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

[d_eddie]

Is this real? How do I use it? Or what is a good resource to explain how to use it?

https://99bitcoins.com/what-is-the-bitcoin-lightning-network-a-beginners-explanation/

This is a good beginning methinks.

Understand what it is and how it works (in theory). I'm wondering how do I physically utilize those nodes in that picture to my advantage right now?

Is there a LN enabled wallet beyond beta stage? I doubt it.

I think at the moment it's a matter of lobbying for merchant adoption. Exchanges embracing it would be the best thing to happen, but I don't see it happening without strong user pressure - or possibly competition from decentralized exchanges. Just see what it took for Coinbase to upgrade to segwit and batch transactions!

[Last of the V8s]

[realr0ach]

Meanwhile one of my younger friends in his 20s can't seem to understand Bitcoin. He thinks it's some kind of pyramid/Ponzi scam and that "the government" will "shut it down". Meanwhile he alternates between Mom's couch in Toronto and Dad's winter place in Thailand trying to get rich playing online poker. All this for a kid with a tested IQ over 180. Go figure.

Wow.  A poker player with an IQ over 180?   Very surprising he does not "get" bitcoin.

You are the one that does not "get" bitcoin.  Even if you ignore the fact that it's designed to completely centralize, bitcoin is 100% guaranteed to die the closer the block reward gets to zero.  Why?  Because a static block reward subsidizes all transactions just like a govt subsidy.  The second it's gone, people will just move to a different chain that still has a block reward subsidizing it, or to some other system that doesn't have the overhead of PoW since they're all designed to centralize anyway.  So yes, bitcoin actually is a Ponzi because PoW is not sustainable since you CANNOT prevent competitor chains from taking it's market once subsidy is gone.

Subsidizing miners with block rewards only makes it more difficult to perform a doublespend or a denial of service attack by producing empty blocks. It doesn't really motivate people to use the chain. Normal users are ignorant of how bitcoin works under the hood. They don't care about this stuff. They would only care if someone did successfully doublespend or DOS the block chain. So as long as transaction fees are sufficient to incentivize miners to collectively produce enough hashing power to prevent this than there is no reason to expect the drop off in block rewards to negatively effect bitcoin in any way.

Jesus Christ you cultists are dense.  Since you failed to comprehend what I said, let me spell it out for you in simple math.  Bitcoin currently spends $112,500 every 10 minutes in order to attempt to secure the chain (obviously unsustainable).  Some would argue this is overdoing it and the chain could get by with much less security (it's not really "security" since it's designed to centralize, but we will overlook that for now).  Let's give bitcoin the benefit of the doubt and make believe at full maturity, it could get by with 1/10th of that, or blowing $10,000 on PoW every 10 minutes without getting "owned".

As you can see from that unsustainable $112k figure, the block reward provides Bitcoin with it's security model by BORROWING from the future to subsidize the present via unsustainable Ponzi.  The second you remove the block reward, your security is no longer free (or rather Ponzi derived security where people make believe buying now automatically gives them more value in the future), but then shifts the security from a borrowing from the future model to where only the present matters.

Once only the present matters, if people are not willing to shell out $10k per 10 minutes to have miners process their transactions/secure the chain (or whatever arbitrary number you come up with), then bitcoin dies and no longer exists.  $10k per 10 minutes is a pretty large overhead, and there is no actual reason for end users to subsidize that.  They can simply go to a different chain where a block reward still exists, thus getting their transactions processed cheaper by joining a different Ponzi that's still running.  

The fact you cannot prevent people from fleeing Bitcoin once it's mining subsidy craters to get their transactions processed cheaper somewhere else is why bitcoin 100% inevitably dies once block reward gets closer to zero.  In reality, the most likely outcome would be bitcoin converting to something like proof of stake to try and prevent collapse.  PoW and PoS are all designed to centralize garbage, but PoW attempts to get by with a "decentralized" meme by being an open entropy system (that is centralized through economy of scale and the large knowledge and capital reserves required to build the foundries and chips).  If bitcoin is forced to convert to PoS just to survive (closed entropy systems cannot even pretend to be decentralized like bitcoin pretends to now), the whole thing was obviously an unsustainable Ponzi scam in the first place.

[macsga]

Is this real? How do I use it? Or what is a good resource to explain how to use it?

https://99bitcoins.com/what-is-the-bitcoin-lightning-network-a-beginners-explanation/


This is a good beginning methinks.

Understand what it is and how it works (in theory). I'm wondering how do I physically utilize those nodes in that picture to my advantage right now?

I believe it can be done via scripting only for now, and ONLY on testnet. The ability of fast "direct" transactions and minimum fees is something everybody wants and fast. AFAIK, (haven't been following this to be honest) there's no release date yet. But, from an article I've read the LN needs to be thoroughly tested prior release (any different input is greatly appreciated). At these prices the problem of having a bug and release it out in the open is not recommended...

PS: Yes, I'm back... (kinda)  

[Anon136]

Is there a LN enabled wallet beyond beta stage? I doubt it.

I think at the moment it's a matter of lobbying for merchant adoption. Exchanges embracing it would be the best thing to happen, but I don't see it happening without strong user pressure - or possibly competition from decentralized exchanges. Just see what it took for Coinbase to upgrade to segwit and batch transactions!

Ah ok. Lame. There probably wont be pressure until transaction fees get too high again. But I expect there should and will be a great deal of pressure once that happens.

I believe it can be done via scripting only for now, and ONLY on testnet. The ability of fast "direct" transactions and minimum fees is something everybody wants and fast. AFAIK, (haven't been following this to be honest) there's no release date yet. But, from an article I've read the LN needs to be thoroughly tested prior release (any different input is greatly appreciated). At these prices the problem of having a bug and release it out in the open is not recommended...

Thanks for the clarification.

[FartBuddy]

Is this real? How do I use it? Or what is a good resource to explain how to use it?

https://99bitcoins.com/what-is-the-bitcoin-lightning-network-a-beginners-explanation/


This is a good beginning methinks.

Understand what it is and how it works (in theory). I'm wondering how do I physically utilize those nodes in that picture to my advantage right now?

I believe it can be done via scripting only for now, and ONLY on testnet. The ability of fast "direct" transactions and minimum fees is something everybody wants and fast. AFAIK, (haven't been following this to be honest) there's no release date yet. But, from an article I've read the LN needs to be thoroughly tested prior release (any different input is greatly appreciated). At these prices the problem of having a bug and release it out in the open is not recommended...

PS: Yes, I'm back... (kinda)  

It's already being used on the mainnet, although the developers advise against it, and are angry their work has been adapted to work on mainnet.

https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoins-lightning-network-problem-people-already-using/

Fake money is boring.

At least, that's the contention of many micropayment enthusiasts, whose impatience for the Lightning Network has led to an influx of real bitcoin being transacted over the network, even though developers caution people against doing so since it's still in the testing phase.

And they're not the only ones – Blockstream launched a Lightning-only merchandise store using its own Lightning implementation, c-lightning, and a Lightning main net explorer suggests more than $33,000 in bitcoin has been transacted via Lightning Networks.

[macsga]

It's already being used on the mainnet, although the developers advise against it, and are angry their work has been adapted to work on mainnet.

https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoins-lightning-network-problem-people-already-using/

Fake money is boring.

At least, that's the contention of many micropayment enthusiasts, whose impatience for the Lightning Network has led to an influx of real bitcoin being transacted over the network, even though developers caution people against doing so since it's still in the testing phase.

And they're not the only ones – Blockstream launched a Lightning-only merchandise store using its own Lightning implementation, c-lightning, and a Lightning main net explorer suggests more than $33,000 in bitcoin has been transacted via Lightning Networks.

LOL! I didn't know that, thanks for the input. TBH, I'm wary on any "addition" that goes live on mainnet without thorough testing. I've paid a great amount for Tx-ing some of my coins and I know the urge of these guys though. But still... damn...

[Frequency]

If you use shapeshift.io, you might want to look into alternatives. I wonder how much this cost Bitcoin Judas?

Well Shapeshift is run by his early bitcoin friend Eric Voorhees so not that much as they probably both know they ruined there reputation anyhow!!

[Last of the V8s]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cuImsvmSf4
A dangerous Bitcoin & Bitcoin-Cash (BCash) Hack (that no one talks about)
early days on this yet

edit: nothing there. apologies

[FartBuddy]

It's already being used on the mainnet, although the developers advise against it, and are angry their work has been adapted to work on mainnet.

https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoins-lightning-network-problem-people-already-using/

Fake money is boring.

At least, that's the contention of many micropayment enthusiasts, whose impatience for the Lightning Network has led to an influx of real bitcoin being transacted over the network, even though developers caution people against doing so since it's still in the testing phase.

And they're not the only ones – Blockstream launched a Lightning-only merchandise store using its own Lightning implementation, c-lightning, and a Lightning main net explorer suggests more than $33,000 in bitcoin has been transacted via Lightning Networks.

LOL! I didn't know that, thanks for the input. TBH, I'm wary on any "addition" that goes live on mainnet without thorough testing. I've paid a great amount for Tx-ing some of my coins and I know the urge of these guys though. But still... damn...

There's already people losing bitcoins from using it too early. This is one of the first losses.

https://twitter.com/rusty_twit/status/953043039701819392

[Anon136]

Jesus Christ you cultists are dense.  

Cultist? I don't even own any bitcoin right now.

As you can see from that unsustainable $112k figure.

Expensive yes. Unsustainable maybe. But it certainly isn't clear that it is unsustainable. Perhaps it can continue to be sustained. It is definitely possible.

the block reward provides Bitcoin with it's security model by BORROWING from the future to subsidize the present via unsustainable Ponzi.

No... It's redistributing capital from HODLers. HODLers who have voluntarily opted into this system. Again you really don't seem to understand how bitcoin works or maybe just basic economics.

The second you remove the block reward, your security is no longer free

It isn't free right now...

Once only the present matters, if people are not willing to shell out $10k per 10 minutes to have miners process their transactions/secure the chain (or whatever arbitrary number you come up with), then bitcoin dies and no longer exists.

You sound poor to me. You seem to think 10,000 dollars is a lot of money or something .

They can simply go to a different chain where a block reward still exists, thus getting their transactions processed cheaper.

Again. Economicses r haurd. It's not cheaper to have savers pay instead of spenders. It's just a different group of people that is paying. And you have to think, hopefully scaling technologies will allow that 10,000 cost to be divided among many more people than it would currently be divided among with 1mb blocks and 250 byte transactions.

The fact you cannot prevent people from fleeing Bitcoin once it's mining Ponzi dies to get their transactions processed cheaper somewhere else is why bitcoin 100% inevitably dies once block reward goes to zero.  

Except that this transition from HODLers paying to spenders paying incentivizes people to just HODL more and harder than they are already doing right now.

In reality, the most likely outcome would be bitcoin converting to something like proof of stake to try and prevent collapse.  PoW and PoS are all designed to centralize garbage, but PoW attempts to get by with a "decentralized" meme by being an open entropy system (that is centralized through economy of scale and the large knowledge and capital reserves required to build the foundries and chips).  If bitcoin is forced to convert to PoS just to survive (closed entropy systems cannot even pretend to be decentralized like bitcoin pretends to now), the whole thing was obviously an unsustainable Ponzi scam in the first place.

Yea I actually think there is a pretty good chance that your conclusions are correct. It's just your argument's that are bad. Bitcoin will probably be replaced by better cheaper technology in the future that processes transactions cheaper and more efficiently. I mostly agree with your general point. Just not your claim that bitcoin is a ponzi. That is a stupid claim. Satoshi implemented the best solutions to decentralized digital currency that were known and available at the time. It is very unlikely that satoshi schemed to lure everyone into an open system that would later become restrictive.

[Wekkel]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cuImsvmSf4
A dangerous Bitcoin & Bitcoin-Cash (BCash) Hack (that no one talks about)
early days on this yet

I was expecting an expert proclaiming a vulnerabilty of bitcoin software. Instead, I got Julian from TenX talking about (when looking through the comments) about 'chain reorganisations'?

Anyway, things must be busy over at TenX (chirp..... chirp..... nope, no card over here..... nope, no card over there....  ).

But perhaps I am missing the point 

[macsga]

There's already people losing bitcoins from using it too early. This is one of the first losses.

https://twitter.com/rusty_twit/status/953043039701819392

Dood! That is EXACTLY what I was talking about before. Development 101! Test first, then TEST SOME MORE, then pay somebody to hack it for you (if necessary) and THEN release it... 

[infofront]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cuImsvmSf4
A dangerous Bitcoin & Bitcoin-Cash (BCash) Hack (that no one talks about)
early days on this yet

I was expecting an expert proclaiming a vulnerabilty of bitcoin software. Instead, I got Julian from TenX talking about (when looking through the comments) about 'chain reorganisations'?

Anyway, things must be busy over at TenX (chirp..... chirp..... nope, no card over here..... nope, no card over there....  ).

But perhaps I am missing the point 

I saw this posted on reddit. Didn't watch it, but commenters were saying he basically "discovered" the 51% attack.

[JayJuanGee]

Great documentary about cypto's place in history (even though it's not about crypto or BTC directly).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX3M8Ka9vUA&t=59s

I looked at the linked youtube video, and it is about 1 hour 44 minutes, and it is about the third industrial revolution.

Are you suggesting that there are some specific parts of the video that mentions crypto or bitcoin, because if it does not mention crypto or bitcoin at all, then wouldn't it be harder to make any claims that it puts crypto into any kind of historical context.   

Can you provide a bit more of a description or some time marks so we would not have to watch the whole thing to attempt to figure out how it might be relevant to "crypto's place in history"?

[Last of the V8s]

http://caribbeanbusiness.com/puerto-rico-to-have-first-cryptocurrency-bank/
more 'news', possibly fake, this time re tether

[Ibian]

There's already people losing bitcoins from using it too early. This is one of the first losses.

https://twitter.com/rusty_twit/status/953043039701819392

Dood! That is EXACTLY what I was talking about before. Development 101! Test first, then TEST SOME MORE, then pay somebody to hack it for you (if necessary) and THEN release it... 

This would never have happened with a simple blocksize increase.

[realr0ach]

http://caribbeanbusiness.com/puerto-rico-to-have-first-cryptocurrency-bank/
more 'news', possibly fake, this time re tether

What in the fuck is this link even trying to say?  They're admitting no money backs any Tethers but "MAYBE" some random idiots will start a bank in Puerto Rico and then MAYBE it will be? What the fuck am I reading?  Bitfinex isn't even a real exchange.  It's like Huobi, just some bullshit where someone attempts to pump the price by painting the tape so they can dump on other exchanges while no money actually exchanges hands.

[Wekkel]

There's already people losing bitcoins from using it too early. This is one of the first losses.

https://twitter.com/rusty_twit/status/953043039701819392

Dood! That is EXACTLY what I was talking about before. Development 101! Test first, then TEST SOME MORE, then pay somebody to hack it for you (if necessary) and THEN release it... 

This would never have happened with a simple blocksize increase.

I guess thats not the point.

[Ibian]

There's already people losing bitcoins from using it too early. This is one of the first losses.

https://twitter.com/rusty_twit/status/953043039701819392

Dood! That is EXACTLY what I was talking about before. Development 101! Test first, then TEST SOME MORE, then pay somebody to hack it for you (if necessary) and THEN release it... 

This would never have happened with a simple blocksize increase.

I guess thats not the point.

And you are not going to say what you think the point is either.