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

[AlcoHoDL]

I think Bitcoin has become too strong and too important to die.

The coders will code. If they mess things up, it will self-correct, either by downgrading, code updates, or forking. Has happened before and will happen again.

If Bitcoin needs constant pampering and shielding from bad actors, then it has already failed by design. If the network is resilient and robust enough, it will survive. And if it can fail by a mere selfish coder who pushes an agenda, then it is not robust enough and is destined to fail sooner or later.

Almost 17 years have passed, and Bitcoin is stronger than ever. I have confidence that it will survive.

tl;dr: Bring it on!

[_act_]

I think Bitcoin has become too strong and too important to die.

The coders will code. If they mess things up, it will self-correct, either by downgrading, code updates, or forking. Has happened before and will happen again.

If Bitcoin needs constant pampering and shielding from bad actors, then it has already failed by design. If the network is resilient and robust enough, it will survive. And if it can fail by a mere selfish coder who pushes an agenda, then it is not robust enough and is destined to fail sooner or later.

Almost 17 years have passed, and Bitcoin is stronger than ever. I have confidence that it will survive.

tl;dr: Bring it on!

I read about bitcoin maximum supply, demand and how it can become scarce since 2019, I know from that time that bitcoin can not die but I concluded that it is truly the digital gold. I wished I had knew earlier.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Ermaios]

I think its more about the way it was handled.

You think?
Bitcoin Core’s sincere and blunt approach that not many people can - fully - understand the whole picture, bugs you to the point of what?
Trashing Core for Luke? Sure, that’s healthy.

Even reading this shitheads quotes is irritating, his arguments are all logical fallacies.

Calling a lawsuit on manipulation of a market an attack on the market itself is disingenuous at best and straight up red herring logical fallacy.

This guy uses nothing but fallacies in his arguments and that's why he's not worth engaging with, it was apparent from his initial insertion into this thread.

I wonder what brought him here?

It certainly has not been because he follows this thread, I think he stalks certain individuals (JJG's wording here) to make Brownie points.

I also took a look at his history and to a uneducated individual he probably looks like he knows his shit when its apparent he knows jack about security and doesn't even know how to correctly handle userspace.

Stating that holding market manipulation tactics accountable is an attack on that market itself is so blatantly obvious that his ass is hanging out to the point no-one with a shred of critical thinking cannot see it.

So apparently according to this nub disagreeing on a protocol is now attacking the project itself?

Lol what a joke, this guy is a paid shill that's playing from a cheat sheet of fallacies and any critical thinker can spot it immediately.

Me thinks that this is your longest post yet. Talk for yourself dude.

I  have a question if core 30  with the new 100k size limit does have a huge terrible flaw how easy would it be to retreat backwards to core 29.

Ie what were the safe guards for system crash and burn for core 30.

How simple to roll back to core 29?

If we do an accidental fork for Instance which is correct one? And last time we did an accidental fork coins were not worth much.

Now they are.

If I recall some pools lost the bad fork coins and were told oh well switch to the good fork fast.

When blocks are now worth over 300 k bigger pools will get pissed if they were shunted to the wrong fork for a few dozen blocks of coins.

Ahh philip.
Why is it that every time I read one of your posts I just want to shoot myself in the head?
Every.single.time.

I will likely regret this... but I am curious.  What lie have I told? 

What LIE? Single not plural? Good one, hahahahahaha.

And what will I never change from?

Now you’re playing dumb.

Also, Do we know each other?  I am afraid I am at a disadvantage since you would be using a sock puppet in that case.

Let’s just say that we do. Not on a personal level obviously, but in these here parts of the WOod.

You do see what is happening here in our thread?  Right?

And I am sorry.  I did not expect I would bring a phalanx of trolls and shills over.  It truly was not my intention.

The phalanx of trolls, shills and sock-puppets is resident to the WO.
I see that - from time to time - karma smacks you on the face, and after it does so, you go back to sucking each others dicks to eternity.

But seriously... a little critical thinking and logic.  Hueristic definitely had his hackles up first, lol.

Yeah…definitely…not!
You can pause now, it’s Hueristc’s turn again. Or perhaps OOM and philip can take a bite.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[JayJuanGee]

The Sunday Saylor buy announcements are causing a pretty regular end of weekend pump. We’ll probably be back to $112K tomorrow but I hope knot (see what I did there). Maybe something to consider if you are spending BTC on fiat denominated items.

Any reason why the buys are on Sunday ?

I think that for MSTR the buys tend to take place all week, yet they have been engaging in a pre-announcement on Sunday to indicate more or less what the Monday morning announcement is going to be... generally, whether new buys had been made during the prior week or not. .. I am pretty sure that if they did not make any buys during the previous week, then they (Saylor) don't post (tweet) on Sunday.

I am in the middle of my planned disaster recovery drills and upgrades to my security for the few sats I hold...  

But before I go back to saying things like "Why the hell are these wrong xpubs showing up with I try to export to Sparrow!!!" with all the sweating that entails no matter how many times I do it...

For those that have eyes to see...
You do see what is happening here in our thread?  Right?

I don't know exactly what is going on, but it does get a bit irritating for guys to jump in like "know it alls," even if they might have some decent points. so yeah, it would probably be better if they made their "potentially decent points" without getting all worked up, emotional and even purposefully defamatory about matters.  We hardly even know the guys and they want to come and lecture us and call us dummies.. with our chief dummy being you (cAPSLOCK) this time...  

That was fun..

Not really... Of course, it is not over.. so, let's see how the ongoing arguing plays out.

I think Bitcoin has become too strong and too important to die.
The coders will code. If they mess things up, it will self-correct, either by downgrading, code updates, or forking. Has happened before and will happen again.

If Bitcoin needs constant pampering and shielding from bad actors, then it has already failed by design. If the network is resilient and robust enough, it will survive. And if it can fail by a mere selfish coder who pushes an agenda, then it is not robust enough and is destined to fail sooner or later.

Almost 17 years have passed, and Bitcoin is stronger than ever. I have confidence that it will survive.
tl;dr: Bring it on!

I read about bitcoin maximum supply, demand and how it can become scarce since 2019, I know from that time that bitcoin can not die but I concluded that it is truly the digital gold. I wished I had knew earlier.

Are you saying that you are ONLY learning something about bitcoin now that you did not know in 2019?

Sure there are frequently regrets about not buying enough bitcoin earlier, and surely when any of us are building our stash, we are (or had been) restricted by how much money we could put together to ongoingly buy bitcoin and/or to stack sufficiently to our knowledge.. so there is always going to be a bit of the dilemma regarding how much to stack based on our just recently coming to know (or figure out) the strength of bitcoin's investment thesis.

The same is likely true today, when there are so many people who are just coming to know bitcoin, but they still choose to either not invest or to take a very whimpy approach to bitcoin accumulation based on presumption (or hope) that the BTC price might drop, yet there is no guarantee that bitcoin's price will drop from our current price ever into the future, so there seems to be a bit of a necessity for anyone who is a no coiner or a low coiner to stack as much bitcoin as he can do now rather than employing a waiting strategy.. and yeah, you notice that I included low coiners.  There are a lot of folks who have been in bitcoin for a long time and still are low coiners, yet they don't know what to do about it (or at least they continue top fail/refuse to recognize that is it remains in their interest to stack bitcoin as aggressively rather than to wait for dips that may or may not end up happening).

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Satofan44]

Calling a lawsuit on manipulation of a market an attack on the market itself is disingenuous at best and straight up red herring logical fallacy.

Fuck off, you are being a dishonest retard again. I have not said that and it has nothing to do with my post. My post is solely about the deal. It is clear to me that you are eager to join the transaction committee so that you can look at the footage together with your pal luke-jr. Keep at it.  

Anyway, by supporting Knots you are supporting the establishment of a transaction review committee that will review transaction data for CSAM. Totally not creepy or suspicious at all.

That does not sound like a fair characterization of the repercussion of supporting knots or some other alternative client..

You can't be picky here. Since there is no real solution to the problem that luke-jr is using to mislead you people to support him, this is what is on the table. If you want to go with his way, this is what is going to come. There is simply no other way. Any automated filtering or whatever other bullshit does not work. An attacker has infinite ways of obfuscating the data and storing it.

Whilst it’s a discussion, what are the chances that Luke Dash Jr forks off and I get more free money like the last time this type of saga played out (thanks Roger and Jihan Wu).

You've got to follow the threads everywhere to keep up. He retreated for now after he got exposed in public too early. Now they came back with a soft fork that will even lead to some confiscation.   You are already in that thread, but others aren't.

meh…triggered
Satofan44 really ripped the bunch of you a new one.

OK, it’s my first post - so to speak - so I’ll be extra nice.

B-side

Are you my alt? It is the old basic error with humans where they think that time equals expertise. Meanwhile the independent thinker experts don't even know the difference between a consensus and relay rule. At least Nick Szabo tweeted something, that means a lot.   I recently just upgraded to Core 30, what about you?

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[cAPSLOCK]

I think Bitcoin has become too strong and too important to die.

The coders will code. If they mess things up, it will self-correct, either by downgrading, code updates, or forking. Has happened before and will happen again.

If Bitcoin needs constant pampering and shielding from bad actors, then it has already failed by design. If the network is resilient and robust enough, it will survive. And if it can fail by a mere selfish coder who pushes an agenda, then it is not robust enough and is destined to fail sooner or later.

Almost 17 years have passed, and Bitcoin is stronger than ever. I have confidence that it will survive.

tl;dr: Bring it on!

Strongly agree.

Every now and then we get to do a boss fight.

[cAPSLOCK]

getting all worked up, emotional and even purposefully defamatory about matters.  We hardly even know the guys and they want to come and lecture us and call us dummies.. with our chief dummy being you (cAPSLOCK) this time...  

Chief dummy!  I like it. Gonna put that on my tagline thingy.

[vapourminer]

Almost 17 years have passed, and Bitcoin is stronger than ever. I have confidence that it will survive.

tl;dr: Bring it on!

Strongly agree.

Every now and then we get to do a boss fight.

so basically make sure your main stash is in a safe offline wallet that only you control and carry on as usual?

i will continue running core 29.1 for the foreseeable future and since i only use it for my own verification and convenience its not gonna a effect anyone else.

[cAPSLOCK]

Almost 17 years have passed, and Bitcoin is stronger than ever. I have confidence that it will survive.

tl;dr: Bring it on!

Strongly agree.

Every now and then we get to do a boss fight.

so basically make sure your main stash is in a safe offline wallet that only you control and carry on as usual?

i will continue running core 29.1 for the foreseeable future and since i only use it for my own verification and convenience its not gonna a effect anyone else.

Yeah, I think you nailed it. One of the things that life has been teaching me the last many years is trying not to worry too much about the stuff you can't control. 

I really was doing a disaster recovery drill last night. The sats in my little bag haven't moved for many years but I like to every now and then make sure I can still sign a transaction... just not broadcast it.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[AlcoHoDL]

I think Bitcoin has become too strong and too important to die.

The coders will code. If they mess things up, it will self-correct, either by downgrading, code updates, or forking. Has happened before and will happen again.

If Bitcoin needs constant pampering and shielding from bad actors, then it has already failed by design. If the network is resilient and robust enough, it will survive. And if it can fail by a mere selfish coder who pushes an agenda, then it is not robust enough and is destined to fail sooner or later.

Almost 17 years have passed, and Bitcoin is stronger than ever. I have confidence that it will survive.

tl;dr: Bring it on!

Strongly agree.

Every now and then we get to do a boss fight.

The very first time I heard about Bitcoin, I felt uneasy about the idea of a group of coders maintaining and updating/changing the code. How can we make sure the changes don't break things? With gold, for example, no one can ever interfere with it, and nothing can ever change its molecular structure -- the "rules" in this case are truly unchangeable in the fundamental, universal sense. With Bitcoin, there is the element of potential change (for better or for worse, so it's a blessing and a curse). In a centralized network structure, this would soon collapse due to greed, corruption, traitors, human error.

It is the decentralized nature of the Bitcoin network that gives it its resilience and robustness. The bigger it grows, the more it becomes like a living organism, or some kind of accelerated artificial evolution, where a change in the code is scrutinized by thousands of nodes and any unwanted behavior is penalized and mitigated as necessary to ensure robustness. When I realized this, I was at ease. The human factor was not so threatening anymore.

It's good to have exceptional coders in the team, and I think we do have some of the best ones, but it is not the coders themselves that ensure stability, robustness, resilience. It's the decentralized structure of the network. This is what is being tested for 17 years now, and it has met all challenges with flying colors (and a few air drops, as presents for its loyal followers). In a sense, the OP_RETURN issue is just another challenge, and the network will take care of it.

Badgers and cobras...

[wachtwoord]

Probably everyone here is well aware of this but the new 100000 byte limit of OP_RETURN seems silly with the entire pubscriptkey (of which it is a subpart) has a  10000 (ten times smaller) limit.

Of course this still implies an increase from 80 bytes to 10000 bytes (or 9995 bytes to be exact) but that's still a lot less than 100000.

That one will also be lifted later, don't worry about it. Just give it some more time. However, being a consensus limit it will be harder but it will happen eventually I assume. For the normies here that are clueless about Bitcoin, the line he is referring to is here. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/script/script.h#L40C1-L41C1

That would be horrible. Nearly as horrible as the blockdize increase (both the explicit one narrowly avoided in the blockdize wars and the implicit one that unfortunately was Trojan horsed in with the segwit implementation).

It is because of the users and their cultist behavior, many in this thread at at fault too. They blame developers for things that they do and things they don't do all the time. When limits are lifted, there is nobody to blame and nobody to sue. It is a natural consequence and progression. Of course some limits will take time to increase depending on engineering factors, we can't just remove all limits arbitrarily. I'm primarily talking about standardness limits, but some consensus ones may be increased with time too. Why wouldn't they?

To make things even nicer, there is nothing you can do to stop this. If you don't like it, you can join luke-jr's CSAM review committee on his new altcoin. Just don't act surprised if someone adds you to some watch list if you support such a thing.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Lol of course I support Luke in this. Anyone that understands bitcoin would and should. Luke saved the bacon in the blockchain wars too.
 
His other crazy takes outside of bitcoin don't affect he's always right when it comes to bitcoin.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Satofan44]

Lol of course I support Luke in this. Anyone that understands bitcoin would and should. Luke saved the bacon in the blockchain wars too.
 
His other crazy takes outside of bitcoin don't affect he's always right when it comes to bitcoin.

You haven't learned the basic lesson of Bitcoin then. Again you are worshiping people and creating another "Jesus".  I guess you are interested in participating in the CSAM review committee too?