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

[philipma1957]

Wen 82k?

[OgNasty]

I didn’t expect to wake up to a massive rally in stocks and Bitcoin, but I’m not mad at it. It seems the market is deciding the bottom is behind us. We’ll see if that turns out to be a head fake or not, but for now I’m enjoying the ride and the green while it is here. No shortage of things to spend money on all the sudden. Cybercab and new iPhone. Tech nerds are in heaven for the next 8 days.

[Hueristic]

Haha, Nephew msg'd me this. He took it right as he pulled in the driveway.

[BlackHatCoiner]

I miss the helicopter man.

[Hueristic]

This would be nice, teach those bears a lesson.


@bitcoinmunger
Bears were hoping to buy at $40k in October.

Instead, they will be buying $90k in October.

https://x.com/bitcoinmunger/status/2095531815956066707

I don't want to hear any of those bitches crying, we here have been warning this for months.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Leahized]

So close to the next bigger pump truck.

 One candle more than 20%? 🚁

[Danish Ali]

Haha, Nephew msg'd me this. He took it right as he pulled in the driveway.

Literally arrived at localhost! Your nephew has great technical instincts catching that exact milestone right in the driveway.


Home sweet 127.0.0.1!

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[fillippone]

Every time we hit a new local high, I'm going to make this picture a little bit bigger.

😁

81479!

81579!







Sorry, I was too impatient to see a new "Pumpin' Stifler" gif!

[Junii]

Every time we hit a new local high, I'm going to make this picture a little bit bigger.

😁

81479!

81579!







Sorry, I was too impatient to see a new "Pumpin' Stifler" gif!

81779!

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Hueristic]

The night the ledger lied

Best war story of the three weeks, 09-01: a perf optimization shifted the LSM memtable flush offsets, point lookups started lying 10-15% of the time, and an error path written back when "absent coin" could only mean crash-recovery re-apply quietly SKIPPED the spend capture instead of failing. Eight times, once per memtable flush, the node walked past a consensus rejection, ran a blind recovery compaction that rewrote the runs with correct offsets, and called it "recovery SUCCEEDED."

Net result: 2,596 already-spent coins - 5,589.97 BTC - resurrected into the live chainstate. A node carrying that set would have accepted double-spends of those coins. It ran in production for hours.

What caught it: the continuous MuHash parity check against Core. Set = Core's set + exactly 2,596 outpoints, sum to the satoshi. Found in hours, not never. Repaired offline with verify-then-delete of each outpoint, re-identical at height 965,085 within ninety minutes of the analysis landing.

"A recovery that 'succeeds' is a claim, not a proof" is now a rule in the tree. So is fail-closed-halt-sticky on absent coins. The audit's verdict on the same event: "caught only by muhash parity against Core." Continuous verification is not overhead. It is the only sensor that sees in that particular dark.

This is a logic error and putting trust in core to be infallible.

I would recommend scraping major pools and using a consensus for this.

If core ever has an issue this will propagate into your chain and set off your rebuild with faulty data when it should not be rebuilt.


_________________________________

Hahaa, just got to this

Now back to your regularly scheduled number watching. The node is still running - the next block arrives in about nine minutes, verified by code that, three weeks ago, could not have been written by anyone alive in time."

Your a little full of yourself clanker and dead wrong.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Floczy]

OT:

Yeti or Hydro Flask? Any other recommendations?

Looking for a good thermos (750 mL to 1 L). No straws or complex machinery. Just a cap (push or screw). Open and chug down the liquid (water). Should not be prone to rust. Should not be flimsy. Should not leak.

Leaning towards the Yeti Rambler 36 oz Water Bottle with Chug Cap.

The hydro flask is aesthetically pleasing,
But what will make the yeti a better option is the easy opening and a more reliable handle,


https://pin.it/ZemEToKv9
The yeti will be easier to open (with the help of the handle), the hydro on the other hand might give a tough time when it gets too tight,
And the yeti handle also looks more reliable as well, since it is the same body as the whole cover
These are the little things I look for when try to make a decision on 2 probably almost equal objects

Meanwhile you have a specifications on 750 ml, if not I would have suggest you check out the one I use, my little hack is to put a lot of ice block inside and add water when ever the previous finishes, and it also does well with hot water as well

Thermoflask
https://pin.it/4rnx0Baiq

[asUHWEceyc]

its kinda funny that the 1st thing graphene does is ignore all the built in AI on the pixel 10. for example i used it with junk account for a week or so and the camara AI stuff was almost insane. pictures of rabbits from 150 feet and i can count hairs.. after AI enhancement. and all the gemini stuff i would never of used is gone, no loss there.

6 hairs per paw?

a funny thing i run enterprise network gear at home and i can tag everything on my network by name. so i tag the pixel as my phone when it hit my wifi and go on with my business. well by default the pixel on graphene comes up as a different phone every time it come back on my wifi.. so a strange pixel is on my system.. i tag it again and figure meh must of been me. third time a strange pixel popped up on the network i actually read about what graphene does and told it it can stay itself on my wifi but randomize everywhere else.

PS bluetooth broadcasts the real device mac for walmart, flock, LE,...

The night the ledger lied

Best war story of the three weeks, 09-01: a perf optimization shifted the LSM memtable flush offsets, point lookups started lying 10-15% of the time, and an error path written back when "absent coin" could only mean crash-recovery re-apply quietly SKIPPED the spend capture instead of failing. Eight times, once per memtable flush, the node walked past a consensus rejection, ran a blind recovery compaction that rewrote the runs with correct offsets, and called it "recovery SUCCEEDED."

Net result: 2,596 already-spent coins - 5,589.97 BTC - resurrected into the live chainstate. A node carrying that set would have accepted double-spends of those coins. It ran in production for hours.

What caught it: the continuous MuHash parity check against Core. Set = Core's set + exactly 2,596 outpoints, sum to the satoshi. Found in hours, not never. Repaired offline with verify-then-delete of each outpoint, re-identical at height 965,085 within ninety minutes of the analysis landing.

"A recovery that 'succeeds' is a claim, not a proof" is now a rule in the tree. So is fail-closed-halt-sticky on absent coins. The audit's verdict on the same event: "caught only by muhash parity against Core." Continuous verification is not overhead. It is the only sensor that sees in that particular dark.

This is a logic error and putting trust in core to be infallible.

I would recommend scraping major pools and using a consensus for this.

If core ever has an issue this will propagate into your chain and set off your rebuild with faulty data when it should not be rebuilt.

smells like leveldb


Crack 83 runrunrun to 90

[philipma1957]

you still are skipping 82k

count correctly please

wen 82k?

then 83k!

[BobLawblaw]

This is a logic error and putting trust in core to be infallible.
I would recommend scraping major pools and using a consensus for this.
If core ever has an issue this will propagate into your chain and set off your rebuild with faulty data when it should not be rebuilt.

I blew my weekly Fable budget on doing a code audit.

Was really fuggin' impressed.

https://github.com/BobClawblaw/bitcoinmachinecode/blob/main/docs/audits/CODEBASE_AUDIT_2026-09-03.md

Headline: the block-connect path enforces script validity, UTXO existence, PoW and the BIP30/BIP141 rules, but not the rest of Bitcoin Core's CheckBlock/ConnectBlock. Two CRITICAL and five HIGH findings in the validation module (§6.3) together mean that a block Core rejects can be accepted, stored and applied by this node

[cAPSLOCK]

Bigger pump truck incoming soon, I can feel it. I'm gonna get a pizza and then check it again. 😁

[cAPSLOCK]

Every time we hit a new local high, I'm going to make this picture a little bit bigger.

😁

81479!

81579!







Sorry, I was too impatient to see a new "Pumpin' Stifler" gif!

81779!

Oh, I missed this, so somebody else got it. Thank you. Well, we'll probably have to do another one if it goes high enough.