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

[fluidjax]

If I give BCH a 0.1% chance of victory, I should hold 0.1% of my portfolio ($ value)  in BCH not 50%.

if you give bch a .01% of victory I don't really consider that uncertain.  Uncertain in this sense implies 50/50. Regardless the optimal strategy is to converge the future winning coin as fast as possible as its determined.  

Those that converge on the winning coin first have the most to gain or not to lose

The point is 50/50 yes/no or up/down is a gross simplification.
Its all about probability, and scaling your exposure to risk in line with your perception of that probability.
 

[JayJuanGee]

[[edited out]

You are being disingenuous and deceitful. Your statement was "very speculative and hypothetical". There was neither speculation, nor hypotheticals in the post you were replying to. Merely a listing of some of the attributes of the SegWit system. You are the one listing nonsense, as the topic here is Bitcoin.

I thought that I was just taking your argument to a further logical extreme in order to emphasize its absurdity, and you are probably correct with your suggestion that i could have probably done that better.  I'll give you that one.  plus one jbreher.   

[traincarswreck]

your formula is too simple, but the essence of it is correct.

For example, they may have a 2% chance of surpassing the value of bitcoin.

They might have a 5% chance of equalling the value of bitcoin.

They might have a 10% chance of retaining 15% value of bitcoin. 

They might have a 30% chance of retaining 1% value of bitcoin.

I don't really know what these exact numbers are, but it is true that you should attempt to cause your holdings to be in line with your view of the various probabilities, even if you cause such view to be a simpler formula... that might evolve a bit with the passage of time.. .. like what the fuck, they were able to survive 3 months past the hardfork, and then maybe looking at them 6 months down the road or 1 year or 3 years or 5 years etc.

Szabo showed we will converge on a single standard.  If we are making a choice 1 will win and the other will revert to its commodity value which is basically null.

[hv_]

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.

Sounds very speculative and hypothetical to me.

No. Just No.

Please employ proper logic. Every bulleted item above is a factual statement. Would you like to challenge any of these factual statements on their own merit?

Whether or not those steps get chained together in reality is currently a matter of speculation, yes. But I made no such claim. A set of factual statements is not "speculative and hypothetical".  Any speculation as to the consequences of the above has been left to the reader.

That is nonsense.  I can make all kinds of factual statements, and then there is no consequence unless you can describe some kind of logical connection.

For example:

1) The sky is clear (meaning no clouds) today

2) Billy bob drives a Toyota Prius

3) That window is dangerous because it slams down without any restraints

4) The goat eats a lot of grass, especially for its size.

5) The Iphone will be damaged if you drop it in the toilet, because it is an Iphone 4

6) If any one of those lightbulbs burn out, then the whole chain does not work,

7) e = mc squared


No matter the string of facts, the jbreher Conclusion is:  Segwit is going to be a disaster for bitcoin because it is too complicated, and even though segwit is a done deal, I am going to continue to whine about it and assert that we should employ a more simple and straight forward solution of increasing to 2mb block limits.  

The problem here is that you can and you will find flaws for all solutions, and you can just repeat same phrases from you against SW like this

A: SW is tested and safe lets do it
B :Sounds very speculative and hypothetical to me.
A: No things are different in production compared to testnets, because miners dont cheat there....
.....

This type of discussion will never end since there are just no proper assesments behind and mathematical logic applied, missing probabilities for the desasters to happen.

What process do we need to agree upon a final logical assesment that anyone accepts as a proof?

[traincarswreck]

The point is 50/50 yes/no or up/down is a gross simplification.
Its all about probability, and scaling your exposure to risk in line with your perception of that probability.
 

Are you keeping Szabo's explanation of the logical emergence of money from barter in mind when you say this?  He made a distinct point the network will converge and the loser's value will revert to its commodity value which is effectively zero.

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

The problem here is that you can and you will find flaws for all solutions, and you can just repeat same phrases from you against SW like this

A: SW is tested and safe lets do it
B :Sounds very speculative and hypothetical to me.
A: No things are different in production compared to testnets, because miners dont cheat there....
.....

This type of discussion will never end since there are just no proper assesments behind and mathematical logic applied, missing probabilities for the desasters to happen.

What process do we need to agree upon a final logical assesment that anyone accepts as a proof?

O.k.  I will admit that I was being a bit flippant in my last post, but that is not merely because I am lacking in substance, but possibly the frustration (and maybe even humor) in the fact that a lot of you big blocker nutjobs want to continue to argue about a done deal.  seg wit is going to lock in and to activate, so what fucking good does it do to keep complaining with a bunch of bullshit arguments that segwit does not work when it has not even gone live yet?

There is a process for getting these kinds of things passed.  Segwit passed through the process and neither 2mb upgrade, nor hardfork nor changing governance passed.  Yeah those others were proposed, but they did not get accepted through the process.  So, now we are on the eve of activating segwit and a bunch of nonsensical specualtion about all the things that it supposedly cannot do.. blah blah blah.. and we have not even seen the first generation of applications built upon the thing and then going live on the thing.

I'm looking forward to finding out what kinds of things are going to be built upon segwit and therefore it looks like we are truly entering into exciting times in the coming year or two.

[savetherainforest]

That moment of the day when I'm like:







    Up! Up!! Up!!!

    pUmP! pUmP!! pUmP!!!

[noobtrader]

dont worry guys....  fork is good trend,  the last time eth got forked, it fly 20x of its price.  moreover, Mcafee says btc will reach 500k usd in 3 years https://www.rt.com/viral/396791-mcafee-penis-bitcoin-price/

so in three years, either we all will own some lambo or we will see some action on national tv.... 

[fluidjax]

Someone has a bot on https://yobit.net/en/trade/BCC/BTC buying 0.00015BTC worth of BCC  2 or 3 times a second.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Someone has a bot on https://yobit.net/en/trade/BCC/BTC buying 0.00015BTC worth of BCC  2 or 3 times a second.

Pump and dumping virtual tokens for a fork coin that doesn't even exist yet.  

[bitebits]

BTC-e plans on refunding its customers:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2056158.msg20505927#msg20505927

[ghandi]

Could someone explain me, how people are already trading Bitcoin Cash BEFORE the fork? Do they only trade "virtual" BCCs on the exchanges (like, you got 10BTC, you will have 10BCC in the Future, let's trade!)? Because if i got this right: To this point there isn't existing a single Bitcoin Cash coin, right?

[fluidjax]

WTF is BIP148 Coin, Jihan is tweeting about it, and i'ts a pair on Viabtc.
Is it what comes into existence if >50% miners stops supporting BIP91, or Segwit fails to lock-in on Bip91?

[pfrtlpfmpf]

On Polo, three, in words: three, bitcoin on lending, this moment.
Never saw that before.
Not even for five percent. Time to shit in my pants.

[Dakustaking76]

Hehe the panic started ore its a markt corrextion

[YamashitaRen]

Too bad I woke up too late to play with it from the beginning  

[FractalUniverse]

You'll get many opportunities to play volatility today and following few days.
this is not it yet,

[JayJuanGee]

BTC-e plans on refunding its customers:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2056158.msg20505927#msg20505927

Could be, could be.

After I read that post, I recalculated my odds of receiving my BTC-e funds back at about 20% - previously I had calculated it to be about 5%, so it is great that the odds of reimbursement are increasing a little bit. 

[becoin]

WTF is BIP148 Coin, Jihan is tweeting about it, and i'ts a pair on Viabtc.
Is it what comes into existence if >50% miners stops supporting BIP91, or Segwit fails to lock-in on Bip91?

After Bitcoin Cash Crash the name of the game is "saving face"!

New ATH is coming in couple of days!

[JayJuanGee]

WTF is BIP148 Coin, Jihan is tweeting about it, and i'ts a pair on Viabtc.
Is it what comes into existence if >50% miners stops supporting BIP91, or Segwit fails to lock-in on Bip91?

Kind of sounds like a test balloon.

I am wondering why some of the folks, such as Jihan doesn't just take a bullet and begin to direct his mining power against seg wit in order that it does not lock in? 

Maybe he wants others to do the dirty work for him?  Maybe he realizes there would be a considerable backlash if he attempted such?  Maybe he realizes that others would ramp up their hash power, and maybe even miners will leave his pools? 

Maybe this is a sign that he is backing out of the stupid-ass fork of bitcoin cash?  how likely would that be?  less than 20% It is seeming pretty likely that the hardforker nutjobs are going to go through with the fork.., right?  This is where the rubber hits the road, right?  Shit or get off the pot, right?