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

[Globb0]

What are your preferences for the 100K party, r0ach?

We can have the $0k party in my basement.

Get the fuck out of here roach.

Grandma is not dead yet, so it's grandma's basement, not "my" basement.       And, you really think grandma is going to handmedown her basement, especially with your bad financial judgement that leaves you largely in negative equity hoarding those worthless pms and screwing away the family's wealth with your ongoing bad investment choices?

Last I heard she was leaning towards leaving it all to the cat

[Ibian]

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.

This is an important difference if true. Can anyone confirm/deny?

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.

I don't see why orphaned blocks are even a concern. The confirmation times will always be the same on average no matter how many orphans we get, and the amount of resources needed for a 51% attack remains unchanged.

Fair enough on the more efficient use of space, however this is a technical benefit, not necessarily a practical one. Unless it, for example, reduces the degree of mining centralization (which it might, someone will need to run some simulations), then it's just fluff.

[HairyMaclairy]

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.

Okay first of all, it does not "make small transactions possible", again or otherwise, that was always possible. That kind of inserted misdirection does not make it look better.

So small fees. To one specific target. Cost of opening/closing such a channel?

Well today, 20 sats.  But if that's too expensive for you, zero cost if you use someone else's channel.  And MAST will probably introduce further tricky mass batching methods.        

[Globb0]

Hiring an appropriately sized venue entirely (hotel / country house... fuck it - a castle, even) might make security a little less of an issue

Unfortunately, Risto's place burned down.

Of course, he turned a little cray-cray before said event, so there's that...

Still crazy. Refers to himself as the dragon, and speaks in the third person.

https://www.facebook.com/people/Risto-Pietil%C3%A4/100017679760266

Oh he's alive. Flaunting the wealth he robbed from everybody.

He is the fallen, once he could lead people with good advice, now if he came he would be shouted down.

Maybe a bit like I expect even if Craig is proved satoshi. Yeah ok you were great making that, but since then you have fully discredit and no one is going to follow shit.

[Ibian]

you don't want those coffee purchases clogging up the main chain.

Yes I do. I specifically want coffee purchases clogging up the main chain, in fact. And anything else people care to use it on.

That is the entire point of bitcoin. Anyone can send any amount to anywhere at any time without needing the permission of middlemen such as yourself.

As for MAST - Bitcoin already uses merkle trees.  A block is just a collection of transactions in a merkle tree format.  MAST is a twist on the idea:  Merklized Abstract Syntax Trees.  Basically MAST allows for complex scripts to be appended to the Bitcoin blockchain with just a tiny proof recorded on the blockchain, so the vast majority of the script sits offchain, creating the ability to create Bitcoin smart contracts which are largely offchain.  And because they are off-chain, they are private.      

Not sure bitcoin should be used for something like this. Better to have it focus on one thing, that it does well, than introduce a hundred other use cases. More complexity means more things can go wrong, in an exponential number of ways.

[HairyMaclairy]

Well, that's your opinion and you are entitled to it.

But that's not the current direction of development. 

[realr0ach]

Wait, so Bitcoin has 'developers' that can play God and alter my digital shitcoins in ways that I don't want?  What happens when the developer does this to my physical metals??? Oh wait....they can't!  Which is one reason metals are money and Bitcoin isn't.

[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  

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......

0.08x  

[Ibian]

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.

My understanding is that tx malleability shifts the tx id, which means the locked coins cannot be validly spent. So segwit is a dependency for LN.  

Edit:  this post explains it better than I could:  http://cowpig.github.io/bitcoin/cryptocurrency/2017/06/24/Segwit-and-Lightning-Network/

Ah, ok. So Segwit IS the bugfix. thought they were separate.

Why would people want to used these shitcoin forks with bugs in them?
Crazy.

Yeah dont worry about those guys.  They are still trying to convince people that 0 conf transactions are safe.

They are. I routinely use them when dealing with people in-person. Never had a problem.

[HairyMaclairy]

Have you turned into some sort of BCH shill while I wasn't watching?

[Ibian]

Have you turned into some sort of BCH shill while I wasn't watching?

People have been accusing me of that for what is it years now? Maybe get your eyesight checked.

[dyask]

Wait, so Bitcoin has 'developers' that can play God and alter my digital shitcoins in ways that I don't want?  What happens when the developer does this to my physical metals??? Oh wait....they can't!  Which is one reason metals are money and Bitcoin isn't.

Well both are water proof but I sure wouldn't want to swim with very much metal.   The time for metals to be a store of value is quickly passing.

[HairyMaclairy]

No thanks Roach.  I have my steak rare not well done with ketchup. 

[realr0ach]

Wait, so Bitcoin has 'developers' that can play God and alter my digital shitcoins in ways that I don't want?  What happens when the developer does this to my physical metals??? Oh wait....they can't!  Which is one reason metals are money and Bitcoin isn't.

Well both are water proof but I sure wouldn't want to swim with very much metal.   The time for metals to be a store of value is quickly passing.

Nice try, Larry Summers.  Kind of easy to spot the kike shills nowadays when they claim metals are a "barbarous relic".  The last time they made the barbarous relic claim they went up 10x shortly after.  Gold price when this "barbarous relic" paper was posted?  Around $200:

https://www.nber.org/papers/w6436

[El duderino_]

Thx XhomerX for the NEW HAT for our journey into the 9K’s love it!!!!

*uploading

[El duderino_]

via Imgflip Meme Generator

Awesome !!!!

[Ibian]

The problem with metals, besides that I can't buy a jug of milk with it, is that tyrannical states can and will just take it. Metals are for the rebuilding phase, not the purge phase. And bitcoin is for getting a safe distance while it all blows over.

[realr0ach]

The problem with metals, besides that I can't buy a jug of milk with it, is that tyrannical states can and will just take it. Metals are for the rebuilding phase, not the purge phase. And bitcoin is for getting a safe distance while it all blows over.

Get off the drugs.  It's far easier for the state to make Bitcoin unusable than metals.  And confiscating metals is even less feasible than confiscating guns.  Even Shlomo Nakamoto says Bitcoin is useless vs state actors.

[Ibian]

The problem with metals, besides that I can't buy a jug of milk with it, is that tyrannical states can and will just take it. Metals are for the rebuilding phase, not the purge phase. And bitcoin is for getting a safe distance while it all blows over.

Get off the drugs.  It's far easier for the state to make Bitcoin unusable than metals.  And confiscating metals is even less feasible than confiscating guns.  Even Shlomo Nakamoto says Bitcoin is useless vs state actors.

Then you don't understand the tech, or politics, or both. Bitcoin is global. Somewhere is going to be fine with it, even if your local corner of the world ain't. And if you are not willing to leave a soviet-level state, then that's entirely on you.

[realr0ach]

The problem with metals, besides that I can't buy a jug of milk with it, is that tyrannical states can and will just take it. Metals are for the rebuilding phase, not the purge phase. And bitcoin is for getting a safe distance while it all blows over.

Get off the drugs.  It's far easier for the state to make Bitcoin unusable than metals.  And confiscating metals is even less feasible than confiscating guns.  Even Shlomo Nakamoto says Bitcoin is useless vs state actors.

Then you don't understand the tech, or politics, or both. Bitcoin is global. Somewhere is going to be fine with it, even if your local corner of the world ain't. And if you are not willing to leave a soviet-level state, then that's entirely on you.

Because it's so useful if the G7 or G20 banned Bitcoin but someone in North Korea has a 486 with the magical ledger of imaginary, valueless tokens on it!  The state can easily destroy and prevent the use of Bitcoin because running a police state in the digital world is cheap and cost effective (see Facebook, Twitter, the nation of China) while running a police state in the physical world requires orders of magnitude more resources.  Pretending it's harder to stop Bitcoin than metals is a flat out lie.  They require the govt's own infrastructure to even work at all.