Author

Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 15300. (Read 26717130 times)

sr. member
Activity: 1204
Merit: 293
"Be Your Own Bank"

"LIGHTNING HITS BITCOIN MAINNET

As cryptocurrency trader and commentator Vortex noted on Christmas Day, Lightning’s RC1 has had a tentative release and “mainnet (transactions) have been completed.”

The Lightning Network is perhaps the most hotly-awaited so-called ‘layer two’ upgrade for the Bitcoin network. Once active, users will be able to send BTC funds practically instantaneously for next to no fee."

https://bitcoinist.com/lightning-network-mainnet-beta-soon/





legendary
Activity: 3080
Merit: 1688
lose: unfind ... loose: untight
- BCH doesn't fix transaction malleabilty,
Transaction malleability is not a problem in practice. Any of its effects are easily mitigated.

FWIW, though, the majority opinion within the Bitcoin Cash community is that we will implement a malleability fix. When higher priority issues are in the rearview.
ruling out L2 solutions
No. While it is true that eliminating malleability simplifies known L2 solutions, in no way prevents them.
Preventing them to the point of making them too hard to implement reliably - at least, as of now. If the emergency situation grants hurrying to hardfork a blocksize change, why not fix transaction malleability first?

Because transaction malleability -- as you seem to tacitly acknowledge -- causes no problems in practice. OTOH, the block size limitation has rendered Bitcoin Segwit unusable for most common commercial activities. Why on earth would we solve a non-problem before solving an acute and crippling problem?

which are the scaling solution in the medium (possibly long) term.
Perhaps. Though I point out that any transaction on any known L2 is by definition not a Bitcoin transaction. Accordingly, less interesting.

Any L2 solution proven in practice -- including being free of negative side effects -- is likely to be picked up by the Bitcoin Cash chain.
Less interesting, but isn't the point about functionality rather than academic interest?

As long is it is Bitcoin functionality, yes. Ergo...

- BCH is controlled by a cartel.
No more so than Bitcoin Segwit. Less so in fact. Six independent leading implementations of non-mining, fully validating wallets (often mis referred to as 'nodes') as opposed to Bitcoin Segwit's Core implementation's market dominance.
Offhand innuendo, pff. The attitude behind this reply is one of the reasons I got tired of replying.  I am referring to the number of active developers (not just the ones with commit rights!). The fact that one client is more popular on the main bitcoin fork doesn't mean it's controlled by a cartel. Open source development and free client choice produced this result.

You are the one who asserted cartelization. Who exactly does this posited cartel consist of?

Their coders are clueless.
Again, simply false.
To me, the mess they made with the fork and the EDA is the mark of incompetence.

The mess they made with the EDA? The EDA served its declared purpose perfectly. It ensured the validity of the BCH chain in its infancy.

The cartel is likely under the heavy hand of PBOC.
Again, no more so than Bitcoin Segwit. The miner population is identical between the two chains.
Another prime example of offhand innuendo in my probably biased opinion - and, most importantly, factually incorrect for all I know. Nearly all miners for BCH are in China.

Again, the set of miners for BCH is identical to the set of miners for BTC. Which renders irrelevant the following bit:

to gain control.
What exactly do you mean by this?
I mean taking control of Bitcoin by replacing it with Bcash.

Miners have exactly as much control in Bitcoin Cash as they do in Bitcoin Segwit.

- Big blocks will stifle adoption.
If you believe that the measure of adoption is number of non-mining, fully-validating wallets, then you may have a point. However, it has been demonstrated to my satisfaction that non-mining, fully-validating wallets have fuck-all to do with network health.
It hasn't been demonstrated to my satisfaction, though. Some things show their value only when they are sorely missed. Full nodes are one of these things IMO.

I do understand that is the prevalent dogma.

Yes, that's the old "Raspberry pi in rural Afghanistan" argument. Even I, not in rural Afghanistan, would stop my own homespun node (not a pi though) if pressed by bandwidth and storage limits.
Testing has demonstrated that an average 'home computer' on an average 'domestic broadband' connection can handle up to 100 tx/s with no architectural changes to the satoshi client, and 500 tx/s merely by fixing that client's broken threading implementation.
My bandwidth can't.

Really? You can't spare 3Mb/s?

Yeah. We've already discussed these very points, have we not? Why you continue to ignore my replies is beyond my ken.
Not ignoring, but I feel stuck in a loop and it's bad for my health!  Tongue

Well, that I can understand. I realize that my viewpoints are not share by the majority here on BCT.org. And I am fine with us having a disagreement on the desired direction forward. What I am not OK with is mischaracterization. One example thereof: "The "more reason" I was (and am) asking of you is an effective, documented rebuttal of my points or some subjective reason that goes beyond "I like big big big! Blocks big, me happy!"" Obviously, my replies to you have been more than "I like big big big"..., and for you to characterize it as such is not only uncharitable, it is either lazy or dishonest. Frankly, while I expect that from some here, I did not expect it from you.
sr. member
Activity: 298
Merit: 253

The banks in the west are closed and bitcoin's still pumping. What happens when they open again and those wires start reaching exchanges?
hero member
Activity: 750
Merit: 601
Further, I believe it likely that massive adoption will lead to huge numbers of nodes - naturally. Every common consumer has little reason to run such a non-mining, fully-validating wallet.

But I want to run a full node, and with huge blocks I don't even have a choice.
(SPV is a middle ground but not sufficient)
You are forcing me to trust someone.
In fact you are forcing me to trust the miners who are driven by incentives that do not align with my own.
In the future they may change the rules and I wouldn't even know, and if I did know, there would be little I could do to about it.

This myth that non-mining nodes don't matter is the most dangerous the big blockers are forced to peddle, simply because  it drops out of the big block argument as a necessity.
The ability to run a full validating node is not optional, it is a requirement, and any fork that prevents this functionality fails the community.

We must not compromise the security of Bitcoin to help it scale.



Bitcoin has never been trustless.  If you're using Bitcoin, you already trust that no group of colluding attackers controls more hash power than honest nodes.  If the hash power majority is colluding to defraud users, bitcoin is not secure.  This is simply a fact.  There is nothing an army of raspberry-pi nodes can do to change this fact. 
 

I don’t need to trust anyone. It’s a pain if miners collude and 51% attack me, but with a full node I just fail to get new blocks and together with others (probably everyone else) we are forced to change to a new set of miners who behave and use the real Bitcoin rules.

But this is another discussion,  and is irelevant to my point, which I will restate.... if I can’t run a full node I need to trust miners.
Don’t shift the argument, address the real issue!
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1010
LN feels like ripple

The only way I can see LN working is with a few large hubs that users "open accounts with" and in a way that those users doesn't actually control private keys.  LN = modernized banking.  
legendary
Activity: 2758
Merit: 13660
BTC + Crossfit, living life.
Dankjewel voor alle tijd en moeite micgoossens,
Betaal je de prijs uit je eigen zak?

Ja toch wel en graag gedaan .... beetje spanning soms moet al eens kunnen toch....
legendary
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1012
LN feels like ripple

Does the blockchain still have a purpose with LN on ? Educate me !
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1116
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1010
Further, I believe it likely that massive adoption will lead to huge numbers of nodes - naturally. Every common consumer has little reason to run such a non-mining, fully-validating wallet.

But I want to run a full node, and with huge blocks I don't even have a choice.
(SPV is a middle ground but not sufficient)
You are forcing me to trust someone.
In fact you are forcing me to trust the miners who are driven by incentives that do not align with my own.
In the future they may change the rules and I wouldn't even know, and if I did know, there would be little I could do to about it.

This myth that non-mining nodes don't matter is the most dangerous the big blockers are forced to peddle, simply because  it drops out of the big block argument as a necessity.
The ability to run a full validating node is not optional, it is a requirement, and any fork that prevents this functionality fails the community.

We must not compromise the security of Bitcoin to help it scale.



Bitcoin has never been trustless.  If you're using Bitcoin, you already trust that no group of colluding attackers controls more hash power than honest nodes.  If the hash power majority is colluding to defraud users, bitcoin is not secure.  This is simply a fact.  There is nothing an army of raspberry-pi nodes can do to change this fact.  Fortunately, a hash-power-majority attacker "ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules, such rules that favour him with more new coins than everyone else combined, than to undermine the system and the validity of his own wealth."
 
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1116
A clickable picture? This changes everything!
sr. member
Activity: 1204
Merit: 293
"Be Your Own Bank"
hero member
Activity: 750
Merit: 601
Further, I believe it likely that massive adoption will lead to huge numbers of nodes - naturally. Every common consumer has little reason to run such a non-mining, fully-validating wallet.

But I want to run a full node, and with huge blocks I don't even have a choice.
(SPV is a middle ground but not sufficient)
You are forcing me to trust someone.
In fact you are forcing me to trust the miners who are driven by incentives that do not align with my own.
In the future they may change the rules and I wouldn't even know, and if I did know, there would be little I could do to about it.

This myth that non-mining nodes don't matter is the most dangerous the big blockers are forced to peddle, simply because  it drops out of the big block argument as a necessity.
The ability to run a full validating node is not optional, it is a requirement, and any fork that prevents this functionality fails the community.

We must not compromise the security of Bitcoin to help it scale.
elg
full member
Activity: 151
Merit: 104
Dankjewel voor alle tijd en moeite micgoossens,
Betaal je de prijs uit je eigen zak?
sr. member
Activity: 1204
Merit: 293
"Be Your Own Bank"
legendary
Activity: 875
Merit: 1362
along with some of these other shills that are crapping up this thread.
I second that!
for BCH shills to even start making a point they should have a whole new code (like eth) and not fork out the code they hate so much. they changed two lines and sing revolution, its just plain annoying. Plus the horde of fudders that come here during every dip makes reading the WO a double pain instead of a place to strenghten  hodl

Catching up on posts in this thread takes much longer with the block size debates on going...  Maybe we should all just communicate in memes? Much easier to skim through to the most recent post that way.  Tongue

Agreed. Sooooo bored of block size debates. zzzzzzzzz
legendary
Activity: 2520
Merit: 3038
I'm really trying to stay apolitical, but I'm at a total loss with jbreher. It's like that guy in Florida that insisted on eating his own face. I just can't even.

Some valid points and concerns but boy are they glued to the wrong horse.
That's the way I see it too - and the reason why sometimes I do bother to write a detailed, articulated, civil reply. But still the exact mechanism of picking the wrong horse escapes me. It must be pretty dark in that barn.
full member
Activity: 324
Merit: 221

I like jbreher's posts. Without his posts we would have nothing but BTC cheerleaders here.

That’s like saying I love the big fat hairy guy in the corner of the strip club. If it wasn’t for him there would be just amazing tits and ass.



You know nothing about life dude. Life is a matter of contrasts. Beauty doesn't exist without ugly. Smart doesn't exist without stupid. World would be the most boring place if everybody would be or think the same. Be glad for the hairy guy Smiley

That's what the one slightly over weight middle aged stripper with a c section scar is for.  There is always one...
full member
Activity: 324
Merit: 221
along with some of these other shills that are crapping up this thread.
I second that!
for BCH shills to even start making a point they should have a whole new code (like eth) and not fork out the code they hate so much. they changed two lines and sing revolution, its just plain annoying. Plus the horde of fudders that come here during every dip makes reading the WO a double pain instead of a place to strenghten  hodl

Catching up on posts in this thread takes much longer with the block size debates on going...  Maybe we should all just communicate in memes? Much easier to skim through to the most recent post that way.  Tongue
legendary
Activity: 2758
Merit: 13660
BTC + Crossfit, living life.
Breaking 24777$ prediction game      FINAL LIST       

27/12/2017 bikerleszno
29/12/2018 cAPSLOCK
30/12/2017 digithusiast
31/12/2017 Raja_MBZ
01/01/2018 elg
02/01/2018 wachtwoord
03/01/2018 JimboToronto
04/01/2018 d_eddie
05/01/2018 BTCMILLIONAIRE
06/01/2018 HanvanBitcoin
07/01/2018 ghandi
08/01/2018 savetherainforrest
09/01/2018 explorer
10/01/2018 bicoinpsycho
11/01/2018 Bitcoinaire
12/01/2018 speedwheel
13/01/2018 undeadbitcoiner
14/01/2018 northypole
15/01/2018 ivomm
16/01/2018 maca068
17/01/2018 bitcoinvest
18/01/2018 last of the v8s
19/01/2018 mfort312
20/01/2018 1982dre
21/01/2018 flamast2
22/01/2018 RealMachasm
23/01/2018 willope
24/01/2018 kartala
25/01/2018 orpington
26/01/2018 rolling
27/01/2018 LFC_bitcoin
28/01/2018 jojo69
29/01/2018 CristiTCM
30/01/2018 rayX12
31/01/2018 realsteelboy
01/02/2018 twocorn
02/02/2018 mancroofer
03/02/2018 True Myth
04/02/2018 poolminor
05/02/2018 itod
06/02/2018 scheptan
07/02/2018 vapourminer
08/02/2018 alexeft
09/02/2018 siert
10/02/2018 AlcoHoDL
11/02/2018 Dunkelheit667
12/02/2018 yonton
13/02/2018 Wekkel
14/02/2018 Thekool1s
15/02/2018 starmman
16/02/2018 Globb0
17/02/2018 leveldkrypto
18/02/2018 olesh
19/02/2018 BitCoinBurger
20/02/2018 Paashaas
21/02/2018 flynn
22/02/2018 icygreen
23/02/2018 erisdiscordia
24/02/2018 phil_s
25/02/2018 sirazimuth
26/02/2018 Arriemoller
27/02/2018 yonton
28/02/2018 Muttley
01/03/2018 bones261
02/03/2018 heater
03/03/2018 soullyG
04/03/2018 InvoKing
05/03/2018 Notme
06/03/2018 sa_94
07/03/2018 NUFCrichard
08/03/2018 Imbatman
09/03/2018 Roombot
10/03/2018 STT
11/03/2018 badream
13/03/2018 erre
14/03/2018 julian071
15/03/2018 podyx
17/03/2018 fragout
18/03/2018 fabiorem
21/03/2018 dakustaking76
23/03/2018 nikauforest
31/03/2018 vroom
01/04/2018 somac.
02/04/2018 kurious
04/04/2018 fluidjax
05/04/2018 bitcoinbunny
08/04/2018 tyler1890
10/04/2018 ludwigvon
11/04/2018 hairymaclairy
16/04/2018 practicaldreamer
18/04/2018 free-bit.co.in
27/04/2018 drbrockoin
01/05/2018 sprinkles
02/06/2018 oblox
07/07/2018 IntroVert
03/08/2018 toxic2040
28/08/2018 bitserve
15/10/2018 Yefi
05/11/2018 mikenz
31/12/2018 melman2002
01/01/2019 Spaceman_Spiff_Original
12/02/2019 FractalUniverse
21/04/2019 gentlemand
20/02/2020 romneymoney
18/12/2021 luckygenough56

MERRY XMAS TO Y'ALL     AND GOOD LUCK
legendary
Activity: 2604
Merit: 3056
Welt Am Draht
I'm really trying to stay apolitical, but I'm at a total loss with jbreher. It's like that guy in Florida that insisted on eating his own face. I just can't even.

Some valid points and concerns but boy are they glued to the wrong horse.
Pages:
Jump to: