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

[itod]

Bitcoin.com is not a scam, it is a URL. What is scammy about that? Further, in what way does the existence of such make me a scammer?

jbreher, just stop it.

By definition in the Whitepaper Bitcoin is the chain with greatest accumulated PoW. Any defense of Ver's scamming attempt with the site that carries Bitcoin + ".com" in the URL to confuse the newbies in mixing up BTC and BCash is just insulting the intelligence of everyone here. You may pretend it's not obvious scam to you, but nobody believes you. Your posts show enough intelligence that you can not be that naive, you are either trolling or have some agenda with Roger, both very irritating. Don't turn yourself into a laughing stock light that silver fetishists whom no one believes he has no agenda, but spreads metal propaganda here out of his true love for our well being.

[Spaceman_Spiff_Original]

Bitcoin.com is not a scam, it is a URL. What is scammy about that? Further, in what way does the existence of such make me a scammer?

jbreher, just stop it.

By definition in the Whitepaper Bitcoin is the chain with greatest accumulated PoW.

I disagree. It is the longest valid chain.  What is valid is up to the collective of users, and different users can have different preferences. Luckily, there is a clear leader in terms of number of users and market cap. However, if bitcoin (core) and bitcoin cash had an equal amount of supporters, we might have a hard time determining which one would be named bitcoin.

[Ibian]

Bitcoin.com is not a scam, it is a URL. What is scammy about that? Further, in what way does the existence of such make me a scammer?

jbreher, just stop it.

By definition in the Whitepaper Bitcoin is the chain with greatest accumulated PoW.

I disagree. It is the longest valid chain.  What is valid is up to the collective of users, and different users can have different preferences. Luckily, there is a clear leader in terms of number of users and market cap. However, if bitcoin (core) and bitcoin cash had an equal amount of supporters, we might have a hard time determining which one would be named bitcoin.

The one that supports pre-fork coins. This is not difficult.

[itod]

Bitcoin.com is not a scam, it is a URL. What is scammy about that? Further, in what way does the existence of such make me a scammer?

jbreher, just stop it.

By definition in the Whitepaper Bitcoin is the chain with greatest accumulated PoW.

I disagree.

Bitcoin White paper, first paragraph, Abstract:

Abstract. ..., accepting the longest proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone.

Source: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

I don't get how can you disagree with the definition?

Edit: Section 4. is even more explicit:

The majority decision is represented by the longest chain, which has the greatest proof-of-work effort invested in it.

If this isn't proof that using the word "Bitcoin" for anything other then BTC is a scam, I don't know what is.

[Spaceman_Spiff_Original]

Bitcoin.com is not a scam, it is a URL. What is scammy about that? Further, in what way does the existence of such make me a scammer?

jbreher, just stop it.

By definition in the Whitepaper Bitcoin is the chain with greatest accumulated PoW.

I disagree.

Bitcoin White paper, first paragraph, Abstract:

Abstract. ..., accepting the longest proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone.

Source: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

I don't get how can you disagree with the definition?

First of all, I don't read the white paper as gospel.  But even if you do, also in abstract: "As long as a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that are not cooperating to attack the network,  they'll  generate the  longest  chain  and  outpace attackers." Therefore the abstract itself already says that the longest chain rule is conditional.

[itod]

Bitcoin.com is not a scam, it is a URL. What is scammy about that? Further, in what way does the existence of such make me a scammer?

jbreher, just stop it.

By definition in the Whitepaper Bitcoin is the chain with greatest accumulated PoW.

I disagree.

Bitcoin White paper, first paragraph, Abstract:

Abstract. ..., accepting the longest proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone.

Source: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

I don't get how can you disagree with the definition?

First of all, I don't read the white paper as gospel.  But even if you do, also in abstract: "As long as a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that are not cooperating to attack the network,  they'll  generate the  longest  chain  and  outpace attackers." Therefore the abstract itself already says that the longest chain rule is conditional.

Edit from above:
Section 4. is even more explicit:

The majority decision is represented by the longest chain, which has the greatest proof-of-work effort invested in it.

If this isn't proof that using the word "Bitcoin" for anything other then BTC is a scam, I don't know what is.

It's not "gospel", it's definition. You can define other things yourself, but give Satoshi Nakamoto the right to define what Bitcion is.

[bitserve]

This is ridiculous. The concept of the "longest chain" only has a meaning considering the same difficulty. When you change that (at that point we are talking about a completely different thing longest or not) you can easily get a longer chain with ANY PoW you want. That's exactly what Bcash did, and now it doesn't matter how long they get, because they are using a lower diffculty and... a smaller accumulated proof of work.

[Spaceman_Spiff_Original]

Bitcoin.com is not a scam, it is a URL. What is scammy about that? Further, in what way does the existence of such make me a scammer?

jbreher, just stop it.

By definition in the Whitepaper Bitcoin is the chain with greatest accumulated PoW.

I disagree.

Bitcoin White paper, first paragraph, Abstract:

Abstract. ..., accepting the longest proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone.

Source: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

I don't get how can you disagree with the definition?

First of all, I don't read the white paper as gospel.  But even if you do, also in abstract: "As long as a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that are not cooperating to attack the network,  they'll  generate the  longest  chain  and  outpace attackers." Therefore the abstract itself already says that the longest chain rule is conditional.

Edit from above:
Section 4. is even more explicit:

The majority decision is represented by the longest chain, which has the greatest proof-of-work effort invested in it.

If this isn't proof that using the word "Bitcoin" for anything other then BTC is a scam, I don't know what is.

It's not "gospel", it's definition. You can define other things yourself, but give Satoshi Nakamoto the right to define what Bitcion is.

I would bet that the majority of Core devs disagree with your definition, as would most users if push came to shove (if miners went a different direction from user needs) but hey, I'll try not to derail the thread for 2 nights in a row, so I'll quit this discussion.

[Ibian]

This is ridiculous. The concept of the "longest chain" only has a meaning considering the same difficulty. When you change that (at that point we are talking about a completely different thing longest or not) you can easily get a longer chain with ANY PoW you want. That's exactly what Bcash did, and now it doesn't matter how long they get, because they are using a lower diffculty and... a smaller accumulated proof of work.

That is what proof of work means. The amount of processing power put into it.

[Ibian]

Bitcoin.com is not a scam, it is a URL. What is scammy about that? Further, in what way does the existence of such make me a scammer?

jbreher, just stop it.

By definition in the Whitepaper Bitcoin is the chain with greatest accumulated PoW.

I disagree.

Bitcoin White paper, first paragraph, Abstract:

Abstract. ..., accepting the longest proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone.

Source: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

I don't get how can you disagree with the definition?

First of all, I don't read the white paper as gospel.  But even if you do, also in abstract: "As long as a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that are not cooperating to attack the network,  they'll  generate the  longest  chain  and  outpace attackers." Therefore the abstract itself already says that the longest chain rule is conditional.

Edit from above:
Section 4. is even more explicit:

The majority decision is represented by the longest chain, which has the greatest proof-of-work effort invested in it.

If this isn't proof that using the word "Bitcoin" for anything other then BTC is a scam, I don't know what is.

It's not "gospel", it's definition. You can define other things yourself, but give Satoshi Nakamoto the right to define what Bitcion is.

I would bet that the majority of Core devs disagree with your definition, as would most users if push came to shove (if miners went a different direction from user needs) but hey, I'll try not to derail the thread for 2 nights in a row, so I'll quit this discussion.

It doesn't matter who disagrees. The inventor defines what his creation is. If other people change it, then it is something else.

[HairyMaclairy]

Can we go back to arguing about child support?  

[Spaceman_Spiff_Original]

Can we go back to arguing about child support?  

[itod]

This is ridiculous. The concept of the "longest chain" only has a meaning considering the same difficulty. When you change that (at that point we are talking about a completely different thing longest or not) you can easily get a longer chain with ANY PoW you want. That's exactly what Bcash did, and now it doesn't matter how long they get, because they are using a lower diffculty and... a smaller accumulated proof of work.

It's obvious that Satoshi thought about all this when he repeated the definition several times, including: "The longest chain which has the greatest proof-of-work effort invested in it" in section 4.

He had hard-forks in consideration, so the only thing that he thought of worthy differentiating between forks is what he stated above. There's no other way to be sure which chain is Bitcoin.

[Ibian]

Can we go back to arguing about child support?  

Annoying but necessary. Alimony, on the other hand...

[bitserve]

Can we go back to arguing about child support?  

As long as they are YOUR childs OR ones you FREELY AND CONCIOUSLY opt to support, everything is ok

[Last of the V8s]

Elwar:  can you create colored coins or ERC-20 style tokens?

Colored coins might be possible but a smart contract would still be required. I wouldn't use an ethereum token because I don't want to go down that path and confuse users with ethereums.

Great.  Let me explain myself.  Global equity markets are going to slowly transition onto public blockchains.  It’s going to start this year.  We need to be able to offer equity instruments (eg shares) on Bitcoin or a side chain or second layer. If we don’t, another public blockchain will fill the hole.

The Gibraltar Stock Exchange will probably be the first to offer regulated securities on a public blockchain. Others will follow quickly.  Eventually LSE, NYSE etc will see the writing on the wall.

I don't follow. Suddenly altcoins are a thing? They are so easy to rekt. And the current contenders are full of vulnerabilities.

[El duderino_]

Breaking 24777$ prediction game      FINAL LIST       

27/12/2017 bikerleszno
29/12/2018 cAPSLOCK 
30/12/2017 digithusiast
31/12/2017 Raja_MBZ
01/01/2018 elg
02/01/2018 wachtwoord
03/01/2018 JimboToronto
04/01/2018 d_eddie 
05/01/2018 BTCMILLIONAIRE
06/01/2018 HanvanBitcoin
07/01/2018 ghandi
08/01/2018 savetherainforrest
09/01/2018 explorer
10/01/2018 bicoinpsycho
11/01/2018 Bitcoinaire
12/01/2018 speedwheel
13/01/2018 undeadbitcoiner
14/01/2018 northypoale
15/01/2018 ivomm
16/01/2018 maca068
17/01/2018 bitcoinvest
18/01/2018 last of the v8s
19/01/2018 mfort312
20/01/2018 1982dre
21/01/2018 flamast2
22/01/2018 RealMachasm
23/01/2018 willope
24/01/2018 kartala
25/01/2018 orpington
26/01/2018 rolling
27/01/2018 LFC_bitcoin
28/01/2018 jojo69
29/01/2018 CristiTCM
30/01/2018 rayX12
31/01/2018 realsteelboy
01/02/2018 twocorn
02/02/2018 mancroofer
03/02/2018 True Myth
04/02/2018 poolminor
05/02/2018 itod
06/02/2018 scheptan
07/02/2018 vapourminer
08/02/2018 alexeft
09/02/2018 siera
10/02/2018 AlcoHoDL
11/02/2018 Dunkelheit667
12/02/2018 yonton
13/02/2018 Wekkel
14/02/2018 Thekool1s
15/02/2018 starmman
16/02/2018 Globb0
17/02/2018 leveldkrypto
18/02/2018 olesh
19/02/2018 BitCoinBurger
20/02/2018 Paashaas
21/02/2018 flynn
22/02/2018 icygreen
23/02/2018 erisdiscordia
24/02/2018 phil_s
25/02/2018 sirazimuth
26/02/2018 Arriemoller
27/02/2018 yonton
28/02/2018 Muttley
01/03/2018 bones261
02/03/2018 heater
03/03/2018 soullyG
04/03/2018 InvoKing
05/03/2018 Notme
06/03/2018 sa_94
07/03/2018 NUFCrichard
08/03/2018 Imbatman
09/03/2018 Roombot
10/03/2018 STT
11/03/2018 badream
13/03/2018 erre
14/03/2018 julian071
15/03/2018 podyx
17/03/2018 fragout
18/03/2018 fabiorem
21/03/2018 dakustaking76
23/03/2018 nikauforest
31/03/2018 vroom
01/04/2018 somac.
02/04/2018 kurious
04/04/2018 fluidjax
05/04/2018 bitcoinbunny
08/04/2018 tyler1890
10/04/2018 ludwigvon
11/04/2018 hairymaclairy
16/04/2018 practicaldreamer
18/04/2018 free-bit.co.in
27/04/2018 drbrockoin
01/05/2018 sprinkles
02/06/2018 oblox
07/07/2018 IntroVert
03/08/2018 toxic2040
28/08/2018 bitserve
15/10/2018 Yefi
05/11/2018 mikenz
31/12/2018 melman2002
01/01/2019 Spaceman_Spiff_Original
12/02/2019 FractalUniverse
21/04/2019 gentlemand
20/02/2020 romneymoney
18/12/2021 luckygenough56

UPDATE     AND GOOD LUCK  !!!

lets keep the price going almost half way of the target to reach here

[HairyMaclairy]

Shares on a public blockchain are going to be a thing. Real shares.  Like Apple and Amazon and even Berkshire Hathaway.  Not this pretend kindergarten shit we have had so far.

But Bitcoin needs a way to record and transfer these shares.  Like colored coins.  There are a bunch of contenders for which public blockchain will win.  It will not be Ripple or Stellar. ETH is the obvious threat but they have their own problems right now. 

[bitserve]

Shares on a public blockchain are going to be a thing. Real shares.  Like Apple and Amazon and even Berkshire Hathaway.  Not this pretend kindergarten shit we have had so far.

But Bitcoin needs a way to record and transfer these shares.  Like colored coins.

I donno, a lot of legislation would need to change for that happen. Maybe I could envision one blockchain controlled by notaries where they would register property transfers... but not a P2P real estate blockchain with no authrorized third party involvement needed.

[mymenace]

Shares on a public blockchain are going to be a thing. Real shares.  Like Apple and Amazon and even Berkshire Hathaway.  Not this pretend kindergarten shit we have had so far.

But Bitcoin needs a way to record and transfer these shares.  Like colored coins.

I donno, a lot of legislation would need to change for that happen. Maybe I could envision one blockchain controlled by notaries where they would register property transfers... but not a P2P real estate blockchain with no authrorized third party involvement needed.

companies will make their own coin and shares will be tied to this