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

[Ludwig Von]

Who the hell are you? You joined in 2015. Fuck off you twit
BobLawblaw
 October 18, 2015, 10:19:19 PM
Nikauforest
 March 08, 2014, 04:33:35 AM

* BobLawblaw pats nikauforest on the head for not being able to see the forest through the trees

Ooh, a dick measuring contest. This oughta be good.

Aww, bless them

 

But... but... he started it !!

Ahja, but you enjoyed it! (and made me and probably more people laugh loud, thanks for that, it softens looking at the charts a bit)

[Rosewater Foundation]

It is that fear that keeps me from shifting more of my BTC holdings to BCH.  

Same fear that Ver, Wu, and Wright all have.

Such conviction!  And yet everyone should buy the shitcoin!  

They meant everyone else.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Price seems to be slowly recovering from low 15000’s to 15600 as I type this. Not sure if anybody cares whilst they’re dick measuring in here.

No. Get your weener out too.

[Gab0]

Wow, nice discussion, but very emotional for my. At any moment, Torque and company start slapping and scratching.

[Rosewater Foundation]

it is a madhouse. Quick. To the dick bike!

[Peter R]

It is that fear that keeps me from shifting more of my BTC holdings to BCH.  

Same fear that Ver, Wu, and Wright all have.

Such conviction!  And yet everyone should buy the shitcoin!  

Presently I hold 3 BCH per BTC.  It is foolish to put all of your eggs in one basket.  

If you think the vision of "digital gold" will win then maybe you should hold 2 BTC per BCH.  

Don't let your ideology prevent you from making wise investment decisions.  Selling all your BTC or all your BCH is not smart.

[BTCMILLIONAIRE]

Wow, nice discussion, but very emotional for my. At any moment, Torque and company start slapping and scratching.

IT'S NOT BCASH

[julian071]

How does it feel to know that the whole Bcash one trick pony can loose most of its market cap the second Core feels that the benefit of raising the blocksize to 2mb outweighs the risk? That's their worst case scenario, and by the time 2mb is spammed to hell and people start bitchin' again LN should be right around the corner.

It is that fear that keeps me from shifting more of my BTC holdings to BCH.  

I believe that if BTC cannot raise the block size limit in the medium-term (3 - 12 months) then BCH will fully take its place as the dominant crypto.  

However, if BTC is able to raise the block size limit, I could see BCH dying.  But I think the political machine that BS/Core built to prevent the block size limit from being lifted will come back to bite them.  Why won't all the same arguments against a block size limit be used again?  If BTC tries to increase the limit, will this result in yet another fork and another form of Bitcoin (e.g., will this next fork have replay protection or not)?  Will that really work?  Or will people just decide that BCH is the solution for lower fees and more reliable confirmation times?

I highlighted the part that gives away your true intentions. You cannot fear that if you really want BTC to change the world for the better. You fear that because you have alterior motives.

[BTCMILLIONAIRE]

It is that fear that keeps me from shifting more of my BTC holdings to BCH.  

Same fear that Ver, Wu, and Wright all have.

Such conviction!  And yet everyone should buy the shitcoin!  

Presently I hold 3 BCH per BTC.  It is foolish to put all of your eggs in one basket.  

If you think the vision of "digital gold" will win then maybe you should hold 2 BTC per BCH.  

Don't let your ideology prevent you from making wise investment decisions.  Selling all your BTC or all your BCH is not smart.

There are numerous altcoins that I'll happily diversify into while completely avoiding the rotten apple that is BCash.

[Gab0]

Wow, nice discussion, but very emotional for my. At any moment, Torque and company start slapping and scratching.

IT'S NOT BCASH

[Peter R]

How does it feel to know that the whole Bcash one trick pony can loose most of its market cap the second Core feels that the benefit of raising the blocksize to 2mb outweighs the risk? That's their worst case scenario, and by the time 2mb is spammed to hell and people start bitchin' again LN should be right around the corner.

It is that fear that keeps me from shifting more of my BTC holdings to BCH.  

I believe that if BTC cannot raise the block size limit in the medium-term (3 - 12 months) then BCH will fully take its place as the dominant crypto.  

However, if BTC is able to raise the block size limit, I could see BCH dying.  But I think the political machine that BS/Core built to prevent the block size limit from being lifted will come back to bite them.  Why won't all the same arguments against a block size limit be used again?  If BTC tries to increase the limit, will this result in yet another fork and another form of Bitcoin (e.g., will this next fork have replay protection or not)?  Will that really work?  Or will people just decide that BCH is the solution for lower fees and more reliable confirmation times?

I highlighted the part that gives away your true intentions. You cannot fear that if you really want BTC to change the world for the better. You fear that because you have alterior motives.

I thought I feared it because shifting all my BTC to BCH could result in me losing all my crypto investment if BCH went to zero (e.g., if BTC actually got its act together and increased the block size limit).

I guess you know me better than I know myself.

[Torque]

If you think the vision of "digital gold" will win then maybe you should hold 2 BTC per BCH.  

Here's why you're wrong:

Yes I believe Bitcoin is digital gold. That's why I buy and hold it. Rarely spend it. Holding is what gives it value, as well as a store of value.

Even if I thought that BCash was good for spending (which I don't), I don't have to hold it. I can just buy and spend it whenever I want, on the fly, as needed.  But why even do that when fiat will do the same thing.

Gresham's Law at work, dude.

[JayJuanGee]

Any vets out there caring to calm my nerves with some words of wisdom?

The market is waking up the fact that BTC is digital gold designed to be held and not spent -- that high fees and transaction friction are a feature and not a bug.  The market may reprice BTC as a result.  

My advice as a veteran since $49 is to take some profit if you're well into the green to soothe your nerves, and to make sure you hold at least 1 BCH for every 1 BTC you hold.

We are currently in a price battle, and an ongoing attack on bitcoin.

You are selectively and seemingly disingenuously attempting to assess your own wishful parts of an attack state as if it were a permanent status.

You are also hoping that bcash is going to get some kind of inroads into bitcoin's network.. but it still remains a long shot, even if you are attempting to suggest that Bcash is undervalued as compared to bitcoin, and that is why you are advising 50/50 at these current prices...  good luck with your pump and dump... .





NOT

[Peter R]

If you think the vision of "digital gold" will win then maybe you should hold 2 BTC per BCH.  

Here's why you're wrong:

Yes I believe Bitcoin is digital gold. That's why I buy and hold it. Rarely spend it. Holding is what gives it value, as well as a store of value.

Even if I thought that BCash was good for spending (which I don't), I don't have to hold it. I can just buy and spend it whenever I want, on the fly, as needed.  But why even do that when fiat will do the same thing.

Gresham's Law at work, dude.

I'm wrong because I say that I do not know for sure whether BTC or BCH will win in the end?  That I hedge my portfolio to account for the risks as I perceive them?  

It sounds like you think it is wiser to dump all of one's BCH and hold only BTC.  Is that true?

[Rosewater Foundation]

If you think the vision of "digital gold" will win then maybe you should hold 2 BTC per BCH. 

Here's why you're wrong:

Yes I believe Bitcoin is digital gold. That's why I buy and hold it. Rarely spend it. Holding is what gives it value, as well as a store of value.

Even if I thought that BCash was good for spending (which I don't), I don't have to hold it. I can just buy and spend it whenever I want, on the fly, as needed.  But why even do that when fiat will do the same thing.

Gresham's Law at work, dude.

I'm wrong because I say that I do not know for sure whether BTC or BCH will win in the end?  That I hedge my portfolio to account for the risks as I perceive them? 

It sounds like you think it is wiser to dump all of one's BCH and hold only BTC.  Is that true?

Of course. It's a centralized shitcoin. Where have you been?

[Gab0]

If you think the vision of "digital gold" will win then maybe you should hold 2 BTC per BCH.  

Here's why you're wrong:

Yes I believe Bitcoin is digital gold. That's why I buy and hold it. Rarely spend it. Holding is what gives it value, as well as a store of value.

Even if I thought that BCash was good for spending (which I don't), I don't have to hold it. I can just buy and spend it whenever I want, on the fly, as needed.  But why even do that when fiat will do the same thing.

Gresham's Law at work, dude.

Have you had the opportunity to read about the "Thiers' Law"?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3w2vqo/thiers_law_the_reverse_of_greshams_law_rolnick/

Edit: Either way, does not the law say that you mention that bad money expels good money? I do not understand your logic.

[Neo_Coin]

....
Have you had the opportunity to read about the "Thiers' Law"?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3w2vqo/thiers_law_the_reverse_of_greshams_law_rolnick/

Edit: Either way, does not the law say that you mention that bad money expels good money? I do not understand your logic.

---->  http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/hyperbitcoinization/    <----

[DaRude]

How does it feel to know that the whole Bcash one trick pony can loose most of its market cap the second Core feels that the benefit of raising the blocksize to 2mb outweighs the risk? That's their worst case scenario, and by the time 2mb is spammed to hell and people start bitchin' again LN should be right around the corner.

It is that fear that keeps me from shifting more of my BTC holdings to BCH.  

I believe that if BTC cannot raise the block size limit in the medium-term (3 - 12 months) then BCH will fully take its place as the dominant crypto.  

However, if BTC is able to raise the block size limit, I could see BCH dying.  But I think the political machine that BS/Core built to prevent the block size limit from being lifted will come back to bite them.  Why won't all the same arguments against a block size limit be used again?  If BTC tries to increase the limit, will this result in yet another fork and another form of Bitcoin (e.g., will this next fork have replay protection or not)?  Will that really work?  Or will people just decide that BCH is the solution for lower fees and more reliable confirmation times?

That would depend on Ver's pockets. If they're deep enough for BCH to come close to say ~40% and sustain it for meaningful period of time, that would put enough pressure on core to implement Segwit2x but on their terms and with their deadlines. If BCH stays at around ~10% they'll just hold out till the LN goes live. 2mb block would most certainly create another fork and with all of the money on the table you can be sure that there will be a well sponsored 1mb group to divide the community as much as possible. In any case i don't see any future for BCH once LN goes live, who would in their right minds pick a risky 0 block confirms over guaranteed instant LN?

TL;DR Whatever market share BTC looses now to people who want low fees right meow would come right back once LN goes live. If BCH manages to put enough pressure on BTC they'll just bump the blocks to 2mb to hold off until LN goes live. In no scenario i see BCH still being a significant player once LN is out.

[natewelt]

Just bought more BCH and LTC. I have plenty of BTC and other alts. First time my BTC stash is under 40% of my crypto holdings. I'm all about diversification...

[Torque]

Edit: Either way, does not the law say that you mention that bad money expels good money? I do not understand your logic.

Gresham's Law:
Bad money tends to circulate, pushing good money into holding (aka storage).

And oh boy, are the BCash crew pushing it as a better form of spending, thus circulating money (ie. lower transaction fees).

Same with Litecoin. I remember when even Coblee was saying "Bitcoin is for holding, and Litecoin is for spending." He was basically shooting litecoin in the foot with such statements.

But let's be real for a second.

1. e-Commerce is rarely if ever happening with crypto. It just isn't. Even if the coin is supposedly "better or faster" for spending.

2. Traders want lower transaction fees for more trading and no fee friction. That's it.

3. Miners HATE hodlers, because they get no transaction fee revenue if coins just sit.

4. The establishment would love nothing better than HFT on-chain. But of course, they will never ever achieve such a thing.