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

[JayJuanGee]

Good day 

So i see BTC at $55k, out of shallow waters, where the bears satisfy their thirst.
I'd like to see the price a lil higher today, above $55.5k, just to make sure we left the dump behind.
Expecting fights at well known levels like $58, $60k and $62k, so $70k by may (which rhymes beautifully) may become very real.
#hodltight

Good day

This time our TA worked out very well. If Bitcoin break resistance at 57K goes higher then we might see new ATH.

Trader quotes at it again 

Exactly...

1) if bitcoin goes higher then it is closer to going even more higher.

2) surely bitcoin must get past $57k in order to get up and beyond $64,895

 

Good morning Bitcoinland.

Back up over $55k... currently $55037USD/$68270CAD (Bitcoinaverage).

We still have a couple of days to turn April's candle green.

Go Bitcoin go.

Just so everyone realizes, the target price to turn this month's candle green is $58,789.96 and it would have to happen before midnight UTC.. which is about 3 days and 6 hours from the time of this post, so it would NOT be an impossible to achieve, but surely is far from a given, in my humble bumble opinion, for whatever that's worth.

[1714178720]

1714178720

[1714178720]

1714178720

[1714178720]

1714178720

[1714178720]

1714178720

[1714178720]

1714178720

[El duderino_]

And still the "dump BTC for ETH or XRP" pump trade continues.  

Gosh do they want people in anything *but* Bitcoin so badly...  

I wonder why? Smells like 2017 all over again...

Pity for the n00bs and more pity for those who already been in the situation and made gaines, though those people before (also some of my friends) "made gaines" but also choked themselves in the altcoin-koolaid and never took the BTC profits always thinking it will go higher it will sustain etc... So the profit they should have taken turned around in what altcoins true meaning is designed for "Not for making BTC, but its to take away peoples BTC" Few understand this. But also friends of me right now... have rallied MAXIMUM profits with like ADA for example, it rallies so good that they now think its a good coin while its a shitcoin which is becoming more and more a bigger shitcoin over time and just rallies on the hype etc ... Some have to burn themselves more as one time I guess ...

[El duderino_]

Objectively, altcoins don’t have so much of an advantage as it may seem to the naïve newbie who just wants to buy a cup of coffee.  Altcoins only seem to offer inexpensive transactions, because:

Also, are you trying to beat out JJG for the 2021 Wordie Man award or what? 

I think so, a separate thread for them long long posts could serve 

Though JJG is mixing some shorter posts in the mix as well

[nullius]

https://twitter.com/sallymayweather/status/1386881393146408960?s=21

People who make these arguments have clearly never heard of Northern Europe

I can shortcut that whole argument by pointing out that countries in Northern Europe have not recently had an executive-branch election stolen with massive ballot fraud.  When you are living in a banana republic run by a socialist who stuffed the ballot, “socialism” versus “not socialism” may turn out to be the least of your problems.

Before you worry about the economy being flushed down the toilet with tax-and-spend policies, you may want to worry about how El Presidente is turning Dubya’s “War on Terror” machinery of global terrorism inwards.  E.g., via Glenn Greenwald:

The Targets of Biden's War on "Domestic Extremists" May Not Be Who You Think
Illustrating the dangers of the federal government's war on "domestic extremists," animal rights activists are being prosecuted under a capacious definition of "terrorism."

Leighton Akira Woodhouse
[26 April 2021]

[...]

The following year, the animal agriculture industry successfully lobbied the Iowa state legislature to make what Pachaud had done a crime. The law was one of many so-called “Ag Gag” laws in agricultural states across the country, which make undercover investigations on factory farms by animal rights groups unlawful (an estimated 99 percent of animals raised for meat are factory farmed; the very few small family farms that are left are being systematically driven out of business by the industrialization and economic consolidation of the industry). As Ag gag laws effectively criminalize speech, some of the more sloppily written among them have been subject to successful constitutional challenges; Iowa’s 2012 law was among them. In 2019, a federal judge struck down Iowa’s 2012 law.

[...]

As should surprise nobody who lived through the political aftermath of 9/11, these laws were passed under the pretext of combatting “terrorism.” Radical animal rights and environmental activists have, in fact, long been among the FBI’s top “domestic terrorism” targets, as well as targets of draconian new legislation. In 2006, at the behest of the pharmaceutical and animal agriculture industries, Congress passed a law specifically defining animal rights activism aimed at “damaging or interfering with the operations of an animal enterprise” — whether or not violence was involved — as “terrorism.”

[...]

Currently, a bill with 196 Democratic co-sponsors (and 3 Republicans) is before Congress, which would begin to build the legal and bureaucratic architecture for an interagency domestic terrorism response unit within the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the Department of Homeland Security. The legislation is explicitly a response to the Capitol Riot and is pointed particularly at “White supremacist” and “neo-Nazi” groups — a particularly unsympathetic and uncontroversial cast of culprits.

But the PATRIOT Act was also purported to target only the most hateful, murderous people in the world — Islamic terrorists — before it metastasized into a massive surveillance state infrastructure that spied on literally every single American with an internet connection. Are we to expect that a domestic analogue to the PATRIOT Act will draw the line at violent sociopathic racists? The intelligence community demonstrably does not: a recently declassified report lists animal rights and environmental activists, abortion activists on both the pro-life and the pro-choice sides, anarchists, and anti-capitalists as potential domestic terrorist threats.

Whoops!

[JayJuanGee]

Do you want for nullius to die of apoplexy? 

Don't tempt us (royal, for sure).

And still the "dump BTC for ETH or XRP" pump trade continues.  

Gosh do they want people in anything *but* Bitcoin so badly...  

I wonder why? Smells like 2017 all over again...

Who's they?

Yes, "they" take advantage of people's dumb whenever possible.. but still, seems like an overall market phenomena - and surely one that is more present in the "crypto" space when normies can enter and exit very easily, as compared with traditional assets - even though Robinhood and services like that are starting to make more trading possibilities more available to normies.

[rolling]

https://twitter.com/sallymayweather/status/1386881393146408960?s=21

People who make these arguments have clearly never heard of Northern Europe

Those countries are not socialist.

This lie was started by Bernie Sanders and just won't die among the left extremists in the United States.

Socialism is a dirty cuss word and nobody should be promoting it, least of all our own senators.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/bernie-sanders-wrong-democratic-socialism-sweden-everywhere-else-ncna1158636

Contrary to the prevailing narrative, the success of Nordic countries like Sweden — as measured by relatively high living standards accompanied by low poverty, with government-funded education through university, universal health coverage, generous parental-leave policies and long life spans — precedes the contemporary welfare state.

[Biodom]

And still the "dump BTC for ETH or XRP" pump trade continues.  

Gosh do they want people in anything *but* Bitcoin so badly...  

I wonder why? Smells like 2017 all over again...

Pity for the n00bs and more pity for those who already been in the situation and made gaines, though those people before (also some of my friends) "made gaines" but also choked themselves in the altcoin-koolaid and never took the BTC profits always thinking it will go higher it will sustain etc... So the profit they should have taken turned around in what altcoins true meaning is designed for "Not for making BTC, but its to take away peoples BTC" Few understand this. But also friends of me right now... have rallied MAXIMUM profits with like ADA for example, it rallies so good that they now think its a good coin while its a shitcoin which is becoming more and more a bigger shitcoin over time and just rallies on the hype etc ... Some have to burn themselves more as one time I guess ...

The sign of the times is that people get excited by the new shiny things..in 2017 it was eth and xerp, now a-coin, d-coin, u-coin, l-coin.
For some, the gains are spectacular (currently). However, we know how it all ends-in a vast under-performance vs btc when the bear market ensues.
All in all, they are oscillators (have been so far). A-coin that you mentioned was the biggest oscillator of them all-lost 98-99% in 2018-2019.
IMHO, it will lose 90% at some point again, the question is-from where?
I never sell btc for any alt, but dabble using fiat. Not buying now.
The difficult art to master is when to sell.
It's easier with bitcoin-I never sell any more, just buy+accumulate otherwise.

[TheJuice]

it's been a while since ive ben in this thread. How are we today? 58k at EOM?

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

Also, are you trying to beat out JJG for the 2021 Wordie Man award or what?  

Huh?

You did not get the memo, Torque?

nullius beat me a long time ago.  I am Mr. Shortie (and sparse), relatively speaking.

Objectively, altcoins don’t have so much of an advantage as it may seem to the naïve newbie who just wants to buy a cup of coffee.  Altcoins only seem to offer inexpensive transactions, because:

Also, are you trying to beat out JJG for the 2021 Wordie Man award or what?  

I think so, a separate thread for them long long posts could serve  

Though JJG is mixing some shorter posts in the mix as well

Maybe there should be a thread with just Nullius and me?  But we would not want to interact with each other that much.

Alternatively, theymos could build-in an automatic diversion of all posts from Nullius and me to one thread (only showing a reference in whatever thread we had posted), even though neither of us would want such seclusion from the peeps and normies, we end up falling into such predicament and hoisted by our own petard(s)..

sucks to have a wordy "issue", sometimes.  You guys should be feeling sorry for us.

 

[shitcoin talkenings...... ]
The difficult art to master is when to sell.  

That seems to be the crux of the matter including the dilemma that normies get into, including that some normies start to actually believe that their shitcoin has actual value, which is dumb as fuck, but surely a real phenomena.. as mentioned by the dude.

it's been a while since ive ben in this thread. How are we today? 58k at EOM?

Royal we?  You should be able to answer that question ur lil selfie, no?

Welcome TheJuice... no homo.. NOW, get out there and post something a wee bit more substantive!!!!!!!   

[nullius]

Objectively, altcoins don’t have so much of an advantage as it may seem to the naïve newbie who just wants to buy a cup of coffee.  Altcoins only seem to offer inexpensive transactions, because:

No one is buying and using shitcoins to buy a cup of coffee.

Yes, they are.

Just as no one is buying Bitcoin to buy a cup of coffee.

Because they can’t (unless with Lightning).

They're using fiat to buy a cup of coffee.

See above:  Shitcoins.  (And those aren’t the only ones; there are some much better altcoins getting point-of-sale traction for brick and mortar purchases nowadays.  If you don’t know that, it is your problem.)

Which just further reinforces my point. Theory and reality are two entirely different things.

Bitcoin is supposed to be money.  That is the theory.  If it’s not useful money in reality, then I don’t want it.  Thank goodness for those L2 things that you want to ignore; why do they even exist?

blockchain : wire transfer :: offchain : Visa

Also, are you trying to beat out JJG for the 2021 Wordie Man award or what? 

No.

[El duderino_]

And still the "dump BTC for ETH or XRP" pump trade continues.  

Gosh do they want people in anything *but* Bitcoin so badly...  

I wonder why? Smells like 2017 all over again...

Pity for the n00bs and more pity for those who already been in the situation and made gaines, though those people before (also some of my friends) "made gaines" but also choked themselves in the altcoin-koolaid and never took the BTC profits always thinking it will go higher it will sustain etc... So the profit they should have taken turned around in what altcoins true meaning is designed for "Not for making BTC, but its to take away peoples BTC" Few understand this. But also friends of me right now... have rallied MAXIMUM profits with like ADA for example, it rallies so good that they now think its a good coin while its a shitcoin which is becoming more and more a bigger shitcoin over time and just rallies on the hype etc ... Some have to burn themselves more as one time I guess ...

The sign of the times is that people get excited by the new shiny things..in 2017 it was eth and xerp, now a-coin, d-coin, u-coin, l-coin.
For some, the gains are spectacular (currently). However, we know how it all ends-in a vast under-performance vs btc when the bear market ensues.
All in all, they are oscillators (have been so far). A-coin that you mentioned was the biggest oscillator of them all-lost 98-99% in 2018-2019.
IMHO, it will lose 90% at some point again, the question is-from where?
I never sell btc for any alt, but dabble using fiat. Not buying now.
The difficult art to master is when to sell.
It's easier with bitcoin-I never sell any more, just buy+accumulate otherwise.

Worst I have been hearing lately was when some friends still holding XRP, sold there shitcoin when the lawsuit was there, I said to surely sell, lot of them did .... Later on they told me why did we sell we said it was gonna pump etc LoL, they still like the XRP performance while its still half in FIAT terms from ATH and I don't know how ad against BTC, ofcourse they only watch against USD but really LoL.... They really think its performing good and they just wanna believe its a good coin cause its cheap in FIAT terms, only around a buck ... pfff n00bs, n00bs everywhere

[El duderino_]

it's been a while since ive ben in this thread. How are we today? 58k at EOM?

Maybe, but could be EO-this hour as well...

Or at EO-Chelsea-Real game...

[OutOfMemory]

And still the "dump BTC for ETH or XRP" pump trade continues.  

Gosh do they want people in anything *but* Bitcoin so badly...  

I wonder why? Smells like 2017 all over again...

Pity for the n00bs and more pity for those who already been in the situation and made gaines, though those people before (also some of my friends) "made gaines" but also choked themselves in the altcoin-koolaid and never took the BTC profits always thinking it will go higher it will sustain etc... So the profit they should have taken turned around in what altcoins true meaning is designed for "Not for making BTC, but its to take away peoples BTC" Few understand this. But also friends of me right now... have rallied MAXIMUM profits with like ADA for example, it rallies so good that they now think its a good coin while its a shitcoin which is becoming more and more a bigger shitcoin over time and just rallies on the hype etc ... Some have to burn themselves more as one time I guess ...

The sign of the times is that people get excited by the new shiny things..in 2017 it was eth and xerp, now a-coin, d-coin, u-coin, l-coin.
For some, the gains are spectacular (currently). However, we know how it all ends-in a vast under-performance vs btc when the bear market ensues.
All in all, they are oscillators (have been so far). A-coin that you mentioned was the biggest oscillator of them all-lost 98-99% in 2018-2019.
IMHO, it will lose 90% at some point again, the question is-from where?
I never sell btc for any alt, but dabble using fiat. Not buying now.
The difficult art to master is when to sell.
It's easier with bitcoin-I never sell any more, just buy+accumulate otherwise.

Worst I have been hearing lately was when some friends still holding XRP, sold there shitcoin when the lawsuit was there, I said to surely sell, lot of them did .... Later on they told me why did we sell we said it was gonna pump etc LoL, they still like the XRP performance while its still half in FIAT terms from ATH and I don't know how ad against BTC, ofcourse they only watch against USD but really LoL.... They really think its performing good and they just wanna believe its a good coin cause its cheap in FIAT terms, only around a buck ... pfff n00bs, n00bs everywhere

See? That's why i always use $SHIT-$BTC charts to evaluate how a shitcoin is performing.

EDIT
Spoiler: All of them suck in the long term -> no importance for investment.

[Torque]

https://twitter.com/NorthmanTrader/status/1386984957399257088?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

[OutOfMemory]

^ The modern kind of criminalization. Tweak the legal framework to favor big farms and farming companies, so that the little farmers can't keep up with agricultural laws and standards. This is how the EU works, for example. Either grow bigger and bigger to earn the money to compete in the standards and rules race, or die as a full-time farmer. All for the best of the customer, of course  

Off for watching a movie with the missus. Have a good time!

[nullius]

The Targets of Biden's War on "Domestic Extremists" May Not Be Who You Think
Illustrating the dangers of the federal government's war on "domestic extremists," animal rights activists are being prosecuted under a capacious definition of "terrorism."

Leighton Akira Woodhouse
[26 April 2021]

[...]

The following year, the animal agriculture industry successfully lobbied the Iowa state legislature to make what Pachaud had done a crime. The law was one of many so-called “Ag Gag” laws in agricultural states across the country, which make undercover investigations on factory farms by animal rights groups unlawful (an estimated 99 percent of animals raised for meat are factory farmed; the very few small family farms that are left are being systematically driven out of business by the industrialization and economic consolidation of the industry). As Ag gag laws effectively criminalize speech, some of the more sloppily written among them have been subject to successful constitutional challenges; Iowa’s 2012 law was among them. In 2019, a federal judge struck down Iowa’s 2012 law.

[...]

As should surprise nobody who lived through the political aftermath of 9/11, these laws were passed under the pretext of combatting “terrorism.” Radical animal rights and environmental activists have, in fact, long been among the FBI’s top “domestic terrorism” targets, as well as targets of draconian new legislation. In 2006, at the behest of the pharmaceutical and animal agriculture industries, Congress passed a law specifically defining animal rights activism aimed at “damaging or interfering with the operations of an animal enterprise” — whether or not violence was involved — as “terrorism.”

[...]

Currently, a bill with 196 Democratic co-sponsors (and 3 Republicans) is before Congress, which would begin to build the legal and bureaucratic architecture for an interagency domestic terrorism response unit within the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the Department of Homeland Security. The legislation is explicitly a response to the Capitol Riot and is pointed particularly at “White supremacist” and “neo-Nazi” groups — a particularly unsympathetic and uncontroversial cast of culprits.

But the PATRIOT Act was also purported to target only the most hateful, murderous people in the world — Islamic terrorists — before it metastasized into a massive surveillance state infrastructure that spied on literally every single American with an internet connection. Are we to expect that a domestic analogue to the PATRIOT Act will draw the line at violent sociopathic racists? The intelligence community demonstrably does not: a recently declassified report lists animal rights and environmental activists, abortion activists on both the pro-life and the pro-choice sides, anarchists, and anti-capitalists as potential domestic terrorist threats.

Whoops!

Almost as if animal agriculture is inherently exploitative and wrong.

Amazon and Walmart similarly put mom and pop shops out of business.  Are mom and pop shops “inherently exploitative and wrong”?  /logic

Not to mention, there are fewer and fewer independent family farmers growing veggies nowadays.  “Almost as if growing veggies is inherently exploitative and wrong.”

[DaRude]

https://twitter.com/excellion/status/1386777620604325888?s=21

Spotted a llama what does it means ?

Why is Samson tweeting this now? Or am i reading it wrong

There is only one reasonable way to read it.  It is wrong, and whoever made it should feel bad.

Bigblockers suffer the same essential fallacy as UBI socialists:  They don’t understand markets.  Bitcoin network capacity is in extremely high demand—high enough that fees reach an equilibrium at the highest that the market will bear, and that in turn limits demand.

A modest linear bump in the blocksize (= supply) would be soaked up instantly, with fees and backlog settling back to where they are now as more people try to make more transactions that are currently not even attempted.  Meanwhile, that linear blocksize increase would non-linearly increase the resource demands on nodes.  (And a large increase of the blocksize, à la CSW rhetoric, would just wreck the network.)

Increasing base-layer capacity to, what, maybe 30–40 tps tops would be a sick joke at a cost that would surprise people.  It would not solve any problems, and it would create many.  We need technologies supporting tens of thousands of TPS or more; a doubling (or whatever) of the current blocksize is insufficient by orders of magnitude, too much and not enough all at once.

A blocksize increase would obviously increase miners’ BTC revenue per successful block:  Blocks would be just as full, and fees would be just as high, and there would be more transactions per block.  But on the other hand, it would also raise miner costs by increasing the orphan rate (and/or the cost of infrastructure to try to avoid this problem); and it would damage Bitcoin’s long-term value proposition, which is bad for miners who have long-term capital investments in Bitcoin.

Never forget that the blockchain with the Nakamoto Consensus is the world’s most inefficient database.  That is the cost of decentralization.  A trusted authority serving as the central arbiter of transaction order, à la Digicash, would be orders of magnitude more efficient and would have other advantages.  It obviously has some fatal disadvantages; observe that Digicash died over two decade ago.  The inefficient database is evidently a worthwhile cost to bear; evidence:  Bitcoin has value!  Just keep in mind that it is costly.  Freedom is not free.


Oh, “llama”?  I read it as “lamer”, but I am not sure.  Also, I do not care.  The rest of it is clear, and it is stupid.  Honey badger ain’t up a tree; and the bulls don’t look very dead from where I sit!


P.S., DaRude, could we please have some more peash and luff in WO?  If you criticize Marcus for posting meaty pictures, then his feelings may be hurt, and he may feel discouraged from the benevolent charitable giving of these virtual meals, and then I may literally starve to death.  Do you want for me to starve!?  You are just full of hate.  

Right, some of us are actually old enough to have lived through the bcash fork and have actually supported bitcoin financially and with UASF back in 2017, thus the reason we're here and not with bcash. But, if one is able to ignore the cheap attempt at drawing parallels between bigblockers and socialists (lol seriously? way to undermine your valid points there), other than that, a solid write up about big blocks for noobs to read up on. Only my question was what's the reason the CSO of blockstream is tweeting this now? Or was it a joke that i missed?

As far as Marcus, if you actually read what i wrote you'd realize that i never criticized the childish way of supporting arguments against vegans by posting pictures of meat (if anything such trolling undermines the argument and just clutters the board but whateves). On that topic i just stated that it might not be healthy to have a borderline religious ceremony about the food that you're consuming, and that quoting any study that claims that's something is "entirely possible" is laughable and such BS should, and will be called out by the board. If because of that he gets butthurt enough and switches to ad hominem attacks that's his problem. Sorry to say but this board doesn't care about his hurt little feelings. State your solid arguments, honeybadger doesn't care about your crying just because someone pokes holes in your arguments.

[nullius]

<snip>

There is only one reasonable way to read it.  It is wrong, and whoever made it should feel bad.

Bigblockers suffer the same essential fallacy as UBI socialists:  They don’t understand markets.  Bitcoin network capacity is in extremely high demand—high enough that fees reach an equilibrium at the highest that the market will bear, and that in turn limits demand.

A modest linear bump in the blocksize (= supply) would be soaked up instantly, with fees and backlog settling back to where they are now as more people try to make more transactions that are currently not even attempted.  Meanwhile, that linear blocksize increase would non-linearly increase the resource demands on nodes.  (And a large increase of the blocksize, à la CSW rhetoric, would just wreck the network.)

Increasing base-layer capacity to, what, maybe 30–40 tps tops would be a sick joke at a cost that would surprise people.  It would not solve any problems, and it would create many.  We need technologies supporting tens of thousands of TPS or more; a doubling (or whatever) of the current blocksize is insufficient by orders of magnitude, too much and not enough all at once.

A blocksize increase would obviously increase miners’ BTC revenue per successful block:  Blocks would be just as full, and fees would be just as high, and there would be more transactions per block.  But on the other hand, it would also raise miner costs by increasing the orphan rate (and/or the cost of infrastructure to try to avoid this problem); and it would damage Bitcoin’s long-term value proposition, which is bad for miners who have long-term capital investments in Bitcoin.

Never forget that the blockchain with the Nakamoto Consensus is the world’s most inefficient database.  That is the cost of decentralization.  A trusted authority serving as the central arbiter of transaction order, à la Digicash, would be orders of magnitude more efficient and would have other advantages.  It obviously has some fatal disadvantages; observe that Digicash died over two decade ago.  The inefficient database is evidently a worthwhile cost to bear; evidence:  Bitcoin has value!  Just keep in mind that it is costly.  Freedom is not free.


Oh, “llama”?  I read it as “lamer”, but I am not sure.  Also, I do not care.  The rest of it is clear, and it is stupid.  Honey badger ain’t up a tree; and the bulls don’t look very dead from where I sit!


P.S., DaRude, could we please have some more peash and luff in WO?  If you criticize Marcus for posting meaty pictures, then his feelings may be hurt, and he may feel discouraged from the benevolent charitable giving of these virtual meals, and then I may literally starve to death.  Do you want for me to starve!?  You are just full of hate.  

Right, some of us are actually old enough to have lived through the bcash fork and have actually supported bitcoin financially and with UASF back in 2017, thus the reason we're here and not with bcash. But, if one is able to ignore the cheap attempt at drawing parallels between bigblockers and socialists (lol seriously? way to undermine your valid points there), other than that, a solid write up about big blocks for noobs to read up on. Only my question was what's the reason the CSO of blockstream is tweeting this now? Or was it a joke that i missed?

As far as Marcus, if you actually read what i wrote you'd realize that i never criticized his childish way of supporting his argument against vegans by posting pictures of meat (if anything such trolling undermines his argument and just clutters the board but whateves). On that topic i just stated that it might not be healthy to have a borderline religious ceremony about the food that you're consuming, and that quoting any study that claims that's something is "entirely possible" is laughable and such BS should, and will be called out by the board. If because of that he gets butthurt enough and switches to ad hominem attacks that's his problem. Sorry to say but this board doesn't care about his hurt little feelings. State your solid arguments, honeybadger doesn't care about your crying just because someone pokes holes in your arguments.

• Implication of unwarranted assumptions about me, as a sort of underhanded ad hominem attack that you evidently don’t have the balls to say outright.  ✔
• Knee-jerk reaction to my use of the word “socialists”.  (I referred specifically to UBI, which in practice pretty much requires making money printer go brrr; and regardless of whence the money comes, the concept is to give everyone free money.  Pop quiz:  Due to the workings of markets, what would giving everyone free money do to prices?)  ✔
• Tortuously pompous concluding paragraph which shows incisively that my sarcasm about Marcus’ hurt feelings just went over your head.  Whoosh.  ✔
• All that, just to ignore the valid points I made except where you criticize me for making valid points in a way that is disagreeable to you.  ✔

Filed accordingly, >/dev/null.

Poor Marcus!  What will all this toxicity do to his self-esteem?  Could we please have a safe space here?  

[Hueristic]

https://twitter.com/ahcastor/status/1378894958510317569

[DaRude]

<snip>

There is only one reasonable way to read it.  It is wrong, and whoever made it should feel bad.

Bigblockers suffer the same essential fallacy as UBI socialists:  They don’t understand markets.  Bitcoin network capacity is in extremely high demand—high enough that fees reach an equilibrium at the highest that the market will bear, and that in turn limits demand.

A modest linear bump in the blocksize (= supply) would be soaked up instantly, with fees and backlog settling back to where they are now as more people try to make more transactions that are currently not even attempted.  Meanwhile, that linear blocksize increase would non-linearly increase the resource demands on nodes.  (And a large increase of the blocksize, à la CSW rhetoric, would just wreck the network.)

Increasing base-layer capacity to, what, maybe 30–40 tps tops would be a sick joke at a cost that would surprise people.  It would not solve any problems, and it would create many.  We need technologies supporting tens of thousands of TPS or more; a doubling (or whatever) of the current blocksize is insufficient by orders of magnitude, too much and not enough all at once.

A blocksize increase would obviously increase miners’ BTC revenue per successful block:  Blocks would be just as full, and fees would be just as high, and there would be more transactions per block.  But on the other hand, it would also raise miner costs by increasing the orphan rate (and/or the cost of infrastructure to try to avoid this problem); and it would damage Bitcoin’s long-term value proposition, which is bad for miners who have long-term capital investments in Bitcoin.

Never forget that the blockchain with the Nakamoto Consensus is the world’s most inefficient database.  That is the cost of decentralization.  A trusted authority serving as the central arbiter of transaction order, à la Digicash, would be orders of magnitude more efficient and would have other advantages.  It obviously has some fatal disadvantages; observe that Digicash died over two decade ago.  The inefficient database is evidently a worthwhile cost to bear; evidence:  Bitcoin has value!  Just keep in mind that it is costly.  Freedom is not free.


Oh, “llama”?  I read it as “lamer”, but I am not sure.  Also, I do not care.  The rest of it is clear, and it is stupid.  Honey badger ain’t up a tree; and the bulls don’t look very dead from where I sit!


P.S., DaRude, could we please have some more peash and luff in WO?  If you criticize Marcus for posting meaty pictures, then his feelings may be hurt, and he may feel discouraged from the benevolent charitable giving of these virtual meals, and then I may literally starve to death.  Do you want for me to starve!?  You are just full of hate.  

Right, some of us are actually old enough to have lived through the bcash fork and have actually supported bitcoin financially and with UASF back in 2017, thus the reason we're here and not with bcash. But, if one is able to ignore the cheap attempt at drawing parallels between bigblockers and socialists (lol seriously? way to undermine your valid points there), other than that, a solid write up about big blocks for noobs to read up on. Only my question was what's the reason the CSO of blockstream is tweeting this now? Or was it a joke that i missed?

As far as Marcus, if you actually read what i wrote you'd realize that i never criticized his childish way of supporting his argument against vegans by posting pictures of meat (if anything such trolling undermines his argument and just clutters the board but whateves). On that topic i just stated that it might not be healthy to have a borderline religious ceremony about the food that you're consuming, and that quoting any study that claims that's something is "entirely possible" is laughable and such BS should, and will be called out by the board. If because of that he gets butthurt enough and switches to ad hominem attacks that's his problem. Sorry to say but this board doesn't care about his hurt little feelings. State your solid arguments, honeybadger doesn't care about your crying just because someone pokes holes in your arguments.

• Implication of unwarranted assumptions about me, as a sort of underhanded ad hominem attack that you evidently don’t have the balls to say outright.  ✔
• Knee-jerk reaction to my use of the word “socialists”.  (I referred specifically to UBI, which in practice pretty much requires making money printer go brrr; and regardless of whence the money comes, the concept is to give everyone free money.  Pop quiz:  Due to the workings of markets, what would giving everyone free money do to prices?)  ✔
• Tortuously pompous concluding paragraph which shows incisively that my sarcasm about Marcus’ hurt feelings just went over your head.  Whoosh.  ✔
• All that, just to ignore the valid points I made except where you criticize me for making valid points in a way that is disagreeable to you.  ✔

Filed accordingly, >/dev/null.

Poor Marcus!  What will all this toxicity do to his self-esteem?  Could we please have a safe space here?  

I post a simple one liner question "Why is Samson tweeting this now? Or am i reading it wrong"
-Replies and quotes my question ✔
-For some reason mentions UBI ✔
-Mentions socialists https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy✔
-Writes up a decent explanation of issues with bigblocks (wasn't asked, but still a nice change of pace) ✔
-Accuses me of not having balls to do something (lol we in 5th grade?)✔
-Question left unanswered ✔

As much as i enjoy the unexpected attention, but i got shit to do IRL. We can play the "i say one word and you tie it to socialism" (Godwin's law for socialism) game later. Ta-ta

&> /dev/null