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

[El duderino_]

via Imgflip Meme Generator

#bUyBTCBuYBTC

[serveria.com]

But...

Until that bit goes then it's still straw grabbing to an extent.

It's a long, long way from being a no brainer yet.

Why? The technology is there. The issue is that most people are not aware of that. Once they find out they can receive cash cheaper, faster and without any 3rd party in-between they'll stop using WU.

[Cryptotourist]

But...

Until that bit goes then it's still straw grabbing to an extent.

It's a long, long way from being a no brainer yet.

Why? The technology is there. The issue is that most people are not aware of that. Once they find out they can receive cash cheaper, faster and without any 3rd party in-between they'll stop using WU.

Because everything happens when the "time is right".

For example, carbon fiber was invented in the 60's only to be widely used after 30 years or so.

-10
Sure, 35% in 5 days is nothing. I smell the fear of shorters  

No fear here mate, only good & bad calls, just like poker  

[birr]

via Imgflip Meme Generator

Meh.
"The average channel capacity is approximately $120."
https://medium.com/@jcliff/the-lightning-network-cf836329626b

[bitcoinPsycho]

via Imgflip Meme Generator

Meh.
"The average channel capacity is approximately $120."
https://medium.com/@jcliff/the-lightning-network-cf836329626b

Yes average not all . Don’t see the point your trying to make?

[Paashaas]

Meh.
"The average channel capacity is approximately $120."
https://medium.com/@jcliff/the-lightning-network-cf836329626b

$120 is more than enough for a network specially disigned for micropayments.

Main chain will be great for medium to large transactions.

Lightning is for low, micro to sub-Satoshi payments.

[mOgliE]

$120 is more than enough for a network specially disigned for micropayments.

Main chain will be great for medium to large transactions.

Lightning is for low, micro to sub-Satoshi payments.

I've already seen this a couple of times, how can you go sub-satoshi? 

[luckygenough56]

i fear a weekend dump

[bitcoinPsycho]

I welcome a weekend pump

[El duderino_]

I never know which one its gonna be

[bitcoinPsycho]

I never know which one its gonna be

More than likely both

[Hexah]

I go for both possibilities.

[gembitz]

i fear a weekend dump

weekend troll?    lol

[goldkingcoiner]

r0ach?  realr0ach?

Ah yes, Micgoossens reading the dreaded r0ach posts:

More like:

Roach reading Micgoossens's replys:


you gunna cry?

[luckygenough56]

i'd like a pump tho

[d_eddie]

$120 is more than enough for a network specially disigned for micropayments.

Main chain will be great for medium to large transactions.

Lightning is for low, micro to sub-Satoshi payments.

I've already seen this a couple of times, how can you go sub-satoshi? 

When you close the channel and go back to the main chain, you're forced to round to whole satoshis of course, but while the funds are in the LN, accounting is in subunits (might be millisatoshis if I'm not wrong).

[d_eddie]

I never know which one its gonna be

More than likely both

As long as I get both, I will be happy. Order doesn't matter since I'm not gambling.

[birr]

via Imgflip Meme Generator

Meh.
"The average channel capacity is approximately $120."
https://medium.com/@jcliff/the-lightning-network-cf836329626b

Yes average not all . Don’t see the point your trying to make?

I think most transactions will be limited in size to the magnitude of the nominal $120 cited.  Maybe considerably less.  
Just because there are channels with $1000 in them, doesn't mean you can transact that much.  The transaction is limited by the contents of the smallest channel in the series of hops it has to go through between the parties who make that transaction.

Ideally, the network will be a mesh without big companies controlling massive hubs.  Which means that many transactions, perhaps most, will require several hops (cue six degrees of Kevin Bacon theme).  It seems likely to me that in such a case, the smallest channel may have less than the average $120.  Some channels will have more, some will have less.  The big ones don't count; it's the smallest one that determines the size of the transaction you can make.

On the other hand, if a few big companies, like Starbucks, Facebook, WalMart, Google etc. set up big hubs that everybody connects to with substantial sums, then you can transact large amounts with millions of other LN users.  Is that the kind of Lightning Network we want to see?  So it's a choice.  
1) Be able to transact large amounts with just about anybody on a highly centralized network than can censor your transactions and spy on you.
2) Have a highly distributed and decentralized network with limited transaction amounts.

[d_eddie]

On the other hand, if a few big companies, like Starbucks, Facebook, WalMart, Google etc. set up big hubs that everybody connects to with substantial sums, then you can transact large amounts with millions of other LN users.  Is that the kind of Lightning Network we want to see?  So it's a choice.  
1) Be able to transact large amounts with just about anybody on a highly centralized network than can censor your transactions and spy on you.
2) Have a highly distributed and decentralized network with limited transaction amounts.

I think one use case doesn't prevent the other from happening, as long as there is good global diffusion and connectivity.

[Karartma1]

Hi fellas,
what's up?  
Hard times for us recently but I hope you are all set for the crypto winter that's on us.

Speaking of LN I'd say that so long as we don't get that available for average Joes we are not going to see fireworks.
So relax and wait while the geeks test the LN for everybody else.
Remember we had that with Bitcoin, already.
A few of us started the network for everybody else. With LN it will be the same.

Price will follow