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

[realr0ach]

Can any of the segwit shills explain why segwit is better than a simple blocksize increase? Never seen anyone even try, and until such time I continue to maintain that segwit was a mistake.

IMO segwit channels are only useful as something like a backend arb device between exchanges, not for end users.  The only endgame network topology of the Lightning Network is a system where you have a single channel open with a bank that routes all your transactions.  For Lightning Network not to have been a trojan horse scam, it would have required routing be a native feature like how mixing is a native Monero feature.  As it stands right now, anyone shilling for Lightning Network is shilling for 'the man', or 'the Jew' as the case may be.  As if Blockstream launching a satellite wasn't a dead giveaway it's backed by (((big money interests))).

[HairyMaclairy]

Afaik transaction malleability breaks LN.  So Segwit is necessary for LN as it fixes transaction malleability.  Also BIP 114 for MAST requires Segwit.

Meanwhile roach confuses LN and Liquid.


Edit:  no need to take my word for it.  This is what Andreas says:

[El duderino_]

BTC= playing with r0ach, drops a little bit And he instant bites of-course

[realr0ach]

Meanwhile roach confuses LN and Liquid.

No, I did not.  I made the statement payment channels are only useful as something like a backend exchange arb mechanism.  A proprietary financial tool and not something relevant to normal people.  Since routing is not both blinded and a mandatory, forced function of LN, it was always going to be a trojan horse scam to put people right back in the existing permissioned ledger banking system.  

Since opening channels would be retardedly expensive with mainstream adoption, the only functional way to do business is to route all your transactions through a bank that already have channels to everywhere relevant configured and enough liquidity to operate them since funds locked in different channels are not fungible with one another.  Hell, it's not even a good system for banks in practice, worse than what they already have.  Regardless, shilling for the Lightning Network is nothing more than shilling for the cashless society slavery system the bankers have espoused to want to force you into.

[hv_]

Afaik transaction malleability breaks LN.  So Segwit is necessary for LN as it fixes transaction malleability.  Also BIP 114 for MAST requires Segwit.

Meanwhile roach confuses LN and Liquid.

Nope, u could impl LN also on BSV

[JayJuanGee]

If satoshi had wanted changes in bitcoin, he would have stuck around past 2010.

Perhaps. But he left. And rather than no changes, we had The SegWit Omnibus Changeset rammed down our throats. The biggest change ever to happen to the Bitcoin Protocol. Well, since being invented to begin with.

Segwit was a great thing to get passed, locked in and then implemented.  Bitcoin has been bullish as fuck since it beat the fuck out of those naysayers who were then (in mid 2017) calling for its demise due to NO plans for BIG BLOCKs... and they seemed to have gotten their asses handed to them, the bitcoin naysayer nutjobs, no?  Even though they are not dead yet, and the various shitcoiners and bitcoin attack vectors seem likely to pump again on the coattails of BIG DADDY, bitcoin.

Am I NOT koreck?

Segwit was the shitcoin created - and got Support only from ano anarcho speculants yet.

No buisness for P2P cash or even the funny new store of value Feature ever adopted it - and never will

U live in a PoSM cloud


 

You are the one living in a cloud if you cannot recognize the advancements of segwit, including backwards compatibility and increases in options that allow a decent array of building upon bitcoin....

So, in terms of the use of the term "shitcoin," you must be getting mixed up.  There was no additional coin created, and in the bitcoin world, we tend to refer to other coins as shitcoins, not bitcoin.  Segwit became an  integral part of bitcoin, starting in August 2017. 

I am sure that you were there, complaining the whole time and refusing to recognize reality... I remember you posting a bunch of nonsense shit back then, and you continue with the same kinds of deluded nonsensical and misinforming posts.  Since you don't seem to believe in bitcoin, then why you hanging out in these bitcoin threads?  Just to distract us with phoney baloney?  Hopefully you are getting paid well for your time to post negative information about a project that you, apparently, don't believe in.

[Globb0]

Now you are starting to make sense $10k/head is definitely doable and mic did the math pretty perfectly $300-400k can buy pretty much anything you'd ask in a party. (not beyonce sorry)

*I am still OK with the second option, drinking Beer . Don't like to get dressed for parties.

Those 10k tickets are only $845 if you buy it today and leave it in escrow  

[HairyMaclairy]

Afaik transaction malleability breaks LN.  So Segwit is necessary for LN as it fixes transaction malleability.  Also BIP 114 for MAST requires Segwit.

Meanwhile roach confuses LN and Liquid.

Nope, u could impl LN also on BSV

 I don't think BSV has LN?

[Ibian]

Afaik transaction malleability breaks LN.  So Segwit is necessary for LN as it fixes transaction malleability.  Also BIP 114 for MAST requires Segwit.

Meanwhile roach confuses LN and Liquid.


Edit:  no need to take my word for it.  This is what Andreas says:

And what is the practical use of LN? Why is LN "necessary"? And what even is MAST?

[JayJuanGee]

Can any of the segwit shills explain why segwit is better than a simple blocksize increase? Never seen anyone even try, and until such time I continue to maintain that segwit was a mistake.

If you spent a lot of time studying the matter and cannot figure it out, after more than 2 years of battling about, then perhaps no one has time to 'splain it to you?

[Ibian]

Can any of the segwit shills explain why segwit is better than a simple blocksize increase? Never seen anyone even try, and until such time I continue to maintain that segwit was a mistake.

I have no idea why it is useful but I refuse to admit it.

Yes. We know.

[JayJuanGee]

Indeed my math did suck yesterday, gonna try again...

Damn 91,568$ until the 100,000K party

goodmorning WO-members F*** 6 pages or something ... had a quick look on my phone and damn XhomerX was being productive Nice HATs!!!!

That's more like it --- causing the distance to have become much closer, too.   

[realr0ach]

JayJuanGee & Trollgoossens, since you're very slow on the uptake, what is your opinion of the fact that numerous people shilling FOR Bitcoin like Last of the V8s and the Popescu cult all believe the segwit coins will become anyone can spend and anyone using a segwit address will lose everything?  

I find this idea pretty hilarious myself since if it actually does occur, most users and exchanges would probably be affected, the price would go to zero, and probably nobody would ever touch Bitcoin again.  But that is how dumb Bitcoin shills are in 2019.  They believe this cataclysmic event actually will occur, yet they are still "bullish" because they're not using a segwit address.

[El duderino_]

Now you are starting to make sense $10k/head is definitely doable and mic did the math pretty perfectly $300-400k can buy pretty much anything you'd ask in a party. (not beyonce sorry)

*I am still OK with the second option, drinking Beer . Don't like to get dressed for parties.

Those 10k tickets are only $845 if you buy it today and leave it in escrow  

All fine, but still if you buy and just keep it asside and manage yourself? Until the time is there?
Whatever I have the same thought to who wants to participate just buy now a .1 btc or something so later on there Will be NO problems most likely it even Will be cheaper as 10K a person......

[El duderino_]

Indeed my math did suck yesterday, gonna try again...

Damn 91,568$ until the 100,000K party

goodmorning WO-members F*** 6 pages or something ... had a quick look on my phone and damn XhomerX was being productive Nice HATs!!!!

That's more like it --- causing the distance to have become much closer, too.   

I couldn’t belief I wrote that, Then again I saw the sangria PIC 

[HairyMaclairy]

Now you are starting to make sense $10k/head is definitely doable and mic did the math pretty perfectly $300-400k can buy pretty much anything you'd ask in a party. (not beyonce sorry)

*I am still OK with the second option, drinking Beer . Don't like to get dressed for parties.

Those 10k tickets are only $845 if you buy it today and leave it in escrow  

It will be a great party but hard to justify $10k for one person for one night.  I don't give a shit about Cristal (I doubt anyone here could tell the difference from bog standard Moet) and strippers don't cost $5k.      

[LoyceV]

And what is the practical use of LN?

Cheap small transactions and fast confirmations! I've recently installed a LN-wallet, and I already made more transactions on LN than I made on Bitcoin in at least a year.
It makes small payments possible again, such as sending 0.0001 BTC with 0.0000000202 BTC fee.

I'm okay with paying a high fee for a big transaction, but I'd love to be able to use Bitcoin for small transactions too. LN allows much more users to actually use it, as 7 transactions per second can't scale up.

[hv_]

Afaik transaction malleability breaks LN.  So Segwit is necessary for LN as it fixes transaction malleability.  Also BIP 114 for MAST requires Segwit.

Meanwhile roach confuses LN and Liquid.

Nope, u could impl LN also on BSV

 I don't think BSV has LN?

Correct - it doesn't Need it, but it's technically doable proven by e.g. Ryan X Charles et al

LN or netting processing might be done by banks later...

[P_Shep]

Afaik transaction malleability breaks LN.  So Segwit is necessary for LN as it fixes transaction malleability.  Also BIP 114 for MAST requires Segwit.

I think that the malleability bug is separate from the segwit. I think segwit required the fix in order to work. So segwit in on itself is not required for LN.



One advantage of segwit are reduced orphaned blocks, as the small header is sent separately and prior to the transaction data to other miners. The quicker transmission time reduces the chances two blocks are mined at the same time.
Another is simply a more efficient use of space. More tx's per Kb.

That's what I understand, anyway.

[JayJuanGee]

Can any of the segwit shills explain why segwit is better than a simple blocksize increase? Never seen anyone even try, and until such time I continue to maintain that segwit was a mistake.

I have no idea why it is useful but I refuse to admit it.

Yes. We know.

That's not what I said, diptwat.

You have been a member of this forum before I even started buying bitcoin, so presumably you have had time to attempt to figure why the fuck we have segregated witness.

However, if you don't really know what the fuck segregated witness is, or what it is for, then don't worry your sweet little head about it.

The main point is that there are technical people who understand bitcoin, and they can take care of all the matters for you, and the main point is that bitcoin is at least 8x greater price than when you entered the forum, and you have had many opportunities to invest into bitcoin and to make a pretty damned decent profit, in the past nearly 6 years, so hopefully, you at least can appreciate that angle of it.

But instead if you want to just circulate posts about how you do not understand anything related to bitcoin, then why the fuck don't you get out of bitcoin and go join one of the shitcoin projects.

I do believe that you really don't need to know everything in bitcoin in order to understand that bitcoin continues to be the one that has the network effects, but if you are filled with doubt and you would feel better to put your money into some other project, then go for it.  That's your choice.  I personally believe those other crypto coins are a waste of time and they don't even come close to holding a light to bitcoin, but hey, that's just my opinion man, and let's see how far it gets me in the coming years (even while it seems to have already made me quite decently rich, I really have not lost confidence in bitcoin's ability to continue to reward me for sticking with it, in spite of my unwillingness to feed seemingly lazy people who ask dumb and seemingly repeatedly answered basic questions, like you).