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

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[modrobert]

The white paper is always brought up. And Satoshi had not anticipated ASICS (who knows if that later Satoshi email is real where "he" talks about exactly that) and that changed EVERYTHING.  It made the idea of the "validation node" important.  Vitally important.  We discovered by this tech that between hashing, and consensus validation the latter *might* be more important, though they go deeply hand in hand.

Many would have been happy with cautious size increases. There's no real justification behind the 1MB (as would be expected from it being implemented as an anti-DOS measure when blocks were tiny) and the theoretical maximum while still maintaining your goals is much higher than that.

I'd advise not getting wrapped up in Raspberry Pis. They are cool devices and I own many but they are not optimal for this kind of service by any means. They are radically underpowered and even within the realms of SBCs, there are more powerful options available. It's not a binary choice between cell phone processors from the early 2010s and supercomputers in datacenters.

I also disagree with the usefulness of "validation nodes". They don't have zero value but they're not as useful as people think and they're certainly not worth crippling the network for just so people can run them on sub-par hardware. If your security is worth $40 per transaction, it's certainly worth more than a $40 computer.

I am among those who thinks reasonable blocksize increases would be a good thing.  I actually pointed out in the taproot activation thread here that the unsung best part of that being done well is it proves that Bitcoin can govern itself better than many had feared after the 2017 fight.  And I even mentioned that this (though a much more popular change) gave me hope that some day we could revisit block size increases as well.

As to nodes on RPis etc.  I agree it is a silly arbitrary measure to make that what we should be able to run a node on, although I do run a Pi 4, which it must be said is not a terribly under powered SBC, and is a requirement if you want to run a node, as anything below that cannot validate the chain fast enough to be useful.

But you bring up cell phone processors.  I think in some ways that is a more important measure.  Things like SPV, and neutrino are important ways to bring trust minimized validation to handheld computers, and i think in those regards we are going the right direction.

I think all the Luke Dashjr type "BLOCKS NEED TO BE SMALLER" arguments are misguided and do us harm.  I think Luke is a trainwreck as a person who takes a very extreme view on EVERYTHING.  The current Pope is an antichrist, the blocks are too big, we need to wear gas masks to keep from getting covid etc.  That combined with the dick measuring contest that the dark side of BTC Maxi culture brings us, and the small block ethos gets more attention than I think it needs.

I wish we had Hal with us still.  I feel like he would have some really good stuff to say about all this.  In fact I would trust him more than Satoshi himself, who I do not think quite had the long view or wisdom of the former.  Maybe it's better they are both currently silent (here's to cryogenics? )

I do think validation is perhaps more important than you do.  I do not want to trust that job to a small number of servers.  But I think we could raise the bar quite a bit before we get into trouble there.  I just want to make sure we avoid a "Davos" of Bitcoin forming.  Some place where the powerful nodes all gather and decide one day that it is in the best interest of mankind to mint another 21mm, and for our trouble we will split a simple 1mm amongst ourselves to cover costs, of course.

Every human endeavor has become corrupted that way eventually.  The longer we can keep that from happening to Bitcoin the better.  And I do understand that the big-blockers see small blocks as a bank takeover.  I just don't see that.  Banks don't need small blocks to remain necessary.

Perhaps a benefit of having a programmer background rather than a trader, whenever feeling doubts about Bitcoin regarding functionality I look at the source code, specifically latest commits to get a sense of what's going on. Sure, developers can go nuts (most of us are in some way), but as taught early on based on what pioneers (miners, testers, API enthusiasts, etc.) wrote in this forum (when it was still bitcoin.org); if the core developers got a crazy idea we just refused to upgrade the Bitcoin clients, or kept personal forks with whatever selection we liked, as long as core protocol still worked, this tradition of "opposing change" eventually spawned into the BIP system and agreement process used these days. If the core developers really disagree internally, we get a fork where client version usage on the network eventually dictates the outcome (like the Bitcoin Cash fork).

Regarding ASIC mining, I have fond memories of backing Butterfly labs in 2013 even when most users in this forum had doubts, they eventually pulled through producing the first ASIC ever made after several delays, though the controversy was wild to say the least. I wasn't just a miner back then, had an online shop selling modchips for game consoles  accepting Bitcoin since 2011 (so it wasn't just alpaca socks).

[shahzadafzal]

What is he really talking about? And what real problems? Problems with bitcoin or problems in the real world. If he mean problems in the real world I would agree. Now for the matter of fact if not all then surely every other project starts with a problem in bitcoin and tries to solve it with their on token or coin that's a logical fallacy.

To be honest haven't seen a single project which solely aiming to solve any real world problem. I remember in 2017/2018 there was one project WPR or WePower which claimed to be green energy based solution. To be honest I thought they will be building windmills or other green energy sources for public use not to run their own so called "trading platform". I'm not even sure where they stand today.

Anyway solving a real-world problem and claiming to solve it are two different things. Until now we haven't seen any single such claim going through yet.

[modrobert]

What is he really talking about? And what real problems? Problems with bitcoin or problems in the real world. If he mean problems in the real world I would agree. Now for the matter of fact if not all then surely every other project starts with a problem in bitcoin and tries to solve it with their on token or coin that's a logical fallacy.

To be honest haven't seen a single project which solely aiming to solve any real world problem. I remember in 2017/2018 there was one project WPR or WePower which claimed to be green energy based solution. To be honest I thought they will be building windmills or other green energy sources for public use not to run their own so called "trading platform". I'm not even sure where they stand today.

Anyway solving a real-world problem and claiming to solve it are two different things. Until now we haven't seen any single such claim going through yet.

In the example, Namecoin includes a domain name system for internet besides being a "coin", although the project is pretty much sleeping these days AFAIK. I also regard Litecoin as old school serving the purpose of having useful differences such as faster transactions, using bcrypt instead of SHA256, etc., but sure, Bitcoin maxis are welcome to disagree.

[vapourminer]

-1 WO for that.

-2 WO for that one.. 

nope

it has already been established that WOsMerit's are completely fungible...there will be no demeriting

you are of course free to burn any awarded WOsMerit's thereby reducing the amounts in circulation and potentially increasing their value

wait.. theres a BURN ADDY (or forum account number perhaps) that we can send merits to and be burnt? like if i want to merit JJG but am in a bad mood i can send a merit meant for him to a NULL type account?

maybe we need a user named "merit burn" (or whatever) setup by theymos and its has but one  post labeled BURN MERITS HERE in some section. you merit that post to burn them and explain why in thje thread.

so. theres my totally stupid thought for the day. more to come of course.

[serveria.com]

I'm a bit late to the party but congrats to El Salvador and all Salvadoreans. The president of that country is a brave guy with a huge pair... 

[shahzadafzal]

Hello gentlemen. How have things been going?

Nothing much just a regular bitcoin domination against central banks!!!

[OutOfMemory]

What is he really talking about? And what real problems? Problems with bitcoin or problems in the real world. If he mean problems in the real world I would agree. Now for the matter of fact if not all then surely every other project starts with a problem in bitcoin and tries to solve it with their on token or coin that's a logical fallacy.

To be honest haven't seen a single project which solely aiming to solve any real world problem. I remember in 2017/2018 there was one project WPR or WePower which claimed to be green energy based solution. To be honest I thought they will be building windmills or other green energy sources for public use not to run their own so called "trading platform". I'm not even sure where they stand today.

Anyway solving a real-world problem and claiming to solve it are two different things. Until now we haven't seen any single such claim going through yet.

I guess he was meaning real world problems, but you can put this to bitcoin as well. At least at aspects like transactional speed, usability on (many, small) endpoint devices with little computing power.
There are some projects out there trying different approaches, i won't name any, so they can at least be called "serious" attempts of incorporating usage value.
Several IOT solutions out there, in their early stages but with promising outlook.  (EDIT: IF the developers don't mess up the security or code as itself)
But it's true, Bitcoin can't solve every problem, as well as no other coin can, so that's why we have lightning, liquid and all the other little helpers coded around the original bitcoin standard (which fucktards like Roger V. and CSW claim to behold by upsizing blocksize - which is a retarded linear approach, imho), which makes sense to some extent (for me at least), while BTC, at its core is still "digital gold" for me.
Doge is an exception, though, because the inventors always made no secret that it's a token-for-fun thing. But most "usecases" of various tokens are plain bullshit, imo.

EDIT: And i didn't even mention the real scams in the cryptosphere!  Well... right, at least two of them...

[cAPSLOCK]

It is rare I will agree with whiney Cobra, but I do, in this case.  His namecoin example is a good one.  I have exactly one other coin that I believe offers something BTC cannot natively.

Just about all the rest of it???  ETH for example.  All that functionality can be built atop BTC.  Will it be?  Or will ETH (or one of it's killers) continue to exist?  Dunno.

[proudhon]

Hello gentlemen. How have things been going?

A country accepts bitcoin as legal tender yet the price barely moves. I would have thought this would be a rocket launching event.

The problem is that the market is figuring out how bad of an investment bitcoin is and how it's is definitely and indefinitely crashing. So lots of countries might make it legal tender, but the down trend will remain. In fact, we know that as more countries adopt bitcoin the lower the price will go.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[Hhampuz]

It is rare I will agree with whiney Cobra, but I do, in this case.  His namecoin example is a good one.  I have exactly one other coin that I believe offers something BTC cannot natively.

Just about all the rest of it???  ETH for example.  All that functionality can be built atop BTC.  Will it be?  Or will ETH (or one of it's killers) continue to exist?  Dunno.

You know I've heard about that for as long as I can remember "Anything ETH does can be built on top of BTC", why has this not happened yet if that is the case? Millionaires being born out of ETH on a weekly basis it feels like sometimes and I would imagine some or a lot of devs would just move to BTC if it were to be possible.

Idk, just asking, don't care about this coin or that coin as long as I have daddy bitcoin

[Hueristic]

Beginning to feel like that bear market again.

Complete fakeout, anyone that sells now is infected with Mindrust Syndrome.

[cAPSLOCK]

Hello gentlemen. How have things been going?

A country accepts bitcoin as legal tender yet the price barely moves. I would have thought this would be a rocket launching event.

The problem is that the market is figuring out how bad of an investment bitcoin is and how it's is definitely and indefinitely crashing. So lots of countries might make it legal tender, but the down trend will remain. In fact, we know that as more countries adopt bitcoin the lower the price will go.

In that case, you have to be right...  Oh well, pack it up.

[strawbs]

Hello gentlemen. How have things been going?

A country accepts bitcoin as legal tender yet the price barely moves. I would have thought this would be a rocket launching event.

The problem is that the market is figuring out how bad of an investment bitcoin is and how it's is definitely and indefinitely crashing. So lots of countries might make it legal tender, but the down trend will remain. In fact, we know that as more countries adopt bitcoin the lower the price will go.

Ok, ok. Some of us know you from way back and we therefore remember that you're just dicking around. I mean, it used to be funny and all that, but the comedy has lost its edge in recent times. It's a little tired and repetitive now, just sayin. You might end up frightening the noobs away too, who might actually take you at your word.

We won't hold it against you if you want to change tack and allow your true colors to shine through, though.

[Hueristic]

I just don't see that.  Banks don't need small blocks to remain necessary.

FYI, small block force a side chain solution which is centralized and there in lies the problem.

I just don't understand why dynamic blocks are just not discussed, it smells of agenda.

[Hueristic]

And Satoshi had not anticipated ASICS (who knows if that later Satoshi email is real where "he" talks about exactly that) and that changed EVERYTHING.  It made the idea of the "validation node" important.  Vitally important.  We discovered by this tech that between hashing, and consensus validation the latter *might* be more important, though they go deeply hand in hand.

Maybe you should provide a link, cAPSLOCK, if you believe that either there is something important and relevant that satoshi supposedly said.. From what I recall, Satoshi disappeared around late 2010, but a lot of the BIG blocker disingenuine nonsense started to get worked up in late 2015 so it increasingly ramped up in the next couple of years without really going away completely even though it should have been clear that not ONLY was the issue resolved in such a way to show the BIG BLOCKERs as largely disingenuine retards, but also current BTC development is ongoingly finding balance in onchain and offchain transactions including having goals of having some of the fee market to develop around this matter to help to inform if there might be needs for tweaks that go above and beyond ongoing tweaks that are happening.

Actually I believe it has been proven that Satoshi mined on custom fpga's.

sorry no link

this proves I sometimes wade through your massive posts JJG.

[JayJuanGee]

-1 WO for that.



-2 WO for that one.. 

nope

it has already been established that WOsMerit's are completely fungible...there will be no demeriting

you are of course free to burn any awarded WOsMerit's thereby reducing the amounts in circulation and potentially increasing their value

that is all

Who died and left you as the WO consensus identifier?

I'm gonna have to give you a -1 WO for that level of boldness, and might even have to amp it up to -1.5 WO for your horrible gif creation talents (if we might be so bold as to label as that?)... Since yesterday many people have told me... sent me pms, just saying.


that's all.

Hello gentlemen. How have things been going?

A country accepts bitcoin as legal tender yet the price barely moves. I would have thought this would be a rocket launching event.

While we already know that fast moves upward don't usually sustain higher level prices.

My sense was that we took the stairs up and the elevator down... and sure perceptions can vary.

-1 WO for that.

-2 WO for that one.. 

nope

it has already been established that WOsMerit's are completely fungible...there will be no demeriting

you are of course free to burn any awarded WOsMerit's thereby reducing the amounts in circulation and potentially increasing their value

wait.. theres a BURN ADDY (or forum account number perhaps) that we can send merits to and be burnt? like if i want to merit JJG but am in a bad mood i can send a merit meant for him to a NULL type account?

You would not do that.

you BIG meanie.

 

maybe we need a user named "merit burn" (or whatever) setup by theymos and its has but one  post labeled BURN MERITS HERE in some section. you merit that post to burn them and explain why in thje thread.

so. theres my totally stupid thought for the day. more to come of course.

I agree.  That is a pretty stupid thought... I am speculating that it could be in the top 50 of all time, at minimum.

this proves I sometimes wade through your massive posts JJG.[/size]

You are braver than most, including yours truly.

+1 WO for that one, to offset part of the -1.5 WO total tentatively pending re: toxicmoxic.

[Hueristic]

What is he really talking about? And what real problems? Problems with bitcoin or problems in the real world. If he mean problems in the real world I would agree. Now for the matter of fact if not all then surely every other project starts with a problem in bitcoin and tries to solve it with their on token or coin that's a logical fallacy.

To be honest haven't seen a single project which solely aiming to solve any real world problem. I remember in 2017/2018 there was one project WPR or WePower which claimed to be green energy based solution. To be honest I thought they will be building windmills or other green energy sources for public use not to run their own so called "trading platform". I'm not even sure where they stand today.

Anyway solving a real-world problem and claiming to solve it are two different things. Until now we haven't seen any single such claim going through yet.

In the example, Namecoin includes a domain name system for internet besides being a "coin", although the project is pretty much sleeping these days AFAIK. I also regard Litecoin as old school serving the purpose of having useful differences such as faster transactions, using bcrypt instead of SHA256, etc., but sure, Bitcoin maxis are welcome to disagree.

IIRC LTC was in responce to asic adoption as scrypt was thought to be asic resistant. but apparently they gave up on that fight and became another shit coin (still good to move funds between exchanges though: only real world usecase I know of). But there are still those that fight for decentralization, its just a harder battle than NGU peops are willing to fight.

Namecoin got a death blow when there was a bug that allowed total takeover of the domain by a simple hack. I think it was fixed but I really didn't follow what has become since then. I think their uphill battle would have been to have ICANN acceptance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ckMG9mAd7s

[vapourminer]

Actually I believe it has been proven that Satoshi mined on custom fpga's.

sorry no link

this proves I sometimes wade through your massive posts JJG.

i believe he did know that gpus could hash, in fact i think he requested that programmers hold off on GPU hashing until the network got more established.

i dont recall him mentioning anything about ASICSs, at least as we know them today.