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

[jojo69]

Well fellas, get ready for some fun in the next two weeks.

Tomorrow is a solar eclipse.

It's also the day that President Trump announces that we're back into the war game in Afghanistan. A build up of troops and more airstrikes likely. This has secretly been in the planning for months and months by the Deep State. But make no mistake, this is really the precursor to war in the Asia Pacific. Can't have all that pesky surplus oil just sitting around stockpiled in tankers everywhere... gotta burn it somehow.
"When all else fails [to stimulate the economy], you take 'em to war."

Gold market is showing signs of shorts exiting positions.

U.S. Stock market is overheated and showing signs of exhaustion.

U.S. govt about to hit the debt ceiling.... again.

Hedge Funds moving into bitcoin through LedgerX come on line in Sept.

Things are heating up fast. Anything can happen in the coming months.

Hold HODL on to your butts bitcoin!

right now rhymes with 1913/1914 more closely than I would like, I am not at all sure that adults are in charge of the ship here

[bitserve]

Well, CORE should not try to play chiking with 90%+ of the hasrate. If they do, maybe this time it won't end good.

P.S.: And I am pro-CORE. But everything has limits....

This is not new, and it is not new that you keep proclaiming your support for core while at the same time trying to act as if the nutjob bigblockers are acting reasonable with their ongoing upping of the ante in their blackmailing and terrorist efforts. 

The big blocker nutjobs are not reasonable, they just are attempting to become more and more creative and more and more severe in what they are willing to try in order to attack bitcoin (while acting as if they are pro-bitcoin).. ... ongoing talking out of both sides.

No, the bigblockers are not acting reasonably at all. BU was a joke. BCH is another joke and an attack to Bitcoin (unless they recognise it just an unrelated altcoin, which some of them doesn't).

But the Segwit2X agreement is somewhat reasonable and feasible.

So maybe I am expecting that CORE put this to a fucking end with a very simple change that will be needed soon anyways?

I don't think this is a change so critical that both camps need to keep the finger over the "mutual destruction" button. And that is exactly what they are doing now.

[marcus_of_augustus]

But the Segwit2X agreement is somewhat reasonable and feasible.

So maybe I am expecting that CORE put this to a fucking end with a very simple change that will be needed soon anyways?

I don't think this is a change so critical that both camps need to keep the finger over the "mutual destruction" button. And that is exactly what they are doing now.

You're wrong, core owes you nothing. Stop acting like a whiny bitch who is not getting extra ice-cream all over your face. There is only one side making threats of destruction and it is not core. Core are basically a group of volunteers, not your paid servants that you can shit on any time you're feeling upset. I doubt you know shit about software security systems but you expect to know what is a "reasonable position" for fundamental protocol changes to the bitcoin distributed network. Sometimes people have to know their limitations and when it is time to shut the fuck up. Your time is now you idiot.

A hardfork needs to be well-thought out and the opportunity to clean up a lot of legacy technical debt is the wisest course of action. It will need significant testing and long advance notice, probably 12-18 months for all the older operational nodes. Core has always said that there will be a hardfork and an algorithm to increase blocksize would be implemented at that time, just not tonight dear. This is an operational $60 billion financial clearing and monetary security system, not something you can just tinker with next time you have a panic desperation anxiety attack that your technical opinion is becoming irrelevant.

[Paashaas]

Roger Ver, Bitmain and r/btc r/BCash bigblockers are the most disgusting retards in the entire Bitcoin community.

Those cheap hostile take-overs are pure cancer, however Bitcoin is becomming more stronger and immume after that.

Great times ahead when we get Segwit witin 2 days, no more bullshit.

[cAPSLOCK]

But the Segwit2X agreement is somewhat reasonable and feasible.

So maybe I am expecting that CORE put this to a fucking end with a very simple change that will be needed soon anyways?

I don't think this is a change so critical that both camps need to keep the finger over the "mutual destruction" button. And that is exactly what they are doing now.

You're wrong, core owes you nothing. Stop acting like a whiny bitch who is not getting extra ice-cream all over your face. There is only one side making threats of destruction and it is not core. Core are basically a group of volunteers, not your paid servants that you can shit on any time you're feeling upset. I doubt you know shit about software security systems but you expect to know what is a "reasonable position" for fundamental protocol changes to the bitcoin distributed network. Sometimes people have to know their limitations and when it is time to shut the fuck up. Your time is now you idiot.

A hardfork needs to be well-thought out and the opportunity to clean up a lot of legacy technical debt is the wisest course of action. It will need significant testing and long advance notice, probably 12-18 months for all the older operational nodes. Core has always said that there will be a hardfork and an algorithm to increase blocksize would be implemented at that time, just not tonight dear. This is an operational $60 billion financial clearing and monetary security system, not something you can just tinker with next time you have a panic desperation anxiety attack that your technical opinion is becoming irrelevant.

Harsh.  But truth.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Tough but fair. I lol'ed.

[bitserve]

But the Segwit2X agreement is somewhat reasonable and feasible.

So maybe I am expecting that CORE put this to a fucking end with a very simple change that will be needed soon anyways?

I don't think this is a change so critical that both camps need to keep the finger over the "mutual destruction" button. And that is exactly what they are doing now.

You're wrong, core owes you nothing. Stop acting like a whiny bitch who is not getting extra ice-cream all over your face. There is only one side making threats of destruction and it is not core. Core are basically a group of volunteers, not your paid servants that you can shit on any time you're feeling upset. I doubt you know shit about software security systems but you expect to know what is a "reasonable position" for fundamental protocol changes to the bitcoin distributed network. Sometimes people have to know their limitations and when it is time to shut the fuck up. Your time is now you idiot.

Look who's whining here. If you want to derail the discussion with personal attacks and projecting things that not only have I never said nor even implied, it's up to you.

If you have, somehow, felt attacked or uncomfortable with my opinion, my apologizes. It wasn't my intention to upset you.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Moral indignation is just his style.

[jojo69]

But the Segwit2X agreement is somewhat reasonable and feasible.

So maybe I am expecting that CORE put this to a fucking end with a very simple change that will be needed soon anyways?

I don't think this is a change so critical that both camps need to keep the finger over the "mutual destruction" button. And that is exactly what they are doing now.

You're wrong, core owes you nothing. Stop acting like a whiny bitch who is not getting extra ice-cream all over your face. There is only one side making threats of destruction and it is not core. Core are basically a group of volunteers, not your paid servants that you can shit on any time you're feeling upset. I doubt you know shit about software security systems but you expect to know what is a "reasonable position" for fundamental protocol changes to the bitcoin distributed network. Sometimes people have to know their limitations and when it is time to shut the fuck up. Your time is now you idiot.

A hardfork needs to be well-thought out and the opportunity to clean up a lot of legacy technical debt is the wisest course of action. It will need significant testing and long advance notice, probably 12-18 months for all the older operational nodes. Core has always said that there will be a hardfork and an algorithm to increase blocksize would be implemented at that time, just not tonight dear. This is an operational $60 billion financial clearing and monetary security system, not something you can just tinker with next time you have a panic desperation anxiety attack that your technical opinion is becoming irrelevant.

post of the week

[JayJuanGee]

Well, CORE should not try to play chiking with 90%+ of the hasrate. If they do, maybe this time it won't end good.

P.S.: And I am pro-CORE. But everything has limits....

This is not new, and it is not new that you keep proclaiming your support for core while at the same time trying to act as if the nutjob bigblockers are acting reasonable with their ongoing upping of the ante in their blackmailing and terrorist efforts.  

The big blocker nutjobs are not reasonable, they just are attempting to become more and more creative and more and more severe in what they are willing to try in order to attack bitcoin (while acting as if they are pro-bitcoin).. ... ongoing talking out of both sides.

No, the bigblockers are not acting reasonably at all. BU was a joke. BCH is another joke and an attack to Bitcoin (unless they recognise it just an unrelated altcoin, which some of them doesn't).

But the Segwit2X agreement is somewhat reasonable and feasible.

So maybe I am expecting that CORE put this to a fucking end with a very simple change that will be needed soon anyways?

I don't think this is a change so critical that both camps need to keep the finger over the "mutual destruction" button. And that is exactly what they are doing now.

O.k.  Well maybe this whole argument boils down to whether segwit2x is reasonable and feasible, and your mere assertion that it is does not mean that it is.

No one is saying "no" to the 2x part - however, they are saying "no" to the stupid ass and untested timeline.

So let's get the fuck on with the segwit part of the agreement (the part that almost anyone that is anyone agrees upon) and see how it plays out before getting ahead of ourselves.   So yeah, maybe a few years down the road, there may be a need for the 2x part (possibly sooner, but I doubt it)

Currently, there is no real justification for the 2x part, except for a bunch of whiners (and seemingly you too) asserting that it is logical and reasonable (and supposedly feasible in your phraseology) and there is absolutely no evidence to support that it is either needed or that it will not create more problems than it supposedly resolves.

So, yeah, down the road there might be some reason for the 2x part, but we are a whole hell-of-a long way from any kind of justification for going down that path, and you are seeming disingenuous to still be acting as if the big blocker nutjobs really believe that there is some kind of a technical justification for the 2x part of segwit2x and for the timeline that they are unreasonably and prematurely whining for.

Edit- After I posted, I see that marcus beat me to the essence of my post.. and more succinctly too.

[fabiorem]

I think it will need 3 years of testing until block size can be increased to 2mb.

I'm not against it, I just think it should not be made in a hurry.

This requires lots of testing, they have to try sidechains, new codes and implementations. This takes time, you cant do that in just 3 months. You will need 3 years.

[JayJuanGee]

I think it will need 3 years of testing until block size can be increased to 2mb.

I'm not against it, I just think it should not be made in a hurry.

This requires lots of testing, they have to try sidechains, new codes and implementations. This takes time, you cant do that in just 3 months. You will need 3 years.

Exactly... that is the essence of the stupidity of the big blockers ongoing attempts to create some false sense of urgency in order to rush something that is neither tested nor needed, currently. 

Their supposed technical claims is wholey an disingenuous argument that gets way too much attention.

[AlexGR]

But the Segwit2X agreement is somewhat reasonable and feasible.

There is extreme dishonesty in the segwit2x camp, which you can see from trying to exploit the fact that people do not really know Segwit is 4mb, and they try to sell the angle that bitcoin is simply going to be upgraded from 1 to 2mb. The dishonesty is compounded by things like what Bitpay does... "yeah just download this upgrade titled bitcoin" (which runs something else).

Core was hesitant to raise block capacity, yet they considered the various parties and went with a rather large 4mb (max) effective capacity for Segwit. Suddenly, the "demands" changed and now 4mb ain't enough, we need 8mb - which is what 2x provides. Incidentally, the forkers will have pushed, and got, two 8mb forks, one with segwit, and one without. No 1mb, no 2mb, no 4mb forks... just 2 forks of 8mb.

Why 1->8?

What's the rush here? Why can't we sit at 4mb for a while, see some LN implementations etc etc and then go for bigger blocks? Seriously, what's the rush? Tx fees? Are people really worried they will lose a buck or two by transacting, when Bitcoin has gone from 600 to ~4200? Who are these people, because I know none who are desperate to destroy the 4200 price to save a dollar on a transaction. You can't be a bitcoin holder and realistically consider that a 1-2-3$ tx fee will eat on your wallet, when Bitcoin has MADE YOU RICH by acting as a store of value. How can any of this be reasonable? This is "concerned trolling" at its finest.

So it all breaks down to arbitrary demands, in order to fork bitcoin and create chaos, through undermining the store-of-value property, undermining transactional clarity (no replay protection) and finally undermining the aggregate intellectual capital that is used to preserve and advance the ecosystem (tens of developers vs ...butthurt Jeff). And all this for what? The rush to go to 8mb because 4mb wasn't enough of an upgrade? And do this within 3 months of segwit activation? It doesn't even make sense. The costs involved are too large compared to possible "gains" (lol). And let's not even start with the part where it's a rushed, non-tested change with no advance warning (as Satoshi wanted for changes of this kind), or that it's not backwards compatible.

That's why it's an attack on bitcoin and that's why you see all those who are actual enemies of bitcoin but pretending to be btc-supporters (the facade drops at this point) actually wishing the most contentious and damaging outcome. They are vitriolic.

[infofront]

Most big blockers are certain that segwit is a catastrophe waiting to happen, for various reasons. That's why they believe buttcoin cash will be the winning fork.

[bitserve]

The thing is that I do agree with all those arguments. Yet I am still more concerned about that 90%+ hashrate that keeps signaling for "Segwit2X" than what I were if core decided to implement the 2x (in addition to Segwit). Among other reasons, because I am sure that if core decided to do it, it would be because they considered feasible to do it safely.

It's obvious by now that the 2x is not gonna happen any time soon, or at least core has no intention to deliver it, not even try to negotiate a future timeline nor anything. But those pools keep signaling for it, and this time it is not a minority percentage as BU is/was. And it is not only Jihan/Ver... it is almost all pools.

They don't even have any "technical" reason to keep signaling for it.... but again, they keep doing it. So.... what now? another fork but this time followed by many more than just Ver and Jihan alone?

I have never said the blame is on core, on the contrary, we all know where the attacks come from. But I can't say I am not worried by the situation.

Maybe my concern is unjustified, well donno. I hope so.

[xhomerx10]

Dumped $50k worth of Rogercoin tonight on Kraken.

Thanks for helping to pay off a mortgage, Mr. Ver !

Sold off in chunks between $720 and $740, with a few market sell orders for shits and giggles here and there.

 Are you done or should I sell my pittance before you fully tank the price?  I see it's under $700 now.

[AlexGR]

The thing is that I do agree with all those arguments. Yet I am still more concerned about that 90%+ hashrate that keeps signaling for "Segwit2X"

The hashrate is centralized. If you can gather most of the miners (or pool operators in different scenarios) in a small meeting and tell them to change what Bitcoin is, then your primary problem is not segwit2x but mining centralization.

[xhomerx10]

Dumped $50k worth of Rogercoin tonight on Kraken.
Thanks for helping to pay off a mortgage, Mr. Ver !
Sold off in chunks between $720 and $740, with a few market sell orders for shits and giggles here and there.

Are you done or should I sell my pittance before you fully tank the price?  I see it's under $700 now.

I'm done for the night More tomorrow

 Damn!  I'm working nights.  Try not to fully kill it before noon

[aesma]

They don't need to run btc1. It's just a simple patch to core code.

They don't need to keep signaling anymore. If they keep doing it, it needs to be interpreted as their intention to follow on with the agreement. In this case with the 2x part of it.

It's not because they "signaled" it... it is because the keep signaling it now.

What other interpretation would be possible for their signaling now?

Trying to play chicken with the Core team to get them to agree to Segwit2x agreement even if no one from the Core team was there to be party to the agreement. I think the big blockers will be the ones to pull off to the side come early November.

Well, CORE should not try to play chiking with 90%+ of the hasrate. If they do, maybe this time it won't end good.

P.S.: And I am pro-CORE. But everything has limits....

Is the 2X code good and well tested ?

edit : I've caught up with the thread, so the answer is no.

[HanvanBitcoin]

BTCought the dip