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

[Hueristic]

Can I say Come Onnnnn!!!!!!!! LFC 1-2 @the moment

pity that I couldn't see it live

I enjoyed the full match. Salah was outstanding. Liverpool rock! Top on the table. Liverpool are not going away. 25 league games they have won including this. Only few more to go. And then we lift the season trophy. 💪

I will crash now. Good night everyone.

I watched one for the first time last week at the casino but was confused because they had purple on and the other team was red. Was 1-1 forever then4-1 I think was the final. It was a hell of alot better than the Basketball on the other monitors but I still don't see why the fans turn fanatic.

[fillippone]

So OT

This evening lfc and City.  Tomorrow juve and i think barca but very though game IMO

Then Sunday whi is pre-F***inf-pared ?? For finally GOT

Fast forward my life to Sunday, please

[El duderino_]

Can I say Come Onnnnn!!!!!!!! LFC 1-2 @the moment

pity that I couldn't see it live

I enjoyed the full match. Salah was outstanding. Liverpool rock! Top on the table. Liverpool are not going away. 25 league games they have won including this. Only few more to go. And then we lift the season trophy. 💪

I will crash now. Good night everyone.

I watched one for the first time last week at the casino but was confused because they had purple on and the other team was red. Was 1-1 forever then4-1 I think was the final. It was a hell of alot better than the Basketball on the other monitors but I still don't see why the fans turn fanatic.

@LFC learn him about football .... english, european football ... I have a lesson in 5 minutes gotta run almost.

[Hueristic]

Bitcoin just broke an all-time high in transactions/block.

The record has now been broken twice in the last 10 days.

Dec 20, 2017: 2722 tx/block
Mar 26, 2019: 2734 tx/block
Mar 31, 2019: 2745 tx/block



https://twitter.com/kerooke/status/1114247683340812288?s=21

Blocks are full, Segwit allows more transactions in a block, LN caps fees: mempool doesn’t give a fuck.




EDIT nobody will ever see because this post is now buried under tenths of fresh WO’s pages, but I want to write for my future reference:

Probably this spike is only due to Veriblock spamming the blockchain:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg50520454#msg50520454

Nobody saw it.

[hisslyness]

the last thing you want to do it generate a 44KB transaction when sending bitcoin somewhere...

What is it with 44KB?

When i'd first started mining, i set my payouts to certain amount and generated over 2000+ UTXO, yes i have been mining for a while. Not understanding that each UTXO will incur 250b or there abouts... so when i wanted to send 2BTC to my brother wallet, did it come with a shock! i had to move it in 44KB increments to minimize the fees and also my Bitcoin Wallet Freezing and stalling when selecting the inputs.


EDIT: Now i have them consolidated from 2000UTXO+ to 27UTXO spread across 8 wallets, 3 are SegWit across 3 Bitcoin Full Nodes

[Hueristic]

Can I say Come Onnnnn!!!!!!!! LFC 1-2 @the moment

pity that I couldn't see it live

The KING

We are going NOWHERE in this title fight 

Yeah this is the game I watched.

[El duderino_]

^
Watch this evening and tomorrow champions league, Will be intens last 8 teams

[Hueristic]

^
Watch this evening and tomorrow champions league, Will be intens last 8 teams

I think I may, wait I thought I was watching premier league game? I'm a bit confused.

[kurious]

^
Watch this evening and tomorrow champions league, Will be intens last 8 teams

I think I may, wait I thought I was watching premier league game? I'm a bit confused.

Premier League and Champions League are different competitions. The CL is the winning teams from the individual European countries' leagues and cups, in a once a year European (club) competition.

[Saint-loup]

TrustToken Pegs Brexit Hopes

TrustToken which was one of the few options available during the start of 2018 has now released a stablecoin pegged to the British Pound. Funds remain however in a US-based escrow account, not in the United Kingdom.

Should the UK who is on the brink of a bitter divorce with the European Union place any capital controls to avoid deposit flight in the case of a No-deal Brexit, there could be a small window of opportunity for the stablecoin to find an audience facilitating trade as cryptocurrencies prove relief in areas facing financial difficulties.

Iceland, Cyprus and Greece, all members of the European Economic Area (EEA), have faced capital controls in recent years grinding international trade to a near halt. Banks saved, but economies felt the recession.

This is, however, conjecture. Without such a pressing event, and the required guerilla marketing tactics highlighting the option, the addition of GBP into the token issuer’s portfolio is unlikely to bring any benefits in the short-term as stablecoins remain, for the most part, a trading tool. And the British have yet to become avid fans of cryptocurrency based on global trading volumes.
https://diar.co/volume-3-issue-10/

[Toxic2040]

Are we building any type of platform at $5,200 seems like it's only rarely being broken into now.

 strong support is at $5.088k and is rising it appears, intermediate support at 5,168.2         was hoping to scoop up some more coin at around $5k but buyer interest and the faint scent of fomo hang in the air.

suspicious chart alignment with possible falcon heavy launch scheduled for tomorrow. #dyor

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1115347895958560771

Now targeting Falcon Heavy launch of Arabsat-6A on Wednesday, April 10 – weather forecast improves to 80% favorable

*edit - Launch Update ⚠️ SpaceX is now targeting Wednesday, April 10 at 6:35 p.m. EDT for the Falcon Heavy



3h

#cryptouplift

[Hueristic]

^
Watch this evening and tomorrow champions league, Will be intens last 8 teams

I think I may, wait I thought I was watching premier league game? I'm a bit confused.

Premier League and Champions League are different competitions. The CL is the winning teams from the individual European countries' leagues and cups, in a once a year European (club) competition.

Ahh IC so its just a different name for the inter-league playoffs?

AFA Price Speculation, I'm betting on sideways for a little while then up again. Maybe a bull trap and then a short squeeze before next leg up

[El duderino_]

^
Watch this evening and tomorrow champions league, Will be intens last 8 teams

I think I may, wait I thought I was watching premier league game? I'm a bit confused.

Yeah it was Premier League what you saw.... LFC is neck on neck with City there

And @the same time they are both in the most prestigious league of the season “the champions league” all the best teams @ their league from the latest season play a tournament, last 4 years real Madrid won it but they are out now by Ajax (very surprisingly) last season LFC Made the FINALS as well

So champions league is this evening and tomorrow return games the week after.....

Very exciting football (LFC little bit F***ed, this evening game and sunday very very tuff game for the Premier League, I hope they make it)

[kenzawak]

Then Sunday whi is pre-F***inf-pared ?? For finally GOT

Ready !

[Toxic2040]

in other off topic rocket news...starhopper down in boca chica completed its first tethered test hop successfully. here are a couple of cool shots.

one Raptor engine lighting off.


pure stainless steel pron...deal with it.

[jbreher]

OK, JJG. Tell me what the plan is to deal with the fact that once blocks are persistently full, then average fees rise uncontrollably, average wait times raise uncontrollably, LN channel openings and closings get economically prohibitive, and number of new entrants gets hard-capped.

What is the plan, JJG - what is the plan?

The blocksize will be increased when necessary. Double the size, double the transactions. Not yet, though. The possible benefits are still outweighed by the risk of spam, which we all have seen. We haven't seen persistently full blocks eyt, though. So that's why it hasn't happened yet.

Personally, I agree with you that the block size limit will at some point be increased. Either that comes about, or BTC loses use case after use case to more capable blockchains.

However, my observation is that such an increase will be too little too late. How long do you think it will take to overcome the inertia already nurtured within the community -- who have been taught that large blocks are a detriment -- to accept the inevitability of such larger blocks? And after that, how long will it take to push out such a change? And preceding the above, how long will it take for the devs to lose their blinders on the topic, especially having to publicly admit they were wrong about the need to keep blocks small?

Besides, daily use of LN for a vast majority of transactions might make it less necessary to open and close channels frequently. And bulk channel openings have been in development for a while already. Some are well past the proof of concept stage (alpha,beta, testnet? I'm not up to date on that ATM).

We were all supposed to be routinely using LN 'in six months' two years ago. Again, too little, too late.

N ot to mention the fact that persistently full blocks breaks lightning.

Schnorr sigs are coming. They improve on-chain privacy, save block space, and they will make coinjoin-like transactions easier - including aggregation of LN channel open/close operations.

A viable small scaling solution that will be routine sometime in the next four to six years.

All this might not amount to a detailed plan, but it does look like a friggin' good approximation in my opinion.

It ain't even an approximation of a plan until it has been clearly articulated and absorbed by the bulk of the community. When do you suppose the next FOMO spike ends up forcing the community's hand?

[pressnegl]

Ahahahaha, it really made my day.  I am just under the table.

[rebal15]

fuck Craig

Craig S. Wright is a fraud.

I call him Craig F. Wright

Figure out F 🤣

More importantly, his Wright starts with "W" Wrong

I don't like him, but when BCH hard fork took place, he said that BTC is going to dump to 1000$. fortunately BTC didn't dump to 1000$.

[jbreher]

The _protocol_ needs no maximum on the block size. The miners, being the ones who are affected by the block size, can set it without your soviet. At whatever point makes sense from a market demand and supply perspective.

Let me get this correct, you did advocate for larger blocks, but now you don't. You changed your mind.

You are incorrect. My advocacy has always been for no protocol-determined block limit. For such is exactly equivalent to a centrally-planned production quota. And production quotas -- to the extent that they are enforceable -- are invariably economically inefficient, ensuring crappy outcomes for most participants.

In case you had not noticed, miners have always been happy to mine blocks large enough such that average wait tx latencies were darned near universally next-block or so. That is, until blocks became persistently full, making such performance impossible.

At 1MB in size, blocks are so trivially small that miners' only consideration was in maximizing tx fees in the blocks they are building. Leading to blocks not being persistently full until the number of txs desired by the community became in excess of the block size limit. Obviously, such an issue can be solved by increasing the block size limit.

Of course, at some size (specific size thereof unknowable to the central planners), block size will be problematic. But the market will solve this issue. At the point where block propagation increases due to size leads to a higher incidence of orphaning, that is where the equilibrium point for block size will be set. Again, assuming no centrally-planned max, and that sufficient txs are available to build such large blocks.

What you really want is a "dynamic block size", that Miner's will set themselves, be it Small (80kB) or Large (8GB), doesn't matter.

Absolutely. Now you seem to have caught up.

and what would you do when groups spam the blocks to make them large and reduce the number of nodes?

What would you have me do? For the eleventy-bajillion-and-oneth time, a large number of so-called 'nodes' provide no value to the network as a whole. Of course, I'll probably continue to run a full-validating, non-mining wallet client or three for myself, as I like to be able to create txs that need no intermediaries.

What will you do when groups spam your small blocks, leading to the txs you desire unable to get included in the chain in under weeks, and even then at a cost of $thousands?

Is anyone going to pull you up on this one? Look above, you said you advocate for larger blocks.

And now you advocate for a dynamic block, only after i mentioned dynamic block, which you never mentioned previously.

What, are you arguing in bad faith, trying to trip me up in semantics? Your supplied definition of 'dynamic block size' (underlined above) as one that "Miner's [sic] will set themselves" does not comport to the long-accepted definition of the concept of 'dynamic block size', the accepted definition being a block size limit determined algorithmically via the protocol, set to some value dependent upon some previous set of mined block sizes. Which is certainly not equivalent to "Miner's [sic] will set themselves, be it Small (80kB) or Large (8GB), doesn't matter." I just papered over this gaffe of yours in order to move the discussion along. I see now you are more interested in a game of cat and mouse rather than any actual discussion of value.

What I have agreed to above is not your misuse of the term 'dynamic block size', but rather the concept that miners set the size of the block they produce with no protocol-imposed limit (i.e., your 'definition's' dependent clause). As I have said over and over (and over and ...).

If that is the case and it is dynamic blocks and not bigger blocks, then you also must support the current and smaller block size as it fits within your framework of a dynamic block.

That is just stupid. Miners have always been able to mine blocks smaller than any protocol limit.

The thing is, when mining a block it doesn't matter what size the block is, the cost to generate such blocks are the same.

Absolutely false. Not all blocks take the same amount of time to validate, and not all blocks take the same amount of time to propagate. To a first order approximation, the block size is a major determinant of these times. I shudder to think that I need to explain this to you. If a block takes longer to process -- such that a block that was solved later by a competing miner is accepted into the blockchain sooner -- that former block is orphaned. The loss of income from that orphaning process is a very real cost. Whether you recognize it as such or not.

Production Quota are economically inefficient?

Yes. Read some economics, ignoramus.

You talk about the market this, the market that, the market will, well the market has spoken mate! and You and BCH/BSV and what every other shitcoin you represent are the weakest link!

The last refuge of the loser: spout an irrelevancy intended to insult the other party.

Good Bye!

Thank god. Your arguments are inane, disingenuous, ineffectual, and dishonest. I'm more than happy to not have to counter your bullshit any longer.

edit: strikethrough immediately preceding. While this particular post was indeed 'inane, disingenuous, ineffectual, and dishonest', I see a subsequent post actually contained an argument. Unpersuasive though it be, it still addressed points of substance.

[jbreher]

https://i.imgur.com/Cji2Wc4.png

China -FUD, is this the good old days back again?     

Not without this good old meme:

via Imgflip Meme Generator

(Price seems to be shrugging it off. Bullish!)