Read about SegWit poison pill. If we hadn't Blockstream, now we would be sitting at 50K.
you think that the price will rise to 50k if so that is ridiculous first and foremost never think about what is not possible and never cry out for the way bitcoin is right now.Everything happens for a reason . 
Topic: If we didnt had idiots blocking segwit we would be sittting on 4 figures by now - page 6. (Read 7300 times)
December 13, 2016, 06:52:06 PM
December 13, 2016, 06:17:14 PM
You can't throw a frog right into boiling water because it immediately jumps out from the water. But if you slowly warm up the water until it start boiling the frog won't notice and will boil to death.
Is that a challenge?
December 13, 2016, 01:54:59 PM
Just to be clear "some idiots" are more than 70% of the network?
Seems to me there is probably a bit more to it than a few die hards.
Seems to me there is probably a bit more to it than a few die hards.
It's only been out, what, a few weeks? People aren't going to rush to change if it's going ok for them.
it has been a lot longer than that, the signalling officially started recently (a couple of weeks ago) and "people" don't have to change anything it is miners who are signalling the change and should change to it not nodes.
p.s. i also think we would have broken $1000 resistance if Segwit was released.
Segwit must be rejected and fortunatey most of the community are rejecting it in favour of a proper scaling plan ..
December 13, 2016, 12:06:30 PM
Just do the right thing and REJECT SEGWIT. It is a secret bankster takeover.
I have switched from Core to Bitcoin Unlimited because BU allows me to define my own maximum block size limit that my full node is going to accept. SegWit is an ugly hack that will scare away new contributors from the project. Just look at this video about segwit. It explains perfectly why it should be discarded. SegWit is a trojan horse.
I'm against SegWit because I know how this goes. You can't throw a frog right into boiling water because it immediately jumps out from the water. But if you slowly warm up the water until it start boiling the frog won't notice and will boil to death. Same with Bitcoin. SegWit is the beginning of a slow temperature rise. It will gradually get worse and worse until at some point the code is an absolute mess and the only party who knows how to decode it are the Core/Blockstream guys. At that point they are the owners of Bitcoin. Then, Core team is to Bitcoin what Ethereum Foundation is to Ethereum. They start slipping in bailouts, they start reversing transactions and who knows what other evil shit.
The United States imposed income taxes briefly during the Civil War and the 1890s, and on a permanent basis from 1913. As you can see, income tax is a rather young tax and if I'm not wrong then in the very beginning it was only something around 1%.
The opponents of the income tax were extremely hostile towards it and their main argument was that next year it is going to be 2%, then 5%, then 10% and so on. And that's why income tax should not be allowed at all. And the opponents were right but the people didn't believe them. So the cat got out of the bag and the income tax became immorally large rather quickly.
You have to look farther into the future with these things. SegWit itself might not be THAT bad but it is a step in the completely wrong and unwanted direction. If we allow SegWit to go through then you can be sure it won't be their last ugly hack. And with each such "enhancement" the power over the Bitcoin protocol gets more and more centralized around Blockstream. Who knows, they might even want to change the license of Bitcoin from open-source to proprietary. They can't do it right now but after delivering hundreds of changes to the code it becomes plausible.
But the worst thing about SegWit is the fact that it is totally unnecessary. Just make it possible for each node to configure their own maximum block size limit and we'd have a small and elegant fix to the whole scaling problem.
If you don't buy that then try to follow this line of logic:
1. SegWit adds enormous complexity to the Bitcoin software.
2. The more complex code the bigger the risk of introducing a critical vulnerability.
3. I have a lot of bitcoins which I don't want to risk in the hands of the Core team.
4. Especially if the risk is not justified (a simple and elegant alternative exists)
I'm promoting BU because it is currently the only alternative to Core. Ideally full node devs would also be decentralized so that no team has more power than others over the Bitcoin protocol. If BU support starts nearing 50% then I'd prefer to use a third alternative and so on.
SegWit is like a deceptive box of bad apples. It is filled with rotten fruits but on the top there are some nice fruits. I would like have those good apples without the rotten ones. Whenever I see tactics like that it's a BIG RED FLAG for me. Banksters and corrupt politicians are infamous for these methods. They "smuggle in" the vile laws with a bunch of righteous ones. Why did they make such a bundle? That's why I don't support it. Core devs should offer the features one by one and let the public decide which ones they like and which ones not. The fact that they attempt to smuggle in their foul code in a bundle of all kinds of features is dirty playing.
So yes, SegWit has all the marks of a sinister agenda. If it looks like a bankster takeover then it probably is. Better safe than sorry. And more decentralization (regarding full node devs) wouldn't hurt Bitcoin anyway.
I have switched from Core to Bitcoin Unlimited because BU allows me to define my own maximum block size limit that my full node is going to accept. SegWit is an ugly hack that will scare away new contributors from the project. Just look at this video about segwit. It explains perfectly why it should be discarded. SegWit is a trojan horse.
I'm against SegWit because I know how this goes. You can't throw a frog right into boiling water because it immediately jumps out from the water. But if you slowly warm up the water until it start boiling the frog won't notice and will boil to death. Same with Bitcoin. SegWit is the beginning of a slow temperature rise. It will gradually get worse and worse until at some point the code is an absolute mess and the only party who knows how to decode it are the Core/Blockstream guys. At that point they are the owners of Bitcoin. Then, Core team is to Bitcoin what Ethereum Foundation is to Ethereum. They start slipping in bailouts, they start reversing transactions and who knows what other evil shit.
The United States imposed income taxes briefly during the Civil War and the 1890s, and on a permanent basis from 1913. As you can see, income tax is a rather young tax and if I'm not wrong then in the very beginning it was only something around 1%.
The opponents of the income tax were extremely hostile towards it and their main argument was that next year it is going to be 2%, then 5%, then 10% and so on. And that's why income tax should not be allowed at all. And the opponents were right but the people didn't believe them. So the cat got out of the bag and the income tax became immorally large rather quickly.
You have to look farther into the future with these things. SegWit itself might not be THAT bad but it is a step in the completely wrong and unwanted direction. If we allow SegWit to go through then you can be sure it won't be their last ugly hack. And with each such "enhancement" the power over the Bitcoin protocol gets more and more centralized around Blockstream. Who knows, they might even want to change the license of Bitcoin from open-source to proprietary. They can't do it right now but after delivering hundreds of changes to the code it becomes plausible.
But the worst thing about SegWit is the fact that it is totally unnecessary. Just make it possible for each node to configure their own maximum block size limit and we'd have a small and elegant fix to the whole scaling problem.
If you don't buy that then try to follow this line of logic:
1. SegWit adds enormous complexity to the Bitcoin software.
2. The more complex code the bigger the risk of introducing a critical vulnerability.
3. I have a lot of bitcoins which I don't want to risk in the hands of the Core team.
4. Especially if the risk is not justified (a simple and elegant alternative exists)
I'm promoting BU because it is currently the only alternative to Core. Ideally full node devs would also be decentralized so that no team has more power than others over the Bitcoin protocol. If BU support starts nearing 50% then I'd prefer to use a third alternative and so on.
SegWit is like a deceptive box of bad apples. It is filled with rotten fruits but on the top there are some nice fruits. I would like have those good apples without the rotten ones. Whenever I see tactics like that it's a BIG RED FLAG for me. Banksters and corrupt politicians are infamous for these methods. They "smuggle in" the vile laws with a bunch of righteous ones. Why did they make such a bundle? That's why I don't support it. Core devs should offer the features one by one and let the public decide which ones they like and which ones not. The fact that they attempt to smuggle in their foul code in a bundle of all kinds of features is dirty playing.
So yes, SegWit has all the marks of a sinister agenda. If it looks like a bankster takeover then it probably is. Better safe than sorry. And more decentralization (regarding full node devs) wouldn't hurt Bitcoin anyway.
December 13, 2016, 10:25:04 AM
If we didn't have idiots blocking a block size increase, we'd have had it a year ago.
(Maybe. Maybe not. But equally as unprovable an assertion)
Putting the brakes on Bitcoin adoption in its early stages seems pretty damn unsafe thing in my book. It's like they want to give governments time to wake up and crack down on it. To be decentralised, Bitcoin needs to be used by millions of citizens willing to riot in the street if it is banned. It needs to become as ubiquitous and essential as the internet.
Core should have gone to 2 MB a year ago, and there would be literally no problems, everyone would be happy, all businesses would be reassured that the devs are willing to scale Bitcoin... but Nope, they are completely unwilling to compromise, they choose idealism over pragmatism and to hell with the proletariat who might want to actually use Bitcoin.
(Maybe. Maybe not. But equally as unprovable an assertion)
Putting the brakes on Bitcoin adoption in its early stages seems pretty damn unsafe thing in my book. It's like they want to give governments time to wake up and crack down on it. To be decentralised, Bitcoin needs to be used by millions of citizens willing to riot in the street if it is banned. It needs to become as ubiquitous and essential as the internet.
Core should have gone to 2 MB a year ago, and there would be literally no problems, everyone would be happy, all businesses would be reassured that the devs are willing to scale Bitcoin... but Nope, they are completely unwilling to compromise, they choose idealism over pragmatism and to hell with the proletariat who might want to actually use Bitcoin.
Wrong. The likes of Andreas Antonopoulos are against raising the block size before we activate segwit, because raising the block size before activating segwit would open space for exploits and attacks. So you are calling Andreas Antonopoulos an idiot? Get real. He agrees with Core devs because they actually know how shit works. Not to mention how dumb it is to complain about lack of scaling while blocking something that actually adds capacity to bitcoin while solving problems we need before we continue scaling.
There is never going to be a block size increase before segwit because it's just stupid, so if they keep blocking segwit, bitcoin will stay as a safe haven and not a viable currency. If you don't like this then blame those that block segwit.
December 12, 2016, 07:09:53 PM
Smaller blocks lead to people paying higher fees to beat the competition and be included in the next block. We need larger blocks to accommodate all transactions. Let miners choose to not include transactions with fees too small. More tx = more fees for miners. Hard drive capacity is not an issue. Hard drives are cheap.
You didn't click that red link right? Larger blocks mean high fees and hardwares for mining are not cheap.Miners need powerful ‘Application Specific Integrated Chips’ (ASICs), GPU, PSU, lots of electricity are needed to mine bitcoin, that's all ain't cheap.
When building a DIY mining rig, it doesn't make sense to save money by buying a cheap PSU. Any instability in the power supply could hit performance, or even cause a system crash that will lead to downtime, so do invest in a high-quality unit.
Read here
December 12, 2016, 06:41:59 PM
Agreed
Roger Ver has spread enough propaganda with his delusional logic behind how bitcoin is not being used because he can't buy starbucks
Roger Ver has spread enough propaganda with his delusional logic behind how bitcoin is not being used because he can't buy starbucks
December 12, 2016, 04:23:01 PM
Big news will bring btc to 4 digits not segwit..
And that would be?? Segwit full adoption and Activation? Well that is Big News.
Well i agree with the other person about a marketer moving the price to $1k. Marketing is very powerful tool that boost adoption or even increase the demand resulting to higher price. But marketing still needs facts to market
. 
December 12, 2016, 03:47:48 PM
Big news will bring btc to 4 digits not segwit..
December 12, 2016, 02:22:15 PM
Even if we have some idiots still don't understanding we need segwit, the price is still rising and we are soon going to pass 778. If we had segwit activating faster, this would be more fuel for our rocket and we would reach moon 10 times faster. But the upraise cannot be stopped no matter what. ATH in new year guaranteed.
If you think implementing Segwit can lead to the price reaching 4 figures quickly, think what increasing the block size would do.
Unfortunately, we have idiots blocking that as well.
I agree that increase block size could make transaction faster but why developers didn't do it, I thought Mr.Satoshi already figured it out since he created blockchain technology. Don't you know that larger blocks make full nodes more expensive to operate and lead to high fees. Bitcoin may look unattractive to new users with high fees. High fees may stop or reverse global adoption, investment, development, support and centralization. Have you read about that?
Smaller blocks lead to people paying higher fees to beat the competition and be included in the next block. We need larger blocks to accommodate all transactions. Let miners choose to not include transactions with fees too small. More tx = more fees for miners. Hard drive capacity is not an issue. Hard drives are cheap.
December 12, 2016, 12:23:30 PM
Even if we have some idiots still don't understanding we need segwit, the price is still rising and we are soon going to pass 778. If we had segwit activating faster, this would be more fuel for our rocket and we would reach moon 10 times faster. But the upraise cannot be stopped no matter what. ATH in new year guaranteed.
If you think implementing Segwit can lead to the price reaching 4 figures quickly, think what increasing the block size would do.
Unfortunately, we have idiots blocking that as well.
I agree that increase block size could make transaction faster but why developers didn't do it, I thought Mr.Satoshi already figured it out since he created blockchain technology. Don't you know that larger blocks make full nodes more expensive to operate and lead to high fees. Bitcoin may look unattractive to new users with high fees. High fees may stop or reverse global adoption, investment, development, support and centralization. Have you read about that?
December 12, 2016, 08:50:57 AM
Looks like segwit is going to stall out at 25℅ adoption. I doubt the protocol will ever change at this point.
December 12, 2016, 03:12:00 AM
It require some time for people to shift towards segwit and start supporting it, but sooner or later i think segwit gonna activated. Price is already booming so no need to worry about price dump for now. We will see steady growth which is better than sudden pump.
December 12, 2016, 02:31:11 AM
Even if we have some idiots still don't understanding we need segwit, the price is still rising and we are soon going to pass 778. If we had segwit activating faster, this would be more fuel for our rocket and we would reach moon 10 times faster. But the upraise cannot be stopped no matter what. ATH in new year guaranteed.
Boy... somebody is greedy for profit... you almost sound like all the other failing prophets here.
December 10, 2016, 03:06:51 PM
Even if we have some idiots still don't understanding we need segwit, the price is still rising and we are soon going to pass 778. If we had segwit activating faster, this would be more fuel for our rocket and we would reach moon 10 times faster. But the upraise cannot be stopped no matter what. ATH in new year guaranteed.
Boy... somebody is greedy for profit... you almost sound like all the other failing prophets here.
December 10, 2016, 01:00:40 PM
If we didn't have idiots blocking a block size increase, we'd have had it a year ago.
(Maybe. Maybe not. But equally as unprovable an assertion)
Putting the brakes on Bitcoin adoption in its early stages seems pretty damn unsafe thing in my book. It's like they want to give governments time to wake up and crack down on it. To be decentralised, Bitcoin needs to be used by millions of citizens willing to riot in the street if it is banned. It needs to become as ubiquitous and essential as the internet.
Core should have gone to 2 MB a year ago, and there would be literally no problems, everyone would be happy, all businesses would be reassured that the devs are willing to scale Bitcoin... but Nope, they are completely unwilling to compromise, they choose idealism over pragmatism and to hell with the proletariat who might want to actually use Bitcoin.
(Maybe. Maybe not. But equally as unprovable an assertion)
Putting the brakes on Bitcoin adoption in its early stages seems pretty damn unsafe thing in my book. It's like they want to give governments time to wake up and crack down on it. To be decentralised, Bitcoin needs to be used by millions of citizens willing to riot in the street if it is banned. It needs to become as ubiquitous and essential as the internet.
Core should have gone to 2 MB a year ago, and there would be literally no problems, everyone would be happy, all businesses would be reassured that the devs are willing to scale Bitcoin... but Nope, they are completely unwilling to compromise, they choose idealism over pragmatism and to hell with the proletariat who might want to actually use Bitcoin.
December 10, 2016, 08:39:21 AM
OP could be right.If SegWit would already been activated the price could be higher due to excitement which created news and that would give us again more attention.
However I'm pretty satisfied how far we've come in terms of price this year.And I'm also very positive that SegWit will get activated no matter what Ver and his dumbsters are trying to stop it from that happening.
Maybe there is still a possibility to touch the $800 this year.Even if it is just for a short moment.Still 3 weeks to go.
However I'm pretty satisfied how far we've come in terms of price this year.And I'm also very positive that SegWit will get activated no matter what Ver and his dumbsters are trying to stop it from that happening.
Maybe there is still a possibility to touch the $800 this year.Even if it is just for a short moment.Still 3 weeks to go.
December 10, 2016, 07:23:02 AM
Even if we have some idiots still don't understanding we need segwit, the price is still rising and we are soon going to pass 778. If we had segwit activating faster, this would be more fuel for our rocket and we would reach moon 10 times faster. But the upraise cannot be stopped no matter what. ATH in new year guaranteed.
If you think implementing Segwit can lead to the price reaching 4 figures quickly, think what increasing the block size would do.
Unfortunately, we have idiots blocking that as well.
Did you even take the time to read my thread? I said we should look at increasing the block size, but only AFTER segwit is implemented. Increasing teh blocksize BEFORE segwit is a big MISTAKE. What part of this can you and the rest of people blocking segwit while wanting a blocksize increase can not understand?
Let's get segwit activated so we can keep improving bitcoin in a safe way.
December 10, 2016, 06:02:41 AM
Even if we have some idiots still don't understanding we need segwit, the price is still rising and we are soon going to pass 778. If we had segwit activating faster, this would be more fuel for our rocket and we would reach moon 10 times faster. But the upraise cannot be stopped no matter what. ATH in new year guaranteed.
i somehow doubt that. because price was and it still is in $700 range and we have been here not for a long time and there is always a slow and boring period before any rise, it can not happen without it and also a $300 rise is not an easy task to achieve.
then add to that the fact that $1000 is somewhat iconic price that many are waiting to cash out at that price which will make a period of instability which makes breaking the $1000 resistance a lot harder than it should be.
In the Indian local exchange market the Price of Bitcoin have touched above $1000+ when Indian government banned 500 and 1000 Rs notes , that time the bitcoin exchange price boomed and it gone over the international market price. But today it is back to normal exchange price.
December 10, 2016, 04:36:53 AM
Read about SegWit poison pill. If we hadn't Blockstream, now we would be sitting at 50K.
And if MtGox was still using its bots to pump the price with non existing money, then we would sit at $100K right now. That kind of talk doesn't make any sense. Fact is that we are sitting at very comfortable price levels right now. Who beside a few noobs do you see complaining? No one. Current price is a very fair reflection of the current situation and progress. There are zero guarantees of course, but at the time Segwit gets activated, then we (with a high probability) can expect the price to pump even further. But as it is right now, there is no date set for the activation.
Jump to: