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

[becoin]

BCC futures down 18% today and this is assuming wu/ver are supporting the price. The die is cast imo

There isn't a chance that ver or wu will give you wealth in exchange for your bcc. Nobody is giving anyone wealth for bcc.  Everyone will keep their bitcoin wealth.

I have no doubt there is a strategy here, perhaps it's:

They will have 3 months to bore everyone into giving away their BCC for peanuts,  before the pump comes when 2x HF fails in November.

What miner in their right mind will mine BCC peanuts for 3 months?

[1714722868]

1714722868

[1714722868]

1714722868

[1714722868]

1714722868

[1714722868]

1714722868

[traincarswreck]

They buy them  

No one is giving up bitcoin an asset with an increasing price for a worthless token.  Not ver, not wu.  Ask ver to give you 5 bux for nothing.  He won't do it.  And you can't pump a coin buy yourself and expect to profit in anyways.  It doesn't work like that.  There is no way to "pump".

There is no strategy to make money from BCC its a losing failing proposition that only makes sense to people that don't understand economics and game theory.

[traincarswreck]

What miner in their right mind will mine BCC peanuts for 3 months?

none

[Paashaas]

I have no doubt there is a strategy here, perhaps it's:

They will have 3 months to bore everyone into giving away their BCC for peanuts,  before the pump comes when 2x HF fails in November.

How do they pump?

Obviously, Roger is using his own fanbase (/rbtc) to lure them in.

Btw Eric just caught Roger lying 

[fluidjax]

BCC futures down 18% today and this is assuming wu/ver are supporting the price. The die is cast imo

There isn't a chance that ver or wu will give you wealth in exchange for your bcc. Nobody is giving anyone wealth for bcc.  Everyone will keep their bitcoin wealth.

I have no doubt there is a strategy here, perhaps it's:

They will have 3 months to bore everyone into giving away their BCC for peanuts,  before the pump comes when 2x HF fails in November.

What miner in their right mind will mine BCC peanuts for 3 months?

Its not like there will be many miners fighting for the block reward if the price is low. The number of miners will reach an equilibrium with the price, and it will simply tick along, boring every one into selling, thinking its going nowhere.

[Torque]

1) Are you concerned that the U.S. gov might be lying about true inflation numbers?

2) Do you believe that Bitcoin can grow at a 5- to 10-yr average rate of at least 10-12% per year?

If yes to both above, then here's why you should invest in Bitcoin for the long term:

http://www.chapwoodindex.com/

[traincarswreck]

Obviously, Roger is using his own fanbase (/rbtc) to lure them in.

He's not 100% for the idea and neither is r/btc and in fact no players will let go of their bitcoin because its rising in value and bcc has no value.  

Even if you were ultra evil and wanted bcc to usurp btc you still wouldn't trade your bitcoin for bcc.  You would hold your wealth btc otherwise you would only be destroying it.  Let me paraphrase this article because I don't think many read my writing well: https://medium.com/@rextar4444/the-myth-of-bitcoin-cash-understanding-game-theory-f87858bf8791

In order for this to work a large amount of the market must be committed to changing to bcc at the same time.  In a cooperative fashion.  The entire reason we need bitcoin is because its not possible for a large complex array of players to make a coordinated move.

It's not possible.  It's a misunderstanding of game theory and economics to suggest that any value can be created or won from bcc.  It's a hoax with a completely unrelated ulterior motive.

[European Central Bank]

What miner in their right mind will mine BCC peanuts for 3 months?

there's a mountain of obsolete mining machines out there. i dunno what they're up to these days but they're looking for work.

[becoin]

What miner in their right mind will mine BCC peanuts for 3 months?

there's a mountain of obsolete mining machines out there. i dunno what they're up to these days but they're looking for work.

They're working on alts. Tomorrow they'll have yet another alt to work on. Yawn.

[becoin]

Obviously, Roger is using his own fanbase (/rbtc) to lure them in.

He doesn't have any fan base. All those are alt fans that don't have any bitcoins. They'll support any action that harms bitcoin, like BCC HF, hoping that will lead to their shitcoin price rise.

[Torque]

Every time that I see the price pushed back up into the $2700-2800 range, alts are down.

That would seem to indicate that alts are getting squeezed each time to prop up bitcoin.

[Denker]

BCC futures down 18% today and this is assuming wu/ver are supporting the price. The die is cast imo

There isn't a chance that ver or wu will give you wealth in exchange for your bcc. Nobody is giving anyone wealth for bcc.  Everyone will keep their bitcoin wealth.

I have no doubt there is a strategy here, perhaps it's:

They will have 3 months to bore everyone into giving away their BCC for peanuts,  before the pump comes when 2x HF fails in November.

I thougt about this option as well.
It's also very difficult to sell Bcash for something than just dust when the masses are dumping.
Therefore I will hold this shitcoin and hope for a pump later to sell it for some profit. If it doesn't happen and that shitcoin goes straight down to hell, I'm fine with it as well.

[JimboToronto]

Good morning Bitcoinland.

Still coiling in anticipation I see... currently $2778USD (Bitcoinaverage).

Isn't waiting fun?

[jbreher]

https://steemit.com/cryptocurrency/@anonymint/shocking-crisis-coming-to-cryptocurrency-in-sept

I don´t get the part of "stealing" segwit transactions. It sounds like bullshit, but Anonymint have a greater tech knowledge than me. Can some tech savvy user confirm it?

Yes. It is a well-known attribute of SegWit.

It is a well-known stupidity of people claiming this.

Well, you can pretend that an 'anyone can spend' transaction is something other than an 'anyone can spend' transaction. But of course that would be tautologically impossible.

Jbreher:

You and some of the big blocker nutjobs seem to have tendencies to cry wolf so much that if there did happen to be a real issue or a real problem, then it is possible that people might not believe you because they have been exposed to too many exaggerations,  made up facts and made up conclusions, right?

Wrong.

Sometimes, I state facts, and sometimes, I render opinions. I try not to exaggerate, I don't make up facts, and I try to keep my conclusions rational. When challenged, I produce rationale for my statements. Sometimes, I even get things wrong, but I always try to be truthful.

You, OTOH, tend to repeat dogma as if it were settled truth, and avoid providing any basis for your utterances.

Issue in a nutshell:
- On a network where miners do not honor SegWit, all segwit transactions are 'anyone can spend' transactions
- On such a network, each successful miner can spend any 'anyone can spend' transaction to himself
- As segwit is used (e.g., on a segwit-honoring network), more value gets locked up in segwit/'anyone can spend' transactions
- As more value is built up in segwit/'anyone can spend' transactions, this increases the incentive for miners to flip the network from segwit-honoring to non-segwit
- This pressure increases with increasing use of segwit. Even if initially stable, the system tends further toward instability.
The net is that smallblockers need to trust the miners -- whom they seem to already believe to be evil -- to not steal their segwit transactions.

Of course, one can convert a segwit coin back to a bitcoin by spending it to yourself in a non-segwit transaction. But that also mandates a second transaction, thereby nullifying and even reversing segwit's so-called capacity increase.

[hv_]

https://steemit.com/cryptocurrency/@anonymint/shocking-crisis-coming-to-cryptocurrency-in-sept

I don´t get the part of "stealing" segwit transactions. It sounds like bullshit, but Anonymint have a greater tech knowledge than me. Can some tech savvy user confirm it?

Yes. It is a well-known attribute of SegWit.

It is a well-known stupidity of people claiming this.

Well, you can pretend that an 'anyone can spend' transaction is something other than an 'anyone can spend' transaction. But of course that would be tautologically impossible.

Jbreher:

You and some of the big blocker nutjobs seem to have tendencies to cry wolf so much that if there did happen to be a real issue or a real problem, then it is possible that people might not believe you because they have been exposed to too many exaggerations,  made up facts and made up conclusions, right?

Wrong.

Sometimes, I state facts, and sometimes, I render opinions. I try not to exaggerate, I don't make up facts, and I try to keep my conclusions rational. When challenged, I produce rationale for my statements. Sometimes, I even get things wrong, but I always try to be truthful.

You, OTOH, tend to repeat dogma as if it were settled truth, and avoid providing any basis for your utterances.

Issue in a nutshell:
- On a network where miners do not honor SegWit, all segwit transactions are 'anyone can spend' transactions
- On such a network, each successful miner can spend any 'anyone can spend' transaction to himself
- As segwit is used (e.g., on a segwit-honoring network), more value gets locked up in segwit/'anyone can spend' transactions
- As more value is built up in segwit/'anyone can spend' transactions, this increases the incentive for miners to flip the network from segwit-honoring to non-segwit
- This pressure increases with increasing use of segwit. Even if initially stable, the system tends further toward instability.
The net is that smallblockers need to trust the miners -- whom they seem to already believe to be evil -- to not steal their segwit transactions.

Of course, one can convert a segwit coin back to a bitcoin by spending it to yourself in a non-segwit transaction. But that also mandates a second transaction, thereby nullifying and even reversing segwit's so-called capacity increase.

So you say, miners are just stupid by blocking SW, since they could 'earn' a lot of more with it ?

 

[williamuk]

Every time that I see the price pushed back up into the $2700-2800 range, alts are down.

That would seem to indicate that alts are getting squeezed each time to prop up bitcoin.

I'd expect that to keep happening until tomorrow but on a slowly diminishing scale. At one point everyone will have to leave alts for bitcoin if they want their free bcc money. Bitcoin velocity will be minimal

Those who were going to move to desktop or paper wallets because of FUD have already done it I should think. They won't be able to come back for a while and shouldn't have any short term impact on the market.

[Ibian]

Anyone having transaction problems? I bumped a transfer with a $8 fee 4 hours ago and it still hasn't gone through. I did this because it had been waiting for 11 hours with a normal fee.

[matt4054]

Anyone having transaction problems? I bumped a transfer with a $8 fee 4 hours ago and it still hasn't gone through. I did this because it had been waiting for 11 hours with a normal fee.

Don't forget that it's the fees/byte ratio, not the absolute fee, that matters here. So I would check the total size of your tx to learn more. If it uses hundreds of inputs, chances are you will have to spend even more to get it through.

The mempool is currently almost empty:

Code:

$ bitcoin-cli getmempoolinfo
{
  "size": 5387,
  "bytes": 7325274,
  "usage": 16250208,
  "maxmempool": 300000000,
  "mempoolminfee": 0.00000000
}

So there must be some specific problem / delay with your tx.

Another typical reason is if your tx uses unconfirmed inputs.

[jbreher]

So you say, miners are just stupid by blocking SW, since they could 'earn' a lot of more with it ?

Well, no. I did not say that.

I said that there is a risk that miners will claim segwit/'anyone can spend' transactions as their own, and that this risk increases with increasing use of segwit.

[Dotto]

Can someone repost the 1 august counter?