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

[vroom]

really, just leave. /r/btc is a nice place for you.

[1714127884]

1714127884

[1714127884]

1714127884

[1714127884]

1714127884

[600watt]

really, just leave. /r/btc is a nice place for you.

2nd that.

[Toxic2040]

Oh come on, I was just saying goodnight, that doesn't count.

Say what you mean and mean what you say. 

Im just ribbing you a little...I had made a crude comment prior and you called me on it...I deleted it..but ya...
This board at one point was home to some of the most intelligent minds in our world. I guess sometimes we all(need to) let lose a bit.

[elg]

and now, go observe the wall guys   

[bitserve]

scammers of cypherdoc/jbreher class

Exactly what do you assert I have done to scam anyone?

Pretend Bcash was a helpful and useful upgrade to Bitcoin instead of admitting it is a pre-mined (EDA) scam of the first order.  We don’t readily forget your fraud nor Peter R nor any other of your pals.

Let's unpack this. In what way is Bitcoin Cash a scam?

They tried to confuse investors saying it was *Bitcoin*, parasiting on the Bitcoin "branding" with bad faith.

Bullshit.

1) At this time the fork occurred, Bitcoin Cash had as legitimate a claim on the name 'Bitcoin' as did Bitcoin Segwit -- especially what with The Bitcoin Segwit Omnibus Changeset being the single greatest change ever perpetrated upon Bitcoin. Simply appending the 'Cash' modifier can be seen as a favor to the other fork.

2) While there may have been a couple isolated incidents of people confusing Bitcoin Cash with Bitcoin Segwit due to the shared 'Bitcoin' portion of the name, they are miniscule. There was no attempt to confuse. There was no bad faith.

3) The word 'Bitcoin' is not a trademark of Bitcoin Segwit, Bitcoin Core, Blockstream, or any other entity. There are no ownership rights to be stolen.

4) 'Parasiting' is a laughable charge. The Bitcoin Cash community reacted in the only manner available to them to do what was in their eye what was necessary to save Bitcoin.

1) Wrong. Bitcoin, following the established consensus rules set from the beginning, did an upgrade to Segwit. Some people, going AGAINST that consensus decided to create a fork with a bunch of UNconsensuated rules (like the difficulty change algo) so it wasn't even some rogue people deciding to maintain the previous branch AGAINST the newly consesuated rules, BUT A COMPLETELY NEW AND DIFFERENT THING. <- The point here is, anyways, CONSENSUATED OR NOT, according to the pre-established rules.

"They vote with their CPU proof-of-worker, expressing their acceptance of valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on them. Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism."
- S. Nakamoto

2) The bad faith was in some prominent proponents of that unconsensuated rogue fork PUBLICLY INSISTING that it was "THE REAL BITCOIN". And don't make start on arguing about all the rest of statements like it was going to be the predominant chain, etc etc....

At the time of the forks, Bitcoin Cash had every right to make that claim. It ceded that right when it was unable to gain a greater accumulated PoW. Not before that was demonstrated.

3) I was very prudent in chosing "branding" instead of BRAND, as I am well aware of the implications of both concepts.

Perhaps you can explain how you think there is any proprietary 'branding' violation here.

4) Parasiting is exactly what hapenned here. I didn't even argue if it was or wasn't a trademark infringent, but an intentional malicious "parasiting" sure did happen.

I would counter that Bitcoin Segwit has parasited upon Bitcoin in exactly the same manner.

1) It's good you quote satoshi, because that is exactly why I say that they did a pre-vote (with their hashrate) establishing what their consensus was. You could argue that pre-voting wasn't needed, but it was demonstrated that the pre-voting was perfectly representative of what later happened when the rogue forkers decided to go on with their unconsensuated fork. Consensus at its best.

2) Ok, so you choose to ignore that consensus pre-voting already established what the outcome would be... but anyways it was later demonstrated that unconsensuated forking was... well... unconsensuated. It's ok to me I guess. But next time I hope we do respect what a pre-voting clearly states so that we don't, ever again, have this sort of confrontations that do no good to anyone and do harm Bitcoin trust.

3) Propietary can only be applied to "Brand". Brand has legal trademark protection. Branding is a concept that comprises much more than "brand" and that most people can recognize (legal protection or not) via common sense and public usage either if it is "registered" or not. I can't explictly say it was a "propietary branding" protection infringement here, but it surely was an attempt to parasite on Bitcoin "branding" through confussion and deception.

4) No. Because Bitcoin consensuated to evolve/adopt Segwit. I would agree with you if someone decided to make an unconsensuated rogue fork including Segwit... but that's not what did happen. Almost everybody (hashrate) voted to adopt Segwit, then it did. At that point in time, after Segwit was consensuated to be part of Bitcoin, anything not having Segwit would NOT be Bitcoin.

Really, why are we arguing ANYTHING when CONSENSUS already spoke?

[Arriemoller]

Oh come on, I was just saying goodnight, that doesn't count.

Say what you mean and mean what you say. 

Im just ribbing you a little...I had made a crude comment prior and you called me on it...I deleted it..but ya...
This board at one point was home to some of the most intelligent minds in our world. I guess sometimes we all(need to) let lose a bit.

I got that, (the ribbing part), my answer was tongue-in-cheek.
I find most people in the threads I visit quite intelligent. But there are some noobs, especialy in the alt threads that might not be above average.
There, I said it.

[bitserve]

Please everybody, can we just stop responding to and quoting the annoying one!

I can understand your concern... But there's some things I can't let pass this time. The shitshow we had with Bcash should not be forgotten and never let happen again if we do really care about BITCOIN.

[cAPSLOCK]

8440..IMO this weeks ATH

Your already wrong. LOL Of course.

Hi Cuck. Time for you to call this weeks ATH

Just here for mere hours and you make yourself a fool.  Your predictions already in shambles.  And yet another sexually insecure idiot using the word "Cuck".  It reveals a lot about who you are. 

But don't worry...  on the next downswing you will be able to dance around and act like you predicted it. 

Then it will go back up again.

I'll be looking for that 2k floor this week.  Shoot I'll give it 'till next Sunday night.

Well...  Seems we didn't quite get to 2k yet.  And I even gave it 'till Monday.  I wouldn't be surprised if we are up $500 more from here by the time you wake up and read this with your morning cup of Kombucha.

[Toxic2040]

Bullshit.

-snip-

Really, why are we arguing ANYTHING when CONSENSUS already spoke?

+25 WOsMerits

Please everybody, can we just stop responding to and quoting the annoying one!

I can understand your concern... But there's some things I can't let pass this time. The shitshow we had with Bcash should not be forgotten and never let happen again if we do really care about BITCOIN.

+25 WOsMerits  

[Arriemoller]

Please everybody, can we just stop responding to and quoting the annoying one!

I can understand your concern... But there's some things I can't let pass this time. The shitshow we had with Bcash should not be forgotten and never let happen again if we do really care about BITCOIN.

Yes, but, that's what he wants. You can never win an argument, he will just play dumb and innocently ask another question that will keep the argumentation going.

[HairyMaclairy]

How charming.  Seasteading with Team Bcash without the seasteads.  Barf.  

“Billionaire Calvin Ayre is building an exclusive deluxe resort in Antigua and Barbuda, a little island in the Caribbean, funded with revenue and profits gained from Bitcoin Cash.”

No scam here. Oh no sir.  Bcash isn’t for private profit, it’s for the people!

https://www.btcnn.com/calvin-ayre-builds-resort-antigua-funded-bitcoin-cash/

[Agapios]

8440..IMO this weeks ATH

Your already wrong. LOL Of course.

Hi Cuck. Time for you to call this weeks ATH

Just here for mere hours and you make yourself a fool.  Your predictions already in shambles.  And yet another sexually insecure idiot using the word "Cuck".  It reveals a lot about who you are. 

But don't worry...  on the next downswing you will be able to dance around and act like you predicted it. 

Then it will go back up again.

I'll be looking for that 2k floor this week.  Shoot I'll give it 'till next Sunday night.

So where is that 2k floor?

[Arriemoller]

Eh, going to bed early, goodnight Bitcoinland!

[Last of the V8s]

footer of coingeek pages

[bitserve]

footer of coingeek pages

What a bunch of rabbish... On other news, it looks like another attempt at a leg up is forming.

[Ibian]

The bottom line is that if the wallet you use can't process pre-fork coins then it is not bitcoin.

Relevance?

Everyone who had coins before the fork.

I still don't see what you're getting at.

Look we all see through you. Just fuck off.

Haha. See through me? What do you see on the other side? Can you substantiate it with anything other than your superman x-ray specs? Just fuck off yourself.

This is the problem with arguing on the internet. If we were all meeting in person, this is the point where you would be punched in the face for being unable to take a hint. And not even necessarily by me.

People like you never admit fault or that the opposition has a point, you just keep talking and talking until people get tired. Doesn't work in the real world, does work where no physical contact is possible. This is your home field.

The thing is, even if we were all meeting in person, I might be tolerated in some small fashion. But even people who don't like me don't like you. You are simply not welcome here.

[HairyMaclairy]

You know something is up when I agree with Ibian. 

[Last of the V8s]

[19:12:24] · <ben_vulpes> https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.06038 << "on a subset of 3,759 contracts which we sampled for concrete validation and manual analysis, we reproduce real exploits at a true positive rate of 89%, yielding exploits for 3,686 contracts"
[19:20:00] · <shinohai> I'm sure with time they can get that number closer to 100% (http://btcbase.org/log/2018-02-19#1785157)

[bitserve]

[19:12:24] · <ben_vulpes> https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.06038 << "on a subset of 3,759 contracts which we sampled for concrete validation and manual analysis, we reproduce real exploits at a true positive rate of 89%, yielding exploits for 3,686 contracts"
[19:20:00] · <shinohai> I'm sure with time they can get that number closer to 100% (http://btcbase.org/log/2018-02-19#1785157)

If someday Bitcoin does another 10x I will "retire" and devote all my time to exploit research on blockchain/smart contracts field. That's when I will start to have real fun.

[Last of the V8s]

[19:12:24] · <ben_vulpes> https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.06038 << "on a subset of 3,759 contracts which we sampled for concrete validation and manual analysis, we reproduce real exploits at a true positive rate of 89%, yielding exploits for 3,686 contracts"
[19:20:00] · <shinohai> I'm sure with time they can get that number closer to 100% (http://btcbase.org/log/2018-02-19#1785157)

If When later this year, someday Bitcoin does another 10x I will "retire" and devote all my time to exploit research on blockchain/smart contracts field. That's when I will start to have real fun.

Looking forward to your research in 2019.