Bitcoin Forum
October 19, 2019, 01:17:14 AM *
News: 10th anniversary art contest
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: Oct. 5 Closing Price:
$0 - 5 (3.5%)
<$8,000 - 38 (27%)
$8,000-$8,500 - 16 (11.3%)
$8,500-$9,000 - 10 (7.1%)
$9,000-$9,500 - 13 (9.2%)
$9,500-$10,000 - 12 (8.5%)
$10,000-$10,500 - 10 (7.1%)
$10,500-$11,000 - 5 (3.5%)
$11,000-$11,500 - 2 (1.4%)
$11,500-$12,000 - 4 (2.8%)
>$12,000 - 17 (12.1%)
>$20,000 - 9 (6.4%)
Total Voters: 141

Pages: « 1 ... 23857 23858 23859 23860 23861 23862 23863 23864 23865 23866 23867 23868 23869 23870 23871 23872 23873 23874 23875 23876 23877 23878 23879 23880 23881 23882 23883 23884 23885 23886 23887 23888 23889 23890 23891 23892 23893 23894 23895 23896 23897 23898 23899 23900 23901 23902 23903 23904 23905 23906 [23907] 23908 23909 23910 23911 23912 23913 23914 23915 23916 23917 23918 23919 23920 23921 23922 23923 23924 23925 23926 23927 23928 23929 23930 23931 23932 23933 23934 23935 23936 23937 23938 23939 23940 23941 23942 23943 23944 23945 23946 23947 23948 23949 23950 23951 23952 23953 23954 23955 23956 23957 ... 25266 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion  (Read 21405736 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. (108 posts by 21 users deleted.)
Toxic2040
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 1085



View Profile
May 22, 2019, 03:52:47 AM
Merited by nutildah (1), micgoossens (1)

lol.jpg

SV user not affected. Troll harder. C'mon - I think you have it in you. That was weaksauce.

I will give you a response jbreher partially out of respect for prior service and mostly out of gentlemanly manners. No one cares.

I will even be more brutally honest, more care than I can believe and far less care and will care then you hope for.

That being said, you constantly try and engage your narrative to get press time on bitcoins most watched thread. Its the same sort of slimy tactic that your cult of personality leader faketoshi has been employing since day one.

Frankly I am tired of it.

For me..it comes down to character and moral fortitude when all things are equal.

Newsflash..all things are not equal..never have been..never will be.

That you continue to support and advocate for such a person makes me question your moral compass at the very least.

You feel me?

Thats all the time I will devote on this subject..other than saying respect is a two way street. You want my respect?  Earn it...I think you have it in you.

tc
1571447834
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1571447834

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1571447834
Reply with quote  #2

1571447834
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1571447834
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1571447834

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1571447834
Reply with quote  #2

1571447834
Report to moderator
1571447834
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1571447834

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1571447834
Reply with quote  #2

1571447834
Report to moderator
Paashaas
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2023
Merit: 1410



View Profile
May 22, 2019, 03:56:15 AM
Merited by infofront (1)

Updated.



https://twitter.com/100trillionUSD/status/1130862825340100609
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2044
Merit: 2067


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 03:56:26 AM

Shelby/Anonymint suggested I share this here:

https://steemit.com/trading/@anonymint/re-anonymint-re-anonymint-most-important-bitcoin-chart-ever-20190521t130454806z

It's his analysis on the Stocks-to-Flow model in relation to the future price of bitcoin. It's interesting stuff IMO.

Yes.. quoting a banned troll should be taken with a decently-sized grain of salt...

Sure it is possible that he has become more reasonable, but who knows with shill/trolls who have demonstrated their previous bullshit that ultimately got them banned  from the forum?
infofront
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1806
Merit: 1847


Shitcoin Minimalist


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 04:00:31 AM
Merited by vapourminer (1)

Shelby/Anonymint suggested I share this here:

https://steemit.com/trading/@anonymint/re-anonymint-re-anonymint-most-important-bitcoin-chart-ever-20190521t130454806z

It's his analysis on the Stocks-to-Flow model in relation to the future price of bitcoin. It's interesting stuff IMO.

Yes.. quoting a banned troll should be taken with a decently-sized grain of salt...

Sure it is possible that he has become more reasonable, but who knows with shill/trolls who have demonstrated their previous bullshit that ultimately got them banned  from the forum?

Lets focus more on the ideas, and less on the personalities.  Smiley

Now I'm really gonna be in hot water around here - I'm agreeing with jbreher.
jbreher
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2534
Merit: 1356


lose: unfind ... loose: untight


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 04:05:21 AM


But if we want Bitcoin to succeed as the financial backbone of the planet, what are our choices?
1) SV's openness to storing arbitrarily huge amounts of data may lead to a small number of players at each task within the system, governed only by open competition. As a bonus, in the huge data scenario it becomes the backbone of the Internet.
2) BTC has already abandoned being the default money for the world, being utterly unable to even onboard the world to LN in less than a quarter century.
3) BCH is headed towards unlimited numbers of txs, albeit each one limited in size. At the cost of the perhaps unforgivable sin of centralized checkpointing.

So far, SV still looks like the preferable route forward to me. Current market share notwithstanding.

1) Significantly altered bitcoin's game theoretics
2) Significantly altered bitcoin's game theoretics, but those changes can (will?) be rolled back by miners
3) Significantly altered bitcoin's game theoretics

You missed one:
4) The Real Bitcoin™

As in TMSR, or pre-(what was it)-0.85 Bitcoin? OK. Add it to the list. Again, I believe its tx per unit time will be its downfall, just like BTC.

YMMV. Objects in mirror may be closer than they appear. Not to be used for the other purpose. This furniture product is not a gateway to Narnia. Keep chain from testicles.

eta: If rollback occurs upon 2), then it collapses into 4), no?

Pretty much - it's based on 0.5.3.

Thanks. I had lost track of the specifics.

Quote
And as to that question - yes. I was hesitant to give TRB a new number. We could call it 2.5.

As for more TX/s, I'm leaning toward the TMSR/Shelby school of thought that the 1MB blocksize is an immutable part of the protocol. Do you think Bitcoin was intended to scale to the masses?

Yes. Public utterances by Satoshi tend to corroborate that postulate. Though I admit that it is impossible to know what is really in the mind of another.

Quote

The lock limit is not a limitation that was manifested within the protocol (i.e., on the wire). It was strictly a limitation of Bitcoin's client SW implementation. As a professional protocol developer, I look at things that are not enforceable 'on the wire' as not being part of the specification. As a system that works only to the extent that it ingeniously and carefully balances incentives, it is absurd to consider aspects that could be overridden by another client SW implementation as being intentional design decisions. We know (or surmise) from other suboptimal threading aspects of the SW that the original implementation suffers from the programmers' poor understanding of multithreading dynamics.
Toxic2040
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 1085



View Profile
May 22, 2019, 04:07:19 AM

-malicious snip-
 I'm agreeing with jbreher.

jbreher
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2534
Merit: 1356


lose: unfind ... loose: untight


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 04:10:59 AM


::le sigh:: ...aaaand we're back to 'Aussie man bad!'


Truth is a defence to defamation

Yet, only in honest discourse is understanding to be reached.

You seem to be a lovely chap.  I don’t know why you persist in defending such comic book villains.

Lodging a copywright claim over the Bitcoin whitepaper which has an MIT open source license printed on the front page?  It’s both hilarious and pathetic.
Thats all he did and anyone can do it just like this so called TheRealSatoshiN! Grin
https://twitter.com/realSatoshiN/status/1130996634853302272
"So I kick his balls. I registered my white paper long before 2009 in Belgium before publication. I am not stupid. satoshin"

I can't pretend to know how this whole silly episode will conclude. But I do know enough to be able to point out that notice from the US Office of Copyright that your claim has been submitted is categorically different from notice from the US Office of Copyright that your claim has been registered.

IOW, this stunt by TheRealSatoshiN adds no value to the discussion, and is at best a lesser claim than CSW's. And if you had two brain cells to rub together, then you would realize such.

So presuming you are not a complete moron, what are you trying to accomplish by posting this here?
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2044
Merit: 2067


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 04:11:03 AM

Shelby/Anonymint suggested I share this here:

https://steemit.com/trading/@anonymint/re-anonymint-re-anonymint-most-important-bitcoin-chart-ever-20190521t130454806z

It's his analysis on the Stocks-to-Flow model in relation to the future price of bitcoin. It's interesting stuff IMO.

Yes.. quoting a banned troll should be taken with a decently-sized grain of salt...

Sure it is possible that he has become more reasonable, but who knows with shill/trolls who have demonstrated their previous bullshit that ultimately got them banned  from the forum?

Lets focus more on the ideas, and less on the personalities.  Smiley

Now I'm really gonna be in hot water around here - I'm agreeing with jbreher.

I think that you gotta do both.. especially if someone has shown their disingenuine posting in the past.... At least, he is not (yet) presenting his doom and gloom bullshit, and seems to be presenting bullish ideas about the price.. ..  

I suppose we will see how the price plays out in the coming years, but even bullish projections should be considered with a grain of salt - because some more modest variation might end up playing out and we don't want to get tied too much into what sorcerers are saying (especially when they have waffled between going from doom and gloom to overly anxious bull within less than a year)
Biodom
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1305



View Profile
May 22, 2019, 04:18:58 AM

Shelby/Anonymint suggested I share this here:

https://steemit.com/trading/@anonymint/re-anonymint-re-anonymint-most-important-bitcoin-chart-ever-20190521t130454806z

It's his analysis on the Stocks-to-Flow model in relation to the future price of bitcoin. It's interesting stuff IMO.

Based on now almost forgotten BETI model, I always thought that prior bubble should have peaked at 28K or above.
It was really hoodwinked out of existence by the CME futures.
He is also surprised by that (the "bubble" peak was too low in 2017 by comparison) and suggests higher S/F next time (to "compensate").
That's an interesting idea, albeit I am not sure why S/F became such a rage all of a sudden?
jbreher
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2534
Merit: 1356


lose: unfind ... loose: untight


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 04:22:37 AM


::le sigh:: ...aaaand we're back to 'Aussie man bad!'


Truth is a defence to defamation

Yet, only in honest discourse is understanding to be reached.

You seem to be a lovely chap.  I don’t know why you persist in defending such comic book villains.

Lodging a copywright claim over the Bitcoin whitepaper which has an MIT open source license printed on the front page?  It’s both hilarious and pathetic.

Lodging such a copyright claim is also NOT an "honest discourse."

Well, it may or may not be. But while I am attempting to have such an honest discourse with cAPSLOCK, need I really be subjected to post after post of tards yelling 'Aussie man bad!'? Note here that said discussion is focused solely upon technical aspects, and not some cult of personality. Regardless, it is certainly not me that registered the copyright, so WTF is the relevance? Actually, don't answer that. We know the answer. ZERO. Zero relevance.

Quote
It seems misleading and disingenuous and an attempt at bullying (or a threat thereof).

Well, I don't see how. In copyright, litigation must be preceded by registration. Without such, case will be dismissed due to lack of standing. Assuming CSW intends to litigate copyright ownership, registration is a necessary first step.

Further, the copyright owner Satoshi Nakamoto -- whether or not CSW -- has already granted license under MIT terms to open source the code. Such assignment of rights is irrevocable under the terms of licensure. As such, no bullying can be accomplished.

It may ultimately result in the enforcement of restoration of the name in each file's author list. But is that bullying? I certainly don't think so.
jbreher
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2534
Merit: 1356


lose: unfind ... loose: untight


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 04:28:16 AM

That you continue to support and advocate for such a person

Again. I do not support and advocate for any person besides myself. I do support and advocate for certain technologies, as manifested by certain blockchains.

Technologies are not persons. Blockchains are not persons. I am quite certain you understand this at least on an objective level.

For you to continually conflate the two is either: disingenuous and dishonest, or; fucking stupidity.

Have a nice day! Sir!
rdbase
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 261


bustadice.com


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 04:30:59 AM

^
It shows if this satoshin can put in a claim of copyrighting the white paper then anybody could even though he is not even the satoshi nakamoto he claims to be.
You do know craig wright can be sued for claiming this copyWright dont you?
jbreher
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2534
Merit: 1356


lose: unfind ... loose: untight


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 04:35:29 AM

^
It shows that this satoshin can put in a claim of copyrighting the white paper and anybody could even though he is not even the satoshi nakamoto he claims to be.
You do know craig wright can be sued for claiming this copywright dont you?

Yes. Pretty much anyone can be sued for anything. Relevance?

Remedial lesson:
Submission of claim may or may not result in registration of copyright.
Registration of copyright cannot be accomplished without first submitting a claim.
/lesson

One of these persons has cleared two of these obstacles.
The other has cleared only one.
To pretend there is some sort of equivalence between the two is either: ignorant, or; downright stupid.
edit: or dishonest - a state that is possibly exclusive to both the above possibilities.
rdbase
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 261


bustadice.com


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 04:49:03 AM

Ill just leave this here for those to decide who is dishonest in their claims of who he thinks he is. Undecided

With statements like this one no wonder he keeps trucking on and gets under millionaires skin.
https://www.ccn.com/craig-wright-binance-bucketshop-john-mcafee-a-conman

With the interview he did for nChain a new startup he is making himself to look less then who he claims to be. Lips sealed

Who created Bitcoin? Craig Wright reveals alleged contributors for the first time
https://youtu.be/8_SoIXUBIhw
nutildah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540
Merit: 2376


https://bitcoin.watfordfc.com


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 04:53:57 AM

Regarding SV's latest price action, its safe to say that the majority of SV's market cap value rests on the idea that Wright is Satoshi, and not much else. There was already a bigger block experiment called BCH, and its been steadily falling in price against BTC since December 2017. The market has all but rejected it. There's no logical reason to think the market will suddenly become hungry for an even bigger block experiment given BCH's past performance.

So the value of BSV lies on Wright proving himself to be Satoshi, and not much else. It doesn't have to do with the "tech" as it is admittedly an older version of bitcoin. If you believe Wright is Satoshi, by all means, pile into SV. Let's just not pretend its about exciting new tech or that it isn't a personality-driven coin. BSV did not shoot up not based on its technical merits but because of Wright's actions. One misstep from Wright or ruling not in his favor will have the opposite effect of his recent copyright filing.
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2044
Merit: 2067


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 04:57:50 AM


::le sigh:: ...aaaand we're back to 'Aussie man bad!'


Truth is a defence to defamation

Yet, only in honest discourse is understanding to be reached.

You seem to be a lovely chap.  I don’t know why you persist in defending such comic book villains.

Lodging a copywright claim over the Bitcoin whitepaper which has an MIT open source license printed on the front page?  It’s both hilarious and pathetic.

Lodging such a copyright claim is also NOT an "honest discourse."

Well, it may or may not be. But while I am attempting to have such an honest discourse with cAPSLOCK, need I really be subjected to post after post of tards yelling 'Aussie man bad!'? Note here that said discussion is focused solely upon technical aspects, and not some cult of personality. Regardless, it is certainly not me that registered the copyright, so WTF is the relevance? Actually, don't answer that. We know the answer. ZERO. Zero relevance.

Quote
It seems misleading and disingenuous and an attempt at bullying (or a threat thereof).

Well, I don't see how. In copyright, litigation must be preceded by registration. Without such, case will be dismissed due to lack of standing. Assuming CSW intends to litigate copyright ownership, registration is a necessary first step.

Further, the copyright owner Satoshi Nakamoto -- whether or not CSW -- has already granted license under MIT terms to open source the code. Such assignment of rights is irrevocable under the terms of licensure. As such, no bullying can be accomplished.

It may ultimately result in the enforcement of restoration of the name in each file's author list. But is that bullying? I certainly don't think so.


That's fine... We can disagree about whether the personality of fucktwat craig wright is relevant or not to bcash SV, and we can also disagree about whether his registration of a copyright is bullying or disingenuous. 

I stand by my earlier statements, so I don't see any reasons to repeat myself further.. nor do I find your additional arguments about your pure focus on the tech to be convincing, either, because historical posts have already shown that you have a tendency to spew out illogical and pie in the sky skewed nonsense when it comes to your supposed defense of the tech of SV and your nonsensical proclamations that SV supposedly adheres better to the original bitcoin vision than bitcoin itself - which ultimately downplays the fact that bitcoin is a community and a system of network effects that have evolved above and beyond some kind of idea of pure on chain scaling.

In other words the bitcoin community has spoken on the topic including the incorporation and activation of segwit that allows for a decent number of second layer solutions, some of which may still NOT have been introduced into bitcoin in spite that bitcoin is going to be receptive to a variety of additional second and possibly third layer supplementations that have become the total package of what bitcoin is in a descriptive sense .. rather than some minority vision (such as your own and some of the various Bcash BIGBLOCKER nutjob detractors who stray from the truth with their self-centered prescriptions of what bitcoin "should be" rather than accepting and acknowledging, as a starting point descriptive assessments about what bitcoin actually is in its current state and as it is progressing through consensus.
infofront
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1806
Merit: 1847


Shitcoin Minimalist


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 05:02:27 AM
Last edit: May 22, 2019, 05:22:02 AM by infofront


But if we want Bitcoin to succeed as the financial backbone of the planet, what are our choices?
1) SV's openness to storing arbitrarily huge amounts of data may lead to a small number of players at each task within the system, governed only by open competition. As a bonus, in the huge data scenario it becomes the backbone of the Internet.
2) BTC has already abandoned being the default money for the world, being utterly unable to even onboard the world to LN in less than a quarter century.
3) BCH is headed towards unlimited numbers of txs, albeit each one limited in size. At the cost of the perhaps unforgivable sin of centralized checkpointing.

So far, SV still looks like the preferable route forward to me. Current market share notwithstanding.

1) Significantly altered bitcoin's game theoretics
2) Significantly altered bitcoin's game theoretics, but those changes can (will?) be rolled back by miners
3) Significantly altered bitcoin's game theoretics

You missed one:
4) The Real Bitcoin™

As in TMSR, or pre-(what was it)-0.85 Bitcoin? OK. Add it to the list. Again, I believe its tx per unit time will be its downfall, just like BTC.

YMMV. Objects in mirror may be closer than they appear. Not to be used for the other purpose. This furniture product is not a gateway to Narnia. Keep chain from testicles.

eta: If rollback occurs upon 2), then it collapses into 4), no?

Pretty much - it's based on 0.5.3.

Thanks. I had lost track of the specifics.

Quote
And as to that question - yes. I was hesitant to give TRB a new number. We could call it 2.5.

As for more TX/s, I'm leaning toward the TMSR/Shelby school of thought that the 1MB blocksize is an immutable part of the protocol. Do you think Bitcoin was intended to scale to the masses?

Yes. Public utterances by Satoshi tend to corroborate that postulate. Though I admit that it is impossible to know what is really in the mind of another.


We may never know for sure. Dan Held made a pretty good thread laying out the argument that Satoshi intended bitcoin to be a store of value, first and foremost: https://twitter.com/danheld/status/1084848063947071488?lang=en


Quote from: jbreher

The lock limit is not a limitation that was manifested within the protocol (i.e., on the wire). It was strictly a limitation of Bitcoin's client SW implementation. As a professional protocol developer, I look at things that are not enforceable 'on the wire' as not being part of the specification. As a system that works only to the extent that it ingeniously and carefully balances incentives, it is absurd to consider aspects that could be overridden by another client SW implementation as being intentional design decisions. We know (or surmise) from other suboptimal threading aspects of the SW that the original implementation suffers from the programmers' poor understanding of multithreading dynamics.

That's a good point. Technically you're correct about the blocksize limit not being part of the protocol, of course.
Though if everyone is running a client with a different blocksize, the network will become a clusterfuck. That's why BCH and BSV forked away, and created their own networks, after all (argument about who forked away from who notwithstanding).

The immutability of the 1MB blocksize still stands if we throw out the word "protocol". Satoshi knew that once he slipped that blocksize limit into the core client, it would be there forever, and become the de facto standard in all bitcoin software implementations. That's why Garzik and the others were opposed to it at the time. Satoshi said that it was temporary, but he knew enough about game theory to realize 1MB blocks would become a Schelling Point within the bitcoin network if it was left in the core client long enough.
VB1001
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 1040


"Four Wheel Drive"


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 05:16:54 AM

Jimmy Song: Genuinely New Money Entering The Crypto Markets

Quote
Bitcoin’s price has been a hot topic over the past several days with the return of price exuberance.
Bitcoin expert, developer, and influencer Jimmy Song noted a price pullback for the asset might be logical.

https://cryptopotato.com/jimmy-song-genuinely-new-money-entering-the-crypto-markets/

Good Morning WO,s
VB1001
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 1040


"Four Wheel Drive"


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 05:29:39 AM




https://twitter.com/ChartsBtc/status/1130939134942429184

It's BTCitcoin






DaRude
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1769
Merit: 1049


In order to dump coins one must have coins


View Profile
May 22, 2019, 05:38:18 AM


::le sigh:: ...aaaand we're back to 'Aussie man bad!'


Truth is a defence to defamation

Yet, only in honest discourse is understanding to be reached.

You seem to be a lovely chap.  I don’t know why you persist in defending such comic book villains.

Lodging a copywright claim over the Bitcoin whitepaper which has an MIT open source license printed on the front page?  It’s both hilarious and pathetic.

Could be, or you just too naive to realize that you aren't the intended audience. These papers are not for you to consume, all of his actions can be easily explained if you think of him as a man preparing a case for litigation. He's just preparing documents that he'll be submitting to court. Probably will try to trademark "Bitcoin" next.
Pages: « 1 ... 23857 23858 23859 23860 23861 23862 23863 23864 23865 23866 23867 23868 23869 23870 23871 23872 23873 23874 23875 23876 23877 23878 23879 23880 23881 23882 23883 23884 23885 23886 23887 23888 23889 23890 23891 23892 23893 23894 23895 23896 23897 23898 23899 23900 23901 23902 23903 23904 23905 23906 [23907] 23908 23909 23910 23911 23912 23913 23914 23915 23916 23917 23918 23919 23920 23921 23922 23923 23924 23925 23926 23927 23928 23929 23930 23931 23932 23933 23934 23935 23936 23937 23938 23939 23940 23941 23942 23943 23944 23945 23946 23947 23948 23949 23950 23951 23952 23953 23954 23955 23956 23957 ... 25266 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!