question because it is coupled with segwit.  Of course, if you couple the question with segwit then you are going to get high levels of support for the matter.  If you ask the question in isolation, which would be 2mb and hardfork, then your level of support drops dramatically.  Maybe it is not as low as my below 30% proclamation, but certainly such support is no where near 90%, even amongst miners... and it is likely going to become even less once segwit is actually activated.

[r0ach]

The security tradeoffs (segwit/lightning network) are not worth it to me. And as mentioned before, there's that entire lack of a working routing mechanism thing.

The fact there's been somewhat of a conspiracy to pretend lightning network can function in a decentralized manner will put bitcoin in it's grave once people figure out it's not possible.  You would need to put all transactions in the same common que to prevent attacks and other problems, then you're right back to square one of on-chain bitcoin scaling.  But the fundamentals of on-chain scaling are also bad.  

You would need around 8 MB blocks for bitcoin to have market penetration into the upper middle class of the world, and even with blocks that big, only enormous transactions of something like $5-10k would be economical on-chain. People would hold, say $100k in savings in an address they control and transfer $10k at a time onto a 3rd party bitcoin debit card.

The problem with this solution is that bitcoin would be functioning solely as a settlement layer and it cannot compete with gold and silver as one.  People would be far better served transferring $10k worth of metals at a time onto a 3rd party debit card instead.  Metals are far superior as a store of value and bitcoin also has built in middle men (transaction validators) and doesn't remove counter party risk.  Bitcoin's fundamentals as a settlement layer are essentially zero due to better options that already exist.

[JayJuanGee]

Your premise about bigblockers being tricked through the segwit2x in terms of the 2x not being intended is ridiculous.

You can try to characterize this as big blockers getting 'tricked'. You're still not getting it.

It is an ongoing theme of big blockers asserting that they have been tricked - not that there is much of any basis in reality to such claims.

BCC renders any such shenanigans impotent.

Yeah more  pie in the sky threats that are going to turn into a flop... time will tell, no?

Well maybe I am exaggerating a little bit to make a point about your seemingly ongoing bitterness towards Core personalities,

Exaggerating. Indeed. But what "ongoing bitterness towards Core personalities" is this of which you speak?

Does not really matter too much.  I am just making an observation about an existing phenomenon... which is either ongoing bitterness towards Core personalities and/or anger and/or some other combination of other quasi-irrelevant contributory factors.

or maybe your mistaken belief that there is a large level consensus out there for bigblocks than the reality of the matter?

No. The only belief that I have about some 'large level of consensus for bigblocks' is that it is larger than one would assume if one never ventured out of the BCT.org walled garden.

you referring me to reddit r/btc?  hahahahaha  That's surely going to be helpful.

I also participated in bitco.in... and there is a high number of big blockers there too, tending to spew out nonsense that is based on erroneous facts erroneous logic and too much emotional baggage and irrational hatred of core personalities.

But here's the deal. I fight for what I believe to be good for Bitcoin. I'm not trying to win some popularity contest, nor be a happy lemming. I'm just energized that after years of inaction, or non-solutions being argued as the way forward, there appears on the horizon the potential of a Bitcoin drawn in the principles that I believe satoshi outlined.

You are likely in fantasy again.. sure you could join some alt coin, but it seems that the bitcoin with segwit is going to be the wave of the future, even though you have been proclaiming without really much basis in fact or logic that such a segwit bitcoin is outside of satoshi's view of bitcoin.. blah blah blah.

You certainly don't come off as a dumb person - but you just seem to be engaged in ongoing nonsense of pushing your various conclusions about the supposed preferability of big blocks - and likely you remain deluded based on getting caught up in politics and a lack of willingness to accept the core process as legit and fair.

Fair? Fair is an alien concept in a permissionless environment. Do. Or do not. There is no try.

Well there is a consensus practice that is in place for submitting BIPs... of course, the concept of a BIP in itself signifies that any good idea should be attempting to get support (consensus) if wanting it to be added to bitcoin, the mother chain.... 

(Incidentally, your labeling of it as the 'core process' (again, in a permissionless environment) belies the blinders upon your eyes)

It appears that you are attempting to get caught up in some technical weeds that strives to pervert my point(s)... .again...    a past-time of ours, no?

They really give a ratt's ass about supposed actual technical deficiencies in bitcoin

"There you go again."
- R. Raygun

of course some themes will have a tendency to repeat, unless the circumstances have sufficiently changed.  Seems that I'm likely not wrong.

[79b79aa8d5047da6d3XX]

so how will those convinced of the virtues of SegWit trade the fork?