Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 15837. (Read 26622872 times)
November 18, 2017, 07:26:54 AM
... And another asshole ^ on ignore.
November 18, 2017, 07:18:42 AM
RoboGoogleTranslateShite
вы caмый xyдший aгитaтop, кoтopый мы иcпoльзoвaли дo cиx пop. вы никoгo нe yбeждaeтe. roger ver нe бyдeт cчacтлив. пepeйдитe к выxoдy для вaшeгo yничтoжeния
November 18, 2017, 07:16:48 AM
Support was at around 40 percent. Then BIP-148 came along and threatened to disconnect any nodes that relayed blocks that were not signaling for segwit. At that point, you either signal or stop mining, so miners signaled. They were also encouraged by strong support (90%+) for the segwit2x agreement, which turned out to be a joke.
As I recall, this BIP wasn't merged in any official bitcoin-core clients. You'd have to download alternative versions or patch it yourself. UASF-supporting nodes were by no means dominating the node-network to be a threat. At least that's how I saw it while connecting for my daily sync. Perhaps the s2x was more of a motive.
Quote
There is a very large community of bitcoiners besides Wu involved with BCH. If you never venture out of bitcointalk.org or /r/bitcoin, I can't blame you for being blind to it. Censorship tends to create echo chambers, to the detriment of the people in those chambers. I never made the claim that BCH is Bitcoin. Clearly that moniker is more closely associated with the Segwit chain. But that may change with time.
My claim is that BCH is more closely aligned with Satoshi's whitepaper. At 1MB and with 2 week difficulty adjustment, the segwit chain is much more fragile than BCH. BCH's mempool has not ever seen backlog and now that the difficulty adjustment algorithm has been upgraded, blocks times are much more reliable than the segwit chain.
My claim is that BCH is more closely aligned with Satoshi's whitepaper. At 1MB and with 2 week difficulty adjustment, the segwit chain is much more fragile than BCH. BCH's mempool has not ever seen backlog and now that the difficulty adjustment algorithm has been upgraded, blocks times are much more reliable than the segwit chain.
BCH is much more centralized, plus it's at the mercy of any script-kid wanting to spam it for peanuts and fill it with gigabytes/day of spam. Just because it hasn't happened, doesn't mean it can't happen. I would probably do it myself for 24hrs or so, just to make an "academic" point that the "mempool is full" bullshit and "we need an upgrade" can equally apply to a 8mb chain if one goes out and spams it. I guess other people too had this thought, but there is also the thought that people who want to sell their BCH will be prevented if they have to download endless gigabytes.
The marketing being pushed by the same crew is about the peer-to-peer e-cash system, with emphasis on the e-cash aspect. Centralization changes the first aspect: As people become unable to participate as peers, you go from peer-to-peer to a client/server model. You go towards the cash system a bit more (a few more tx/s while global requirements are in excess of XX.XXX tx/sec - which ultimately don't make a dent towards the cash-goal), but you recede way more in terms of p2p characteristics. If it's not a decentralized peer to peer system, then who cares? THIS is the novelty of bitcoin. Not the 10 minute transactions. If people wanted a client/server system, they have paypal and it can do instant txs.
Even the cash-aspect of BCH promising "faster" txs is problematic. I mean if you want to go faster, you can do it like Litecoin (faster blocks). 10m blocks (on avg - could be 1hr if the difficulty is high) aren't good enough to buy you a coffee. Even 2.5m (LTC) aren't good enough - you'd need something like dash's system, or a pre-funded lightning channel.
Anyway...
Exactly. If these guys really just wanted faster and cheaper transactions they'd either just proclaim an altcoin like Dash 'the new bitcoin', or build something new from the ground up. Or they could even back Byteball, which by virtue of not needing mining at all is much cheaper, and actually gets faster when the number of transactions on the network goes up.
But of course, their real agenda is just making money. By mining, by pumping and dumping, or by any other means. This so called community behind BCH is just a mix of people who are purely in it for the money, and others who are simply being duped.
November 18, 2017, 07:16:10 AM
Support was at around 40 percent. Then BIP-148 came along and threatened to disconnect any nodes that relayed blocks that were not signaling for segwit. At that point, you either signal or stop mining, so miners signaled. They were also encouraged by strong support (90%+) for the segwit2x agreement, which turned out to be a joke.
As I recall, this BIP wasn't merged in any official bitcoin-core clients. You'd have to download alternative versions or patch it yourself. UASF-supporting nodes were by no means dominating the node-network to be a threat. At least that's how I saw it while connecting for my daily sync. Perhaps the s2x was more of a motive.
Quote
There is a very large community of bitcoiners besides Wu involved with BCH. If you never venture out of bitcointalk.org or /r/bitcoin, I can't blame you for being blind to it. Censorship tends to create echo chambers, to the detriment of the people in those chambers. I never made the claim that BCH is Bitcoin. Clearly that moniker is more closely associated with the Segwit chain. But that may change with time.
My claim is that BCH is more closely aligned with Satoshi's whitepaper. At 1MB and with 2 week difficulty adjustment, the segwit chain is much more fragile than BCH. BCH's mempool has not ever seen backlog and now that the difficulty adjustment algorithm has been upgraded, blocks times are much more reliable than the segwit chain.
My claim is that BCH is more closely aligned with Satoshi's whitepaper. At 1MB and with 2 week difficulty adjustment, the segwit chain is much more fragile than BCH. BCH's mempool has not ever seen backlog and now that the difficulty adjustment algorithm has been upgraded, blocks times are much more reliable than the segwit chain.
BCH is much more centralized, plus it's at the mercy of any script-kid wanting to spam it for peanuts and fill it with gigabytes/day of spam. Just because it hasn't happened, doesn't mean it can't happen. I would probably do it myself for 24hrs or so, just to make an "academic" point that the "mempool is full" bullshit and "we need an upgrade" can equally apply to a 8mb chain if one goes out and spams it. I guess other people too had this thought, but there is also the thought that people who want to sell their BCH will be prevented if they have to download endless gigabytes.
The marketing being pushed by the same crew is about the peer-to-peer e-cash system, with emphasis on the e-cash aspect. Centralization changes the first aspect: As people become unable to participate as peers, you go from peer-to-peer to a client/server model. You go towards the cash system a bit more (a few more tx/s while global requirements are in excess of XX.XXX tx/sec - which ultimately don't make a dent towards the cash-goal), but you recede way more in terms of p2p characteristics. If it's not a decentralized peer to peer system, then who cares? THIS is the novelty of bitcoin. Not the 10 minute transactions. If people wanted a client/server system, they have paypal and it can do instant txs.
Even the cash-aspect of BCH promising "faster" txs is problematic. I mean if you want to go faster, you can do it like Litecoin (faster blocks). 10m blocks (on avg - could be 1hr if the difficulty is high) aren't good enough to buy you a coffee. Even 2.5m (LTC) aren't good enough - you'd need something like dash's system, or a pre-funded lightning channel.
Anyway...
+1
See, this is why I'm a core tard. The alternative just doesn't make sense.
November 18, 2017, 07:07:23 AM
November 18, 2017, 06:40:25 AM
Bitcoin hashing power is going down (8 Exahashes/s) while BCH has not powered up yet. We have to expect another weekend battle over Bitcoin control.
Mempool looks kind of stable but one never knows what will happen.
As for the last weekend I do not wish to take part in this battle as I have my small Bitcoin bag that needs a lot of care. For those of you who will fight well, it is your choice to do so.
Mempool looks kind of stable but one never knows what will happen.
As for the last weekend I do not wish to take part in this battle as I have my small Bitcoin bag that needs a lot of care. For those of you who will fight well, it is your choice to do so.
Yes there seems to be a couple of exahashes of mining power which are missing - off mining something other than Bitcoin or Bcash. I wonder what that could be ?
Maybe this weekend won’t be a total fizzer after all. 
November 18, 2017, 06:38:22 AM
Support was at around 40 percent. Then BIP-148 came along and threatened to disconnect any nodes that relayed blocks that were not signaling for segwit. At that point, you either signal or stop mining, so miners signaled. They were also encouraged by strong support (90%+) for the segwit2x agreement, which turned out to be a joke.
As I recall, this BIP wasn't merged in any official bitcoin-core clients. You'd have to download alternative versions or patch it yourself. UASF-supporting nodes were by no means dominating the node-network to be a threat. At least that's how I saw it while connecting for my daily sync. Perhaps the s2x was more of a motive.
Quote
There is a very large community of bitcoiners besides Wu involved with BCH. If you never venture out of bitcointalk.org or /r/bitcoin, I can't blame you for being blind to it. Censorship tends to create echo chambers, to the detriment of the people in those chambers. I never made the claim that BCH is Bitcoin. Clearly that moniker is more closely associated with the Segwit chain. But that may change with time.
My claim is that BCH is more closely aligned with Satoshi's whitepaper. At 1MB and with 2 week difficulty adjustment, the segwit chain is much more fragile than BCH. BCH's mempool has not ever seen backlog and now that the difficulty adjustment algorithm has been upgraded, blocks times are much more reliable than the segwit chain.
My claim is that BCH is more closely aligned with Satoshi's whitepaper. At 1MB and with 2 week difficulty adjustment, the segwit chain is much more fragile than BCH. BCH's mempool has not ever seen backlog and now that the difficulty adjustment algorithm has been upgraded, blocks times are much more reliable than the segwit chain.
BCH is much more centralized, plus it's at the mercy of any script-kid wanting to spam it for peanuts and fill it with gigabytes/day of spam. Just because it hasn't happened, doesn't mean it can't happen. I would probably do it myself for 24hrs or so, just to make an "academic" point that the "mempool is full" bullshit and "we need an upgrade" can equally apply to a 8mb chain if one goes out and spams it. I guess other people too had this thought, but there is also the thought that people who want to sell their BCH will be prevented if they have to download endless gigabytes.
The marketing being pushed by the same crew is about the peer-to-peer e-cash system, with emphasis on the e-cash aspect. Centralization changes the first aspect: As people become unable to participate as peers, you go from peer-to-peer to a client/server model. You go towards the cash system a bit more (a few more tx/s while global requirements are in excess of XX.XXX tx/sec - which ultimately don't make a dent towards the cash-goal), but you recede way more in terms of p2p characteristics. If it's not a decentralized peer to peer system, then who cares? THIS is the novelty of bitcoin. Not the 10 minute transactions. If people wanted a client/server system, they have paypal and it can do instant txs.
Even the cash-aspect of BCH promising "faster" txs is problematic. I mean if you want to go faster, you can do it like Litecoin (faster blocks). 10m blocks (on avg - could be 1hr if the difficulty is high) aren't good enough to buy you a coffee. Even 2.5m (LTC) aren't good enough - you'd need something like dash's system, or a pre-funded lightning channel.
Anyway...
November 18, 2017, 06:02:46 AM
November 18, 2017, 05:34:00 AM
If I was a better trader maybe. But Jay's right about me. I have no business trying to do that.
November 18, 2017, 05:13:58 AM
On a more serious note, the walls look like there's a lot more upside!
Let’s hope so, I think the dream of $10,000 per coin before New Year is still realistic. I don’t think anybody thought that was possible a couple of years back but it now seems a reality.
November 18, 2017, 04:58:07 AM
Bitcoin hashing power is going down (8 Exahashes/s) while BCH has not powered up yet. We have to expect another weekend battle over Bitcoin control.
Mempool looks kind of stable but one never knows what will happen.
As for the last weekend I do not wish to take part in this battle as I have my small Bitcoin bag that needs a lot of care. For those of you who will fight well, it is your choice to do so.
Mempool looks kind of stable but one never knows what will happen.
As for the last weekend I do not wish to take part in this battle as I have my small Bitcoin bag that needs a lot of care. For those of you who will fight well, it is your choice to do so.
November 18, 2017, 04:44:02 AM
So, can we see you, girls ?
I´m sure you´re hotter, than hot ! If not, i´m completey into wise girls, imean you have to cover yourself.
My girlfriend`s going to kill me . . .
I´m sure you´re hotter, than hot ! If not, i´m completey into wise girls, imean you have to cover yourself.
My girlfriend`s going to kill me . . .
November 18, 2017, 04:33:35 AM
I would rather want a 2013 year with BTC spiking to $100,000. Gotta keep the perps on their toes 
November 18, 2017, 04:26:31 AM
On a more serious note, the walls look like there's a lot more upside!
Do the walls say we are going to have another year like 2017? Because I would like that.
I don't really know. But I think it is going to be similar.
November 18, 2017, 04:23:31 AM
On a more serious note, the walls look like there's a lot more upside!
Do the walls say we are going to have another year like 2017? Because I would like that.
November 18, 2017, 04:06:27 AM
On a more serious note, the walls look like there's a lot more upside!
November 18, 2017, 04:04:50 AM
Now can we stick to English please?
So how are those walls looking?
Painted ..................
November 18, 2017, 03:47:23 AM
Now can we stick to English please?
So how are those walls looking?
November 18, 2017, 03:42:00 AM
Jeez guys, BTC is pumping in-battle and you're talking binary and Chinese now?
Bow down on your knees, ye all people of BCT, and be well prepared to greet the beautiful and all-powerful CAROLINA!
Bow down on your knees, ye all people of BCT, and be well prepared to greet the beautiful and all-powerful CAROLINA!
November 18, 2017, 03:40:09 AM
Chain split tokens on BFX.
I don't think I have any of those. They were gifted to you at the time of the not-fork?
There was supposed to be a hard fork for S2X at blockheight 494,784 which had no replay protection and was supposed to stir panic among the natives. But the fork broke because of shitty coding so this weekends Bcash epic pump and dump never got off the ground. So there hasn’t been a fork and now almost certainly won’t be because the main chain is too far ahead.
So you won’t have any because they don’t exist. The BFX 2X tokens are futures for delivery of a currently non-existent coin that you can buy and sell on BFX before the fork. Leaving some rather unhappy bag holders today.
Eventually people will learn not to trust Chinese miners but probably not yet.
Lemme grab an aspirin and reread that at a later time in a calm environment...
Jump to: