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

[Meuh6879]

like the 114 000 Bitcoin Core clients ?
 ... with the 1Mb limit size (and 4Mb limit weight) ?

 

[yermom]

I think Segwit2x has majority 90-95% of hashpower. It will be solved very quickly :-)

and 0% of full node to keep or accept the 2Mb Block size ... 
Miners can not force node to "change" of software.

Why do you think, there will be not full nodes with Segwit2X ?  It is few lines of code to change limit from 1MB to 2 MB

Because it doesn't matter if miners want to do dirty businesses.
Segwit2x is likely not going to succeed

[gembitz]

ot~>> XPM--[[[primecoin]]]--- perhaps the first legitimate scientific coin rising from the ashes driving btc price higher!!  *radarzz*

https://poloniex.com/exchange#btc_xpm

 

[buyandhold]

Slightly off topic: where do you all get your news re: bitcoin, specifically news out of China? Twitter?

Links (to Twitter, Reddit or other sources) found in this very thread 

Once it's in this thread it's already old news unfortunately.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg21954218#msg21954218

[JayJuanGee]

I'm sure the next fork will be called Bitcoin Money

bitcoin gold, its already in the works  

https://www.coindesk.com/first-cash-now-gold-another-bitcoin-hard-fork-way/

hmm yeah I saw somewhere (think it was coinscalendar.com) that its happening on the 25th October- and "BTG" get issued on 1st of Nov appaz

Yawn

<plots>

One of the disruptive aspects of this (for some of us) seems to be having to figure out whether it is going to be practical to move around some coins (maybe move some off of exchanges in order to get some possible credit or windfall for whatever newly propositioned airdrop nightmare?).. ..

Hopefully at some point these airdrops will become zero profits - but it is hard to sit on the sidelines (such as with BCH) when the profits could cause nearly immediate increase of 7% to 25% of BTC holdings, depending upon timing.  I think that I am around 11% overall with my BCH, but I still have about 15% of my holdings to still cash out... I just received the Bitstamp ones, and I am still waiting upon Coinbase and Gemini to issue the ones that I had with them.   Even though Bitfinex took an immediate 15% haircut, which might have been somewhat worth the gamble in order to get them on the exchange quickly, the only service that I completely lost my BCH was Localbitcoins that refuses to accept thei custodial obligations and give me my BCH that they had in their custody as of 8/1 forkening...  

[d_eddie]

I think Segwit2x has majority 90-95% of hashpower. It will be solved very quickly :-)

and 0% of full node to keep or accept the 2Mb Block size ... 
Miners can not force node to "change" of software.

Why do you think, there will be not full nodes with Segwit2X ?  It is few lines of code to change limit from 1MB to 2 MB

• It's not 1MB to 2MB. It's more like ~4MB to ~8MB.
• You have to know WHICH lines of code need changing, and change them right. And figure out the technical consequences. The developer(s?) on the 2x Team don't seem to be able to tell the keyboard from the screen. And the team don't seem to care much about censorship resistance, either.
• Node operators, besides trusting the 2x Team to do the right thing technically, must be WANTING to take that step. I, for one, am not.

But I see you're a legendary member, so you know all this. You trollin' me, man?

[JayJuanGee]

If we have another fork that even rhymes a little to this one, I can only see bitcoin getting stronger as people buy more in anticipation of the air drop.

Without replay protection, it will be a slow mess to untangle the altcoins though.

If replay protection is not added, then what is going to be the solution, something like 100 confirmations?  Or am I misunderstanding the gravity of the problem and adding confirmations would that not be enough?

Longest chain will win.

I understand about this longest chain principle, yet even if there is an attempt to attack bitcoin through its own rules, bitcoin is not going to be undermined through mere technicalities...   Therefore, who gives a flying ratt's ass about longest chain, if some forked off new coin does not have the network of users behind it, then it does not matter if "technically" it has the longest chain....

So please, we need a bit more nuanced assessment rather than just asserting the largess of some simple rule that could cause discordance, right?  It is not so simple as the longest chain, can you concede that?

[pfrtlpfmpf]

Flux, liquidity ... are always good for the buyers.  
High volume, High price.

who is that woman, please tell me, or better yet, upload a porn with her. Shes the hottest girl, i´ve ever seen. This is no sexist post, i just love you all  

Must be Sarah Shahi

You saved me. I won´t forget that, ever !

[JayJuanGee]

If we have another fork that even rhymes a little to this one, I can only see bitcoin getting stronger as people buy more in anticipation of the air drop.

Without replay protection, it will be a slow mess to untangle the altcoins though.

If replay protection is not added, then what is going to be the solution, something like 100 confirmations?  Or am I misunderstanding the gravity of the problem and adding confirmations would that not be enough?

100 confirmations should be safe enough, quite hard to reverse that much.
But in a fork/war context it could take days instead of 1000 minutes (16-17 hours).
And doubt about the winning chain can add to the paralyzing effect. IF the fork happens, which still remains to be seen.

We should not delude ourselves into thinking that there is going to be any kind of meaningful contest, right?

Sure there is going to be confusion, but who the fuck , besides some nutjobs, bank shills and government sabotuers, are going to go over to a renegade forked coin?

O.k... sure let's see  how it plays out.. and yeah, with a certain high level of turmoil, it could take a while to cash out our forked coins... and maybe even some exchanges might be down longer (or at least extra ordinarily cautious in their receipt of deposits) than the last time to protect themselves from some of the possible higher levels of disruption and value change or actual receipt of coin uncertainties.

[Torque]

And, we actually do find that lots of people do figure this shit out, and if they want to get left behind and if demand for BTC and the price stays down (for a while) because of this, then those of us who have figured it out are going to be able to buy "cheaper coins"^tm because we were willing to expend 5-30 minutes of human (rather than chimpanzee) brain power on figuring out the divisibility of unit topic.  

Whether a person buys 1 btc or 0.1 btc or 0.01 btc it doesn't matter. If the price goes up 5%, 2X, 5X, or 10X the result is exactly the same with each amount regardless.

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

But I see you're a legendary member, so you know all this. You trollin' me, man?

Yeah, this Odalv character seems to know "a whole hell of a lot," and is able to boil things down to real simple principles.         

[Odalv]

I think Segwit2x has majority 90-95% of hashpower. It will be solved very quickly :-)

and 0% of full node to keep or accept the 2Mb Block size ... 
Miners can not force node to "change" of software.

Why do you think, there will be not full nodes with Segwit2X ?  It is few lines of code to change limit from 1MB to 2 MB

Because it doesn't matter if miners want to do dirty businesses.
Segwit2x is likely not going to succeed

I like 1 MB blocks, but I do not understand how to stop investor majority. They want 2MB blocks.

[Meuh6879]

The Bitcoin network (NODES, FULL NODES) don't.
Simple.

You can emit a block ... but if no-one keep and relay (because of the 2Mb size/8Mb weight), it's an orphan block.
If you have 800-1500 NODES of Segwit 2x ... you must FIGHT the 114 000 nodes with the 1Mb size/4Mb weight limits.

Miners don't matter.
But the earn reward if they follow the RULES of the whole network, the real Bitcoin network.

FULL NODES enforce the rules.
Automatically.

TrustNet is like that.
P2P network are like that.

It's people (nodes).

[Odalv]

I think Segwit2x has majority 90-95% of hashpower. It will be solved very quickly :-)

and 0% of full node to keep or accept the 2Mb Block size ... 
Miners can not force node to "change" of software.

Why do you think, there will be not full nodes with Segwit2X ?  It is few lines of code to change limit from 1MB to 2 MB

• It's not 1MB to 2MB. It's more like ~4MB to ~8MB.
• You have to know WHICH lines of code need changing, and change them right. And figure out the technical consequences. The developer(s?) on the 2x Team don't seem to be able to tell the keyboard from the screen. And the team don't seem to care much about censorship resistance, either.
• Node operators, besides trusting the 2x Team to do the right thing technically, must be WANTING to take that step. I, for one, am not.

But I see you're a legendary member, so you know all this. You trollin' me, man?

I'm not trolling you. I'm software developer with 20 years of experience. I'm writing code for the banks and I can guarantate you, I can add few lines of code and bitcoin core will be supporting Segwit2x within 1 hour.  

[Meuh6879]

  like BCH ... not new.

like Bitcoin Classic ...
like Bitcoin XT ...
like Bitcoin Unlimited ...
like Bitcoin Segwit2X ...

[JimboToronto]

like BCH ... not new.

like Bitcoin Classic ...
like Bitcoin XT ...
like Bitcoin Unlimited ...

Bitcoin Millennial Edition? Bitcoin Vista?

 

[JayJuanGee]

I think Segwit2x has majority 90-95% of hashpower. It will be solved very quickly :-)

and 0% of full node to keep or accept the 2Mb Block size ... 
Miners can not force node to "change" of software.

Why do you think, there will be not full nodes with Segwit2X ?  It is few lines of code to change limit from 1MB to 2 MB

• It's not 1MB to 2MB. It's more like ~4MB to ~8MB.
• You have to know WHICH lines of code need changing, and change them right. And figure out the technical consequences. The developer(s?) on the 2x Team don't seem to be able to tell the keyboard from the screen. And the team don't seem to care much about censorship resistance, either.
• Node operators, besides trusting the 2x Team to do the right thing technically, must be WANTING to take that step. I, for one, am not.

But I see you're a legendary member, so you know all this. You trollin' me, man?

I'm not trolling you. I'm software developer with 20 years of experience. I'm writing code for the banks and I can guarantate you, I can add few lines of code and bitcoin core will be supporting Segwit2x within 1 hour.  

Oh my?  We got our answer.  This particular one has "experience," and that is what distinguishes this one from the other FUD spreading trolls.... hahahahaha... and probably this one has "real world" experience, not just that made up internet magic stuffs.           

[Odalv]

The Bitcoin network (NODES, FULL NODES) don't.
Simple.

You can emit a block ... but if no-one keep and relay (because of the 2Mb size/8Mb weight), it's an orphan block.
If you have 800-1500 NODES of Segwit 2x ... you must FIGHT the 114 000 nodes with the 1Mb size/4Mb weight limits.

Miners don't matter.
But the earn reward if they follow the RULES of the whole network, the real Bitcoin network.

FULL NODES enforce the rules.
Automatically.

TrustNet is like that.
P2P network are like that.

It's people (nodes).

Are you sure there is 114 000 nodes with the 1Mb size/4Mb ? (I run ONE, but I wil upgrade)

[fluidjax]

I think Segwit2x has majority 90-95% of hashpower. It will be solved very quickly :-)

and 0% of full node to keep or accept the 2Mb Block size ...  
Miners can not force node to "change" of software.

Why do you think, there will be not full nodes with Segwit2X ?  It is few lines of code to change limit from 1MB to 2 MB

• It's not 1MB to 2MB. It's more like ~4MB to ~8MB.
• You have to know WHICH lines of code need changing, and change them right. And figure out the technical consequences. The developer(s?) on the 2x Team don't seem to be able to tell the keyboard from the screen. And the team don't seem to care much about censorship resistance, either.
• Node operators, besides trusting the 2x Team to do the right thing technically, must be WANTING to take that step. I, for one, am not.

But I see you're a legendary member, so you know all this. You trollin' me, man?

I'm not trolling you. I'm software developer with 20 years of experience. I'm writing code for the banks and I can guarantate you, I can add few lines of code and bitcoin core will be supporting Segwit2x within 1 hour.  

This is not just about code change, the changes are reasonably trivial, and you are right 1 hour to change the code, a few hours to review and some time for others to check maybe a week or two, some testing on the test chain looking at propagation speed and other implications of the bigger blocks, maybe a month or two, a mechanism so everyone running a current bitcoin version can change their code to run bigger blocks, once enough people are signalling we can begin the change, a lock-in period,  etc... say a few more months at minimum.

If you want to do a hard fork safely and properly it isn't a 1 hour job!!!!

We don't currently need a block size increase.
And everyone knows we don't currently need a block size increase, this is a power grab, its about sacking the Core development team, and replacing it with.... with.... another ready to go team, but who they are is currently unknown.

[Odalv]

I think Segwit2x has majority 90-95% of hashpower. It will be solved very quickly :-)

and 0% of full node to keep or accept the 2Mb Block size ... 
Miners can not force node to "change" of software.

Why do you think, there will be not full nodes with Segwit2X ?  It is few lines of code to change limit from 1MB to 2 MB

• It's not 1MB to 2MB. It's more like ~4MB to ~8MB.
• You have to know WHICH lines of code need changing, and change them right. And figure out the technical consequences. The developer(s?) on the 2x Team don't seem to be able to tell the keyboard from the screen. And the team don't seem to care much about censorship resistance, either.
• Node operators, besides trusting the 2x Team to do the right thing technically, must be WANTING to take that step. I, for one, am not.

But I see you're a legendary member, so you know all this. You trollin' me, man?

I'm not trolling you. I'm software developer with 20 years of experience. I'm writing code for the banks and I can guarantate you, I can add few lines of code and bitcoin core will be supporting Segwit2x within 1 hour.  

Oh my?  We got our answer.  This particular one has "experience," and that is what distinguishes this one from the other FUD spreading trolls.... hahahahaha... and probably this one has "real world" experience, not just that made up internet magic stuffs.           

What is your problem ?
 - Do you think I do not have 20 years experience in programing ?
 - Do you think I do not live in "real world " ?

Who is "we got your answer" -> it is "you" ?