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

[Paashaas]

Chinese mining cartel is selling every bitcoin they mine to defend bcash price. Lowering blocksize is the ultimate argument of showing them what they do is futile.

The Bcash cancer is still out there



https://news.8btc.com/jiang-zhuoer-bitcoin-cores-next-goal-is-to-increase-bitcoins-fixed-supply-and-stop-halvening

[Paashaas]

Segwit reached 60%



https://segwit.space/

[HairyMaclairy]

Ummmmm

[Paashaas]

Is this a joke? You need to pay taxes when it rains in New Jersey?

Is it even allowed to catch rainwater for your own use?  

https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2019/02/04/rain-tax-likely-to-become-reality-in-new-jersey/#.XGHnBuf1tMg.twitter

[JayJuanGee]

The moment Vinny Lingham backs it, you know it is a scam

It seems there are some big blockers supporting smaller blocks in the hopes of destroying bitcoin.

Hahahahahaha

Touché.

Agreed that Vinny is not exactly a trustworthy or credible character in the bitcoin space based on some of his past behaviors.   In other words, whatever Vinny says should be taken with a BIG ass grain of salt. 

On the other hand, there are a lot of projects in bitcoin that are going on simultaneously, and many of these developers are working for free to research, test and propose.  Some of their projects might get tested on testnet, and other projects they might propose, as LukeJr seems to be doing, to open up such testing on the mainnet.  Maybe it would work?  Maybe he will get agreement? 

Remember how lightning network went live, largely because the moment was right, and there was an ongoing two month steady spamming attack on bitcoin.  Coincidentally (or not) the then ongoing spamming attack stopped... Go figure.

Sometimes, a lot can be learned through investigating without necessarily following through with activation of a project in the long term.  Surely, the studies of smaller blocks does not seem to be attacking bitcoin. 

I had read some previous posts in this thread, and maybe some other threads suggesting that "we" focus on Schnorr signatures, fungibility, privacy and other more important bitcoin development matters, which reminds me of the quote from a famous little girl.


 
 

[jojo69]

jojo did you mean this (from ages ago lol) ? about Shamir https://btcarmory.com/fragmented-backup-vuln/
found in this great https://medium.com/@lopp/satoshi-roundtable-v-recap-151dab7548bb

yeah

good grief...your memory man

[jojo69]

Is this a joke? You need to pay taxes when it rains in New Jersey?

Is it even allowed to catch rainwater for your own use?  

https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2019/02/04/rain-tax-likely-to-become-reality-in-new-jersey/#.XGHnBuf1tMg.twitter

overly shrill headlines

Stormwater management is, in fact, a thing.  It does cost actual money, here in the real world.

[jbreher]

You still have to download and verify the blockchain first before you prune it.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Well, I don't know the current situation, but some years ago, gmax stated that core no longer verifies back to the genesis block, relying instead upon a centralized checkpoint as 'good enough'. Still downloaded, just not verified. Weird.

FUD unless properly sourced.

It ain't just a river in Egypt.

[jbreher]

You still have to download and verify the blockchain first before you prune it.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Well, I don't know the current situation, but some years ago, gmax stated that core no longer verifies back to the genesis block, relying instead upon a centralized checkpoint as 'good enough'. Still downloaded, just not verified. Weird.

I'm sure that there is more to the gmax description of the bitcoin blocks verification situation than your summary is suggesting, jbreher.

Well, JJG is 'sure'. I guess that settles that.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

bakkt got pushed again till later in the year?

So it's a bit of a moonshot bet and it's been organized in a manner that is very different than the way ICE typically does businesses. Bakkt has its own offices, its own management team and et cetera. And then we've entered into agreements with it to provide services, as I've described over that Bakkt -- over that ICE overlay.

So we'll see how it goes. They're well along in building out an infrastructure that I think you'll see launch later this year. And I'll let Bakkt talk more about how it wants to go about an what the business and use cases are its revenue model, et cetera, as it unfolds.

everyone mentioned the 'moonshot' bit yesterday, but not the 'later this year'? idk

They're well along in building out an infrastructure that I think you'll see launch later this year.

‘I think’ you’ll see launch later this year.

Fucking hell, ‘I think’.

What a joke, they couldn’t arrange a piss up in a brewery.

[mindrust]

The moment Vinny Lingham backs it, you know it is a scam

They way I see it he is pretending like he is backing it.

He (and other big bollockers) blindly believe that big blocks are the only way to scale bitcoin, he thinks small blocks will eventually destroy bitcoin and bcash will take bitcoin's place.

That's why he pretends it.

I honestly don't know if small blocks will destroy bitcoin. I really don't.

What I know is if it (blocksize) becomes bigger than a certain size, it will lead to centralization and another thing I know is, Vinny Lingham is a fucktard paidshill. So whatever he says, it is best to ignore him. He is no better than a standard rbtc retard.

[jbreher]

So, more importantly, how was PR?

Still there. We'll be here 'til Saturday.

On the west side now - near Rincon. Nice, but windy. While in Fajardo, we went down the southeast corner. As one goes 'round the bend from the east to the south, it gets flatter and to me less interesting. Of course, we only traveled west along the south coast as far as Salinas. Might get attractive by Ponce or further west.

Still don't feel I have a sense of the place. Without interactive activities scheduled, it's kind of hard to know the lay of the land.

OTOH, I've never felt unwelcome or with confused traveler syndrome. The wife and I are both thinking we'll continue entertaining the idea of becoming residents. So far, the area of Rio Grande or Luquillo might be a good place to settle down.

More roaming this week. And we'll be back in March, bringing the kids, their spousal units, and the grandkids - staying at a lovely compound inside the El Yunque rainforest. That'll be less investigation, more simple tourism. Maybe last chance to all get together before oldest grandkid starts adult life of her own.

There is the 'Blockchain Unbound' conference in March as well in Condado - I'm trying to figure out how to tack that onto the end of another trip that abuts the dates. It would be a good chance to meet some local crypto folk. We shall see.

[JayJuanGee]

You still have to download and verify the blockchain first before you prune it.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Well, I don't know the current situation, but some years ago, gmax stated that core no longer verifies back to the genesis block, relying instead upon a centralized checkpoint as 'good enough'. Still downloaded, just not verified. Weird.

I'm sure that there is more to the gmax description of the bitcoin blocks verification situation than your summary is suggesting, jbreher.

Well, JJG is 'sure'. I guess that settles that.

Yep... and you did not provide the details and even admitted that you were summarizing. 

Gmaxwell usually explains technical ideas decently well, and your summary (from a potentially selective memory) seems to leave out bits and pieces of details (perhaps with a purpose  to leave fear in the reader?)... Your vagueness does not really surprise me.   

[bonker]

Segwit reached 60%



https://segwit.space/

But still the number of unconfirmed transactions are high,hmmmmp...

[jbreher]

You still have to download and verify the blockchain first before you prune it.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Well, I don't know the current situation, but some years ago, gmax stated that core no longer verifies back to the genesis block, relying instead upon a centralized checkpoint as 'good enough'. Still downloaded, just not verified. Weird.

I'm sure that there is more to the gmax description of the bitcoin blocks verification situation than your summary is suggesting, jbreher.

Well, JJG is 'sure'. I guess that settles that.

Yep... and you did not provide the details and even admitted that you were summarizing. 

I provided the details some years ago in this very thread. Like, as in, a link to his actual statement. I can't be assed to go dig for it at the moment. But once all y'all get shrill in your denials, I'll likely be unable to resist throwing it in your face.

But in the meantime, JJG is 'sure'. Apropos of nothing.

[windjc]

bakkt got pushed again till later in the year?

So it's a bit of a moonshot bet and it's been organized in a manner that is very different than the way ICE typically does businesses. Bakkt has its own offices, its own management team and et cetera. And then we've entered into agreements with it to provide services, as I've described over that Bakkt -- over that ICE overlay.

So we'll see how it goes. They're well along in building out an infrastructure that I think you'll see launch later this year. And I'll let Bakkt talk more about how it wants to go about an what the business and use cases are its revenue model, et cetera, as it unfolds.

everyone mentioned the 'moonshot' bit yesterday, but not the 'later this year'? idk

They're well along in building out an infrastructure that I think you'll see launch later this year.

‘I think’ you’ll see launch later this year.

Fucking hell, ‘I think’.

What a joke, they couldn’t arrange a piss up in a brewery.

BTW, next month is later this year.

[JayJuanGee]

You still have to download and verify the blockchain first before you prune it.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Well, I don't know the current situation, but some years ago, gmax stated that core no longer verifies back to the genesis block, relying instead upon a centralized checkpoint as 'good enough'. Still downloaded, just not verified. Weird.

I'm sure that there is more to the gmax description of the bitcoin blocks verification situation than your summary is suggesting, jbreher.

Well, JJG is 'sure'. I guess that settles that.

Yep... and you did not provide the details and even admitted that you were summarizing.  

I provided the details some years ago in this very thread. Like, as in, a link to his actual statement. I can't be assed to go dig for it at the moment. But once all y'all get shrill in your denials, I'll likely be unable to resist throwing it in your face.

But in the meantime, JJG is 'sure'. Apropos of nothing.

That's fine... just leave out supporting evidence for your ambiguous assertion and then blame me for "surely" having skepticism for details.

Fine..

That's just fine.  

[becoin]

Why would anyone want smaller blocks? Have we forgotten the dark times of $100 fees already?

Fee size doesn't depend on block size. Fee size depends on the will of Chinese mining cartel to spam the blockchain for the purpose of promoting their bcash corporate coin! Now Bitmain & Co is in big trouble and don't have the resources to do what they've done when fee was $100. Lightning is the way to go for everyday bitcoin payments. Blockchain is the settlement layer for those payments.

[Ibian]

Why would anyone want smaller blocks? Have we forgotten the dark times of $100 fees already?

Fee size doesn't depend on block size. Fee size depends on the will of Chinese mining cartel to spam the blockchain for the purpose of promoting their bcash corporate coin! Now Bitmain & Co is in big trouble and don't have the resources to do what they've done when fee was $100. Lightning is the way to go for everyday bitcoin payments. Blockchain is the settlement layer for those payments.

It does when the blocks are full. Supply and demand, same as anything else, none of this is new.

[Lauda]

The moment Vinny Lingham backs it, you know it is a scam

It seems there are some big blockers supporting smaller blocks in the hopes of destroying bitcoin.

Hahahahahaha
Touché.

Agreed that Vinny is not exactly a trustworthy or credible character in the bitcoin space based on some of his past behaviors.   In other words, whatever Vinny says should be taken with a BIG ass grain of salt.  
-snip-

My pet monkey is smarter than Vinny by quite the margin. For those that actually do understand the tech and the scaling issues (not just in Bitcoin but in general software), then they would understand that Luke actually makes very-good arguments from a technical perspective but he kind-of forgets that Bitcoin is not just tech. Now if everyone understood that the UTXO set size is kind-of only bound by the block size, they would pretty much never advocate for any significant block size increase. A lot needs to change before we could be considered *ready* for a good proposal, although it's possible that we never reach consensus.

I had read some previous posts in this thread, and maybe some other threads suggesting that "we" focus on Schnorr signatures, fungibility, privacy and other more important bitcoin development matters, which reminds me of the quote from a famous little girl.

That is already underway, it just isn't ready.