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

[HairyMaclairy]

We have had our fun but I don’t think we are mooning this side of the 2x fork at block 501451 which is ~ 300 blocks away.  We could easily have a relief rally after though.  

Mem pool is swelling with 5 - 10 sat transactions which are spam.  Our hash rate seems stable enough though.

Edit: after thinking about it some more I expect a further bump as herd moves in for fork coins.

[1714603219]

1714603219

[1714603219]

1714603219

[1714603219]

1714603219

[1714603219]

1714603219

[fabiorem]

40k by end of 2018? That's very conservative. Will they really "tame" the honey badger?

[JimboToronto]

I can't get angry with old Jimbo.  He's had a tough life.

Tough life? Hardly.

Job-free since 1976, spent most of my adult life partying, debt-free for over 20 years, enjoying relatively good health because of stress avoidance, lots of good friends and thousands of acquaintances (many who are considerably younger than me), and now a nice fat retirement fund thanks to Bitcoin.

I can't complain.

[HairyMaclairy]

40k by end of 2018? That's very conservative. Will they really "tame" the honey badger?

Remember all the pundits saying in early December that Bitcoin could reach 10k by the end of the year?

[TERA2]

It's time to bear it all.

[d_eddie]

I can't get angry with old Jimbo.  He's had a tough life.

Tough life? Hardly.

Job-free since 1976, spent most of my adult life partying, debt-free for over 20 years, enjoying relatively good health because of stress avoidance, lots of good friends and thousands of acquaintances (many who are considerably younger than me), and now a nice fat retirement fund thanks to Bitcoin.

I can't complain.

Music also helps to keep us young. See the incredible age managed by famous conductors, often still in full activity.

[HairyMaclairy]

[jbreher]

I have always presumed jbreher is probably at least in the 4 digits BTC, maybe even in the (low) 5's.... Which is why I have always tried to understand why he decided to go the "wrong way" (Jihan/Ver) with so much at stake

I haven't worked out estimates of jbreher's (or anyone else's) stash, but the man strikes me as a rational thinker with much at stake since a long time. So I also tried to understand the reasons for his choice, and I asked him explicitly. Unfortunately, his explanations with regard to bigblockery/Verism etc. always came short. Disappointing underperformance for a good poster, accurate checker of facts, numerical literate such as he is.

What more reason do you need other than the fact that the current blocksize limitation is destroying the user experience thereby constraining adoption?

[Dunkelheit667]

I would also like to bump my questions posted some 10 hours ago or something.

If you GPU mine, does it matter if your computer is connected to your browser via wifi or cable?

And does anyone know anything about the OS called PureOS. Are there any issues with that OS that you know of?

Cable is always the best choice but, if you are mining to a pool and your wifi is stable probably there will be no significant difference. I was mining for some time with an antminer S3 I added an antenna over wifi and it worked well. There is very little traffic if you are pool mining and a few ms of additional latency are not that important. Running a full node would be a much different matter.

Never used PureOS. I usually prefer vanilla debian or any other widely used distribution so that any new vulnerabilities are published/patched soon enough.

Thank you, I will be pool mining and I'm going to do it for fun, not for profits. I only have one cable slot on my router and would prefer to use that for my everyday computer so I will give the wifi a try.

Yes, give it a try. Latency on Wi-Fi might be some ms worse than having the rig connected via cable but might not really matter. Let's say you're solo mining a coin with short block time (like 15 seconds) and Wi-Fi adds 5 ms, there is a 0.033 % chance the block you found might be orphaned. If you're pool mining on something like BTG with one block every 10 minutes, well... no significant difference nails it.

[Arriemoller]

I can't get angry with old Jimbo.  He's had a tough life.

Tough life? Hardly.

Job-free since 1976, spent most of my adult life partying, debt-free for over 20 years, enjoying relatively good health because of stress avoidance, lots of good friends and thousands of acquaintances (many who are considerably younger than me), and now a nice fat retirement fund thanks to Bitcoin.

I can't complain.

Music also helps to keep us young. See the incredible age managed by famous conductors, often still in full activity.

Is it enough to listen to music? I'm so tone deaf that I was excused from (some) music classes in high school.
Btw was this song ever a international hit? or was it just in Sweden? Always wondered. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdxCJaPLLE0

[d_eddie]

I have always presumed jbreher is probably at least in the 4 digits BTC, maybe even in the (low) 5's.... Which is why I have always tried to understand why he decided to go the "wrong way" (Jihan/Ver) with so much at stake

I haven't worked out estimates of jbreher's (or anyone else's) stash, but the man strikes me as a rational thinker with much at stake since a long time. So I also tried to understand the reasons for his choice, and I asked him explicitly. Unfortunately, his explanations with regard to bigblockery/Verism etc. always came short. Disappointing underperformance for a good poster, accurate checker of facts, numerical literate such as he is.

What more reason do you need other than the fact that the current blocksize limitation is destroying the user experience thereby constraining adoption?

You seem to like BCH a lot, which IMO is not a rational strategy. This dissonance is unresolved as yet. A few reasons:

- BCH doesn't fix transaction malleabilty, ruling out L2 solutions which are the scaling solution in the medium (possibly long) term.

- BCH is controlled by a cartel. Their coders are clueless. The cartel is likely under the heavy hand of PBOC. They use guerrilla tactics (esp. transaction spam) to gain control.

- Big blocks will stifle adoption. Yes, that's the old "Raspberry pi in rural Afghanistan" argument. Even I, not in rural Afghanistan, would stop my own homespun node (not a pi though) if pressed by bandwidth and storage limits. "Be your own bank" implies the ability to run your own full verifying node.

- More adoption will come when we have a scalable system. Big blocks aren't scalable.

You know all these things already. You are too intelligent not to see the logical implications. So, my fuzzy inference is: you have other reasons. Not saying you are necessarily a paid shill, although it can't be ruled out. The "more reason" I was (and am) asking of you is an effective, documented rebuttal of my points or some subjective reason that goes beyond "I like big big big! Blocks big, me happy!" Something like "I was bitten by a small block when I was a child, try to understand my shock" would be a little better, but as you understand, still not quite satisfactory.

[Arriemoller]

 "I was bitten by a small block when I was a child, try to understand my shock"

LOL!!

[HairyMaclairy]

^^^

To add to the above, the complete pointlessness of increasing block size when those larger blocks will immediately be filled again and congestion will be just as bad as before.  

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis–Mogridge_Position

Why do you insist on a solution that is doomed to fail?

[d_eddie]

Music also helps to keep us young. See the incredible age managed by famous conductors, often still in full activity.

Is it enough to listen to music?

Not sure, but I'm afraid not. I suspect it's the brain activity involved in making music that makes the magic happen.

I'm so tone deaf that I was excused from (some) music classes in high school.
Btw was this song ever a international hit? or was it just in Sweden? Always wondered. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdxCJaPLLE0

I don't think I've heard it before. Certainly nothing big like Abba or Europe.

[Torque]

^^^

To add to the above, the complete pointlessness of increasing block size when those larger blocks will immediately be filled again and congestion will be just as bad as before.  

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis–Mogridge_Position

Why do you insist on a solution that is doomed to fail?

Since e-Commerce comprises less than 0.1% of legit bitcoin transactions, I'm assuming they need more lanes for faster/cheaper trading, spamming, and drugs. Actually no, Monero would probably be better to buy drugs with. So that just leaves faster/cheaper trades and spamming.  

But based on the amount of time they spend here trolling and shilling, for some reason they refuse to use BCash because its somehow not good enough? The solution is right there to be used and yet they insist that Bitcoin must change? Huh?

[404Revolution]

^^^

To add to the above, the complete pointlessness of increasing block size when those larger blocks will immediately be filled again and congestion will be just as bad as before.  

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis–Mogridge_Position

Why do you insist on a solution that is doomed to fail?

Since e-Commerce comprises less than 0.1% of legit bitcoin transactions, I'm assuming they need more lanes for faster/cheaper trading, spamming, and drugs. Actually no, Monero would probably be better to buy drugs with. So that just leaves faster/cheaper trades and spamming.  

But based on the amount of time they spend here trolling and shilling, for some reason they refuse to use BCash because its somehow not good enough? The solution is right there to be used and yet they insist that Bitcoin must change? Huh?

The logic you are employing is so absolutely wrong I can only hope you're intentionally trying to obfuscate the truth.... For your sake.

[jbreher]

Bcash is controlled by a single person

false

and has almost zero independent nodes.

false

It is wholly centralized and can be taken out by the Chinese government at any moment.  

No more so than Bitcoin Segwit.

[spiderbrain]

I have always presumed jbreher is probably at least in the 4 digits BTC, maybe even in the (low) 5's.... Which is why I have always tried to understand why he decided to go the "wrong way" (Jihan/Ver) with so much at stake

I haven't worked out estimates of jbreher's (or anyone else's) stash, but the man strikes me as a rational thinker with much at stake since a long time. So I also tried to understand the reasons for his choice, and I asked him explicitly. Unfortunately, his explanations with regard to bigblockery/Verism etc. always came short. Disappointing underperformance for a good poster, accurate checker of facts, numerical literate such as he is.

What more reason do you need other than the fact that the current blocksize limitation is destroying the user experience thereby constraining adoption?

You seem to like BCH a lot, which IMO is not a rational strategy. This dissonance is unresolved as yet. A few reasons:

- BCH doesn't fix transaction malleabilty, ruling out L2 solutions which are the scaling solution in the medium (possibly long) term.

- BCH is controlled by a cartel. Their coders are clueless. The cartel is likely under the heavy hand of PBOC. They use guerrilla tactics (esp. transaction spam) to gain control.

- Big blocks will stifle adoption. Yes, that's the old "Raspberry pi in rural Afghanistan" argument. Even I, not in rural Afghanistan, would stop my own homespun node (not a pi though) if pressed by bandwidth and storage limits. "Be your own bank" implies the ability to run your own full verifying node.

- More adoption will come when we have a scalable system. Big blocks aren't scalable.

You know all these things already. You are too intelligent not to see the logical implications. So, my fuzzy inference is: you have other reasons. Not saying you are necessarily a paid shill, although it can't be ruled out. The "more reason" I was (and am) asking of you is an effective, documented rebuttal of my points or some subjective reason that goes beyond "I like big big big! Blocks big, me happy!" Something like "I was bitten by a small block when I was a child, try to understand my shock" would be a little better, but as you understand, still not quite satisfactory.

I'm sorry, rational debate about the block size issue is not acceptable in this thread. You may only engage in name calling and badly recycled dogma.

[alexeft]

The solution is right there to be used and yet they insist that Bitcoin must change? Huh?

  They really are that smart!

[jbreher]

if you consider his methodology in trading, that would certainly not be consistent with folks having either 5 digits or even 4 digits of BTC.

What is your rationale for claiming that my trading strategy is inconsistent with such a postulated stash size? Do you think such strategies work only for minnows?