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

[HairyMaclairy]

On a more serious note, the walls look like there's a lot more upside!

Do the walls say we are going to have another year like 2017?  Because I would like that.

[alexeft]

On a more serious note, the walls look like there's a lot more upside!

Do the walls say we are going to have another year like 2017?  Because I would like that.

I don't really know. But I think it is going to be similar.

[Wekkel]

I would rather want a 2013 year with BTC spiking to $100,000. Gotta keep the perps on their toes  

[pfrtlpfmpf]

 So, can we see you, girls ?
I´m sure you´re hotter, than hot ! If not, i´m completey into wise girls, imean you have to cover yourself.

 My girlfriend`s going to kill me . . .

[Karartma1]

Bitcoin hashing power is going down (8 Exahashes/s) while BCH has not powered up yet. We have to expect another weekend battle over Bitcoin control.
Mempool looks kind of stable but one never knows what will happen.

As for the last weekend I do not wish to take part in this battle as I have my small Bitcoin bag that needs a lot of care. For those of you who will fight well, it is your choice to do so.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

On a more serious note, the walls look like there's a lot more upside!

Let’s hope so, I think the dream of $10,000 per coin before New Year is still realistic. I don’t think anybody thought that was possible a couple of years back but it now seems a reality.

[JayJuanGee]

If I was a better trader maybe. But Jay's right about me. I have no business trying to do that.

    

[pfrtlpfmpf]

... maybe you survive it  https://youtu.be/LYrgA9J3Dww

 bare ly !

[AlexGR]

Support was at around 40 percent.  Then BIP-148 came along and threatened to disconnect any nodes that relayed blocks that were not signaling for segwit.  At that point, you either signal or stop mining, so miners signaled.  They were also encouraged by strong support (90%+) for the segwit2x agreement, which turned out to be a joke.

As I recall, this BIP wasn't merged in any official bitcoin-core clients. You'd have to download alternative versions or patch it yourself. UASF-supporting nodes were by no means dominating the node-network to be a threat. At least that's how I saw it while connecting for my daily sync. Perhaps the s2x was more of a motive.

There is a very large community of bitcoiners besides Wu involved with BCH.  If you never venture out of bitcointalk.org or /r/bitcoin, I can't blame you for being blind to it.  Censorship tends to create echo chambers, to the detriment of the people in those chambers.  I never made the claim that BCH is Bitcoin.  Clearly that moniker is more closely associated with the Segwit chain.  But that may change with time.

My claim is that BCH is more closely aligned with Satoshi's whitepaper.  At 1MB and with 2 week difficulty adjustment, the segwit chain is much more fragile than BCH.  BCH's mempool has not ever seen backlog and now that the difficulty adjustment algorithm has been upgraded, blocks times are much more reliable than the segwit chain.

BCH is much more centralized, plus it's at the mercy of any script-kid wanting to spam it for peanuts and fill it with gigabytes/day of spam. Just because it hasn't happened, doesn't mean it can't happen. I would probably do it myself for 24hrs or so, just to make an "academic" point that the "mempool is full" bullshit and "we need an upgrade" can equally apply to a 8mb chain if one goes out and spams it. I guess other people too had this thought, but there is also the thought that people who want to sell their BCH will be prevented if they have to download endless gigabytes.

The marketing being pushed by the same crew is about the peer-to-peer e-cash system, with emphasis on the e-cash aspect. Centralization changes the first aspect: As people become unable to participate as peers, you go from peer-to-peer to a client/server model. You go towards the cash system a bit more (a few more tx/s while global requirements are in excess of XX.XXX tx/sec - which ultimately don't make a dent towards the cash-goal), but you recede way more in terms of p2p characteristics. If it's not a decentralized peer to peer system, then who cares? THIS is the novelty of bitcoin. Not the 10 minute transactions. If people wanted a client/server system, they have paypal and it can do instant txs.

Even the cash-aspect of BCH promising "faster" txs is problematic. I mean if you want to go faster, you can do it like Litecoin (faster blocks). 10m blocks (on avg - could be 1hr if the difficulty is high) aren't good enough to buy you a coffee. Even 2.5m (LTC) aren't good enough - you'd need something like dash's system, or a pre-funded lightning channel.

Anyway...

[HairyMaclairy]

Bitcoin hashing power is going down (8 Exahashes/s) while BCH has not powered up yet. We have to expect another weekend battle over Bitcoin control.
Mempool looks kind of stable but one never knows what will happen.

As for the last weekend I do not wish to take part in this battle as I have my small Bitcoin bag that needs a lot of care. For those of you who will fight well, it is your choice to do so.

Yes there seems to be a couple of exahashes of mining power which are missing - off mining something other than Bitcoin or Bcash.  I wonder what that could be ?    Maybe this weekend won’t be a total fizzer after all.

[Wekkel]

BCH is much more centralized? In what?

Stupidity.

And hubris.

 

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Support was at around 40 percent.  Then BIP-148 came along and threatened to disconnect any nodes that relayed blocks that were not signaling for segwit.  At that point, you either signal or stop mining, so miners signaled.  They were also encouraged by strong support (90%+) for the segwit2x agreement, which turned out to be a joke.

As I recall, this BIP wasn't merged in any official bitcoin-core clients. You'd have to download alternative versions or patch it yourself. UASF-supporting nodes were by no means dominating the node-network to be a threat. At least that's how I saw it while connecting for my daily sync. Perhaps the s2x was more of a motive.

There is a very large community of bitcoiners besides Wu involved with BCH.  If you never venture out of bitcointalk.org or /r/bitcoin, I can't blame you for being blind to it.  Censorship tends to create echo chambers, to the detriment of the people in those chambers.  I never made the claim that BCH is Bitcoin.  Clearly that moniker is more closely associated with the Segwit chain.  But that may change with time.

My claim is that BCH is more closely aligned with Satoshi's whitepaper.  At 1MB and with 2 week difficulty adjustment, the segwit chain is much more fragile than BCH.  BCH's mempool has not ever seen backlog and now that the difficulty adjustment algorithm has been upgraded, blocks times are much more reliable than the segwit chain.

BCH is much more centralized, plus it's at the mercy of any script-kid wanting to spam it for peanuts and fill it with gigabytes/day of spam. Just because it hasn't happened, doesn't mean it can't happen. I would probably do it myself for 24hrs or so, just to make an "academic" point that the "mempool is full" bullshit and "we need an upgrade" can equally apply to a 8mb chain if one goes out and spams it. I guess other people too had this thought, but there is also the thought that people who want to sell their BCH will be prevented if they have to download endless gigabytes.

The marketing being pushed by the same crew is about the peer-to-peer e-cash system, with emphasis on the e-cash aspect. Centralization changes the first aspect: As people become unable to participate as peers, you go from peer-to-peer to a client/server model. You go towards the cash system a bit more (a few more tx/s while global requirements are in excess of XX.XXX tx/sec - which ultimately don't make a dent towards the cash-goal), but you recede way more in terms of p2p characteristics. If it's not a decentralized peer to peer system, then who cares? THIS is the novelty of bitcoin. Not the 10 minute transactions. If people wanted a client/server system, they have paypal and it can do instant txs.

Even the cash-aspect of BCH promising "faster" txs is problematic. I mean if you want to go faster, you can do it like Litecoin (faster blocks). 10m blocks (on avg - could be 1hr if the difficulty is high) aren't good enough to buy you a coffee. Even 2.5m (LTC) aren't good enough - you'd need something like dash's system, or a pre-funded lightning channel.

Anyway...

+1
See, this is why I'm a core tard. The alternative just doesn't make sense.

[julian071]

Support was at around 40 percent.  Then BIP-148 came along and threatened to disconnect any nodes that relayed blocks that were not signaling for segwit.  At that point, you either signal or stop mining, so miners signaled.  They were also encouraged by strong support (90%+) for the segwit2x agreement, which turned out to be a joke.

As I recall, this BIP wasn't merged in any official bitcoin-core clients. You'd have to download alternative versions or patch it yourself. UASF-supporting nodes were by no means dominating the node-network to be a threat. At least that's how I saw it while connecting for my daily sync. Perhaps the s2x was more of a motive.

There is a very large community of bitcoiners besides Wu involved with BCH.  If you never venture out of bitcointalk.org or /r/bitcoin, I can't blame you for being blind to it.  Censorship tends to create echo chambers, to the detriment of the people in those chambers.  I never made the claim that BCH is Bitcoin.  Clearly that moniker is more closely associated with the Segwit chain.  But that may change with time.

My claim is that BCH is more closely aligned with Satoshi's whitepaper.  At 1MB and with 2 week difficulty adjustment, the segwit chain is much more fragile than BCH.  BCH's mempool has not ever seen backlog and now that the difficulty adjustment algorithm has been upgraded, blocks times are much more reliable than the segwit chain.

BCH is much more centralized, plus it's at the mercy of any script-kid wanting to spam it for peanuts and fill it with gigabytes/day of spam. Just because it hasn't happened, doesn't mean it can't happen. I would probably do it myself for 24hrs or so, just to make an "academic" point that the "mempool is full" bullshit and "we need an upgrade" can equally apply to a 8mb chain if one goes out and spams it. I guess other people too had this thought, but there is also the thought that people who want to sell their BCH will be prevented if they have to download endless gigabytes.

The marketing being pushed by the same crew is about the peer-to-peer e-cash system, with emphasis on the e-cash aspect. Centralization changes the first aspect: As people become unable to participate as peers, you go from peer-to-peer to a client/server model. You go towards the cash system a bit more (a few more tx/s while global requirements are in excess of XX.XXX tx/sec - which ultimately don't make a dent towards the cash-goal), but you recede way more in terms of p2p characteristics. If it's not a decentralized peer to peer system, then who cares? THIS is the novelty of bitcoin. Not the 10 minute transactions. If people wanted a client/server system, they have paypal and it can do instant txs.

Even the cash-aspect of BCH promising "faster" txs is problematic. I mean if you want to go faster, you can do it like Litecoin (faster blocks). 10m blocks (on avg - could be 1hr if the difficulty is high) aren't good enough to buy you a coffee. Even 2.5m (LTC) aren't good enough - you'd need something like dash's system, or a pre-funded lightning channel.

Anyway...

Exactly. If these guys really just wanted faster and cheaper transactions they'd either just proclaim an altcoin like Dash 'the new bitcoin', or build something new from the ground up. Or they could even back Byteball, which by virtue of not needing mining at all is much cheaper, and actually gets faster when the number of transactions on the network goes up.

But of course, their real agenda is just making money. By mining, by pumping and dumping, or by any other means. This so called community behind BCH is just a mix of people who are purely in it for the money, and others who are simply being duped.

[gentlemand]

RoboGoogleTranslateShite

вы caмый xyдший aгитaтop, кoтopый мы иcпoльзoвaли дo cиx пop. вы никoгo нe yбeждaeтe. roger ver нe бyдeт cчacтлив. пepeйдитe к выxoдy для вaшeгo yничтoжeния

[julian071]

... And another asshole ^ on ignore.

[sirazimuth]

RoboGoogleTranslateShite

вы caмый xyдший aгитaтop, кoтopый мы иcпoльзoвaли дo cиx пop. вы никoгo нe yбeждaeтe. roger ver нe бyдeт cчacтлив. пepeйдитe к выxoдy для вaшeгo yничтoжeния

For a minute there I thought you were impersonating Donald Trump.....

[gentlemand]

For a minute there I thought you were impersonating Donald Trump.....

He and I share more similarities than I care to admit to at this particular moment.

[sirazimuth]

For a minute there I thought you were impersonating Donald Trump.....

He and I share more similarities than I care to admit to at this particular moment.

You just made me wear my coffee...
that's epic my friend, lmao!

[bitserve]

... the bitcoin is delaying it. At least the bitcash is growing.

I have always wondered how a "social farming" network works.

How much do you earn? Payment is per hour or some other criteria you need to meet? Are you given rough guidelines or do you guys have a master list of arguments to repeat like parrots? Do you like your work?

[bitcoinPsycho]

... I no longer work, I'm a rentier. And you? What´s your profession?

you a rent boy?