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

[Dump3er]

Who was it, who posted this really cool log()Log() trendline in december or january? I want to see how far we are below the trendline now. Next bubble should be gigantic

[hyphymikey]

Weekend forecast?

[JayJuanGee]

...
Well, the whole point of blockchain-based technology is precisely that it takes trust out of the equation completely...

He brought up several interesting points which you might have missed.  I'll try to put them in different wrappers, hopefully not losing the meaning in the process.
 
 

Even though frequently Jorge says a variety of goofy things, he makes a lot of good points regarding the barriers in terms of transitioning into the use of electronic voting through the block chain - however, that does NOT mean that various smaller scale operations of block chain voting could not be implemented. 

xyzzy099, on the other hand, seems to have a preference to just stick to his points NO matter what.  He does not want facts or logic to get in the way of his viewpoint.   

[xyzzy099]

...
Well, the whole point of blockchain-based technology is precisely that it takes trust out of the equation completely...

He brought up several interesting points which you might have missed.  I'll try to put them in different wrappers, hopefully not losing the meaning in the process.
 
 

Even though frequently Jorge says a variety of goofy things, he makes a lot of good points regarding the barriers in terms of transitioning into the use of electronic voting through the block chain - however, that does NOT mean that various smaller scale operations of block chain voting could not be implemented. 

xyzzy099, on the other hand, seems to have a preference to just stick to his points NO matter what.  He does not want facts or logic to get in the way of his viewpoint.   

If you'd like to post some support for that contention, I will be glad to address it.

My only point in this exchange was that this was a technology worth looking into.  I have not seen any evidence that would refute that simple claim.  Have you?

[derpinheimer]

'ere we go...

[adamstgBit]

510.OMGITSHAPPENING O_O

[Bittings]

I can feel it in my nether regions, $510 is going to be so amazing!

[adamstgBit]

509.false alarme its not happening

[derpinheimer]

Its not over yet.

But I think all of this volume is fake so who cares?

[thefunkybits]

hehehe

nobody cares about your fake walls, bears 

[adamstgBit]

nonsense and name calling, its like religion and politics for the everyday folk, this thread is all kinds of fucked up.

[JayJuanGee]

...
Well, the whole point of blockchain-based technology is precisely that it takes trust out of the equation completely...

He brought up several interesting points which you might have missed.  I'll try to put them in different wrappers, hopefully not losing the meaning in the process.
 
 

Even though frequently Jorge says a variety of goofy things, he makes a lot of good points regarding the barriers in terms of transitioning into the use of electronic voting through the block chain - however, that does NOT mean that various smaller scale operations of block chain voting could not be implemented. 

xyzzy099, on the other hand, seems to have a preference to just stick to his points NO matter what.  He does not want facts or logic to get in the way of his viewpoint.   

If you'd like to post some support for that contention, I will be glad to address it.

My only point in this exchange was that this was a technology worth looking into.  I have not seen any evidence that would refute that simple claim.  Have you?

I saw your posts in connection with the elections topic, and you asked a good question to Jorge.  He answered the question from his perspective, and then you said that you do NOT like his answer b/c you think that he is NOT trying hard enough.   then you argue about why he should try harder. 

I don't necessarily agree with Jorge on a lot of topics, but I think that he made several valid points concerning voting mechanism obstacles.

In that regard, I think that there are ways to attack his various points without crying about it... for example, you could suggest that there may be some applications and implementations of the voting technology on a smaller or a different scale or means employed through the technology to inspire greater public confidence in the potential of bitcoin network as a voting mechanism.  Instead you complain that he is NOT trying hard enough, and complain that you do NOT like his answer(s).

You argued in a similar manner with me to suggest that I am NOT arguing on your terms.. etc..etc. etc..  Or suggest that I should research and do more work in order to make my points.. points that I have already made with examples that I have already deemed sufficient to make my points.

[macsga]

Well, finally we can celebrate some respectable volume! Hmm... end of August. September rally incoming?

[Ivanhoe]

Looks like we'll have some action. Don't start a rally while i'm in Serbija please.

[kryptopojken]

It's thursday so something big is going to happen. No idea which direction though

[derpinheimer]

Ask wall going down soon?

[seljo]

Holy phuck walls are getting bigger... Roger Waters would be proud...

[adamstgBit]

Ask wall going down soon?

Soon TM

[xyzzy099]

I saw your posts in connection with the elections topic, and you asked a good question to Jorge.  He answered the question from his perspective, and then you said that you do NOT like his answer b/c you think that he is NOT trying hard enough.   then you argue about why he should try harder. 

I don't necessarily agree with Jorge on a lot of topics, but I think that he made several valid points concerning voting mechanism obstacles.

In that regard, I think that there are ways to attack his various points without crying about it... for example, you could suggest that there may be some applications and implementations of the voting technology on a smaller or a different scale or means employed through the technology to inspire greater public confidence in the potential of bitcoin network as a voting mechanism.  Instead you complain that he is NOT trying hard enough, and complain that you do NOT like his answer(s).

You argued in a similar manner with me to suggest that I am NOT arguing on your terms.. etc..etc. etc..  Or suggest that I should research and do more work in order to make my points.. points that I have already made with examples that I have already deemed sufficient to make my points.

I did not complain that Jorge was 'not trying hard enough'  Jorge himself stated outright that certain preconceptions that he had - voting from home systems were a priori bad and wrong (although I am still not sure why he would see this only a a vote-from-home system) had caused him to dismiss this technology out-of-hand, without even examining it at all.

I don't deny that Jorge shared some knowledge about e-voting issues that were interesting and informative, but nothing he said would justify just dismissing this technology out-of-hand.

Nevertheless, as I have stated, my only intent here was to bring something to Mr. Stolfi's attention that I genuinely thought he might have interest in.  Damn me for expressing my disappointment when he dismissed it summarily without even considering it.

I think, Mr. JayJuanGee, that you are not a very careful reader.  I am not a perfect poster, but I am not guilty of the heinous crimes you accuse me of.  You should reread this discussion more attentively.

The worst thing I am guilty of is accusing Jorge of being an old dog who won't even try a new trick - and I stand by that characterization

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation