Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 16024. (Read 26709607 times)

no, if it's not mostly wash trading.

Yeah... they seem to be saying.. Let's make some shit up and act as if a decentralized system is really centralized, and then after that, we will get rid of that decentralized system by saying that we are creating a more decentralized system, even though we are not.  In other words, we want to put in charge a small group of incompetent goofballs to be the "new and improved bitcoin."     In other words, not meaning to bring politics into this, but it is difficult to resist.. Let's bring in a self-absorbed narcisist in to run the new bitcoin, such as Donald Trump, he will fix everything...

hahahahahaha       go figure.

But still, 3rd biggest market cap isn't too shabby.

"exist" as in mined stop & go by "unknown" and traded almost exclusively on a korean exchange, most likely by just some whale insiders taking advantage of the few fools trying to trade it short term and getting REKT.

Look at you jojo69... trying to cut me off at the pass.   

Actually, I cannot really fault you, if you feel a bit more comfortable to skim a little bit of extra fiat off in this $6900 to $7500 price range.

Within this price range my sell and buy increments are stuck in the middle of transitioning from $200 increments to $250 increments and I am kind of in a bit of limbo in this transitioning... since the price seems to be kind of stuck... If we go up, then my orders will graduate to $250 increments, but if we go down, then they will stay in their pre-graduate state of $200 increments.

Anyhow, since I am currently trading on 4 exchanges, in about the past 5 days, I have experienced the execution of several sell and buy orders from the bouncing around within this $6900 to $7500 price range, and so far I am keeping to my already pre-established strategy, and perhaps I am a bit afraid to shave too much extra off, here, even though I understand why it could be prudent to engage in a bit of extra shaving off here.

I think that part of my shaving off reluctancy is that a very large proportion of my order book transactional history shows predominantly sales all the fucking way up from $3k to $7500...   Remember the mid September dip from $4980 to $2970?    We largely have not had any meaningful and significant dip since then, and so therefore, my current inventory of fiat seems sufficiently large, and I don't really feel as if I need more of the stuff.... I guess in the end, I am engaging in discretion, and I certainly understand that the discretion of others could reasonably differ significantly from mine, especially on this point and especially if they may have not been continuously cashing out along the way up, as I had been. 

I'm a bit suprised by the venom in your response Jay. No offense was intended. Only to make a point that the segwit branch is just as much a fork as so called 'altcash' or 'bcash' (see what I did there). If there was such a consensus as you describe then bitcoin cash would not exist. Yet it does.  In your face.

You may want to check this : https://bitcointechtalk.com/how-to-protect-against-replay-attacks-7a00bd2fe52f

Thank you very much

    What is a transaction replay?

In the context of forks, transaction replay is when a transaction is valid on both sides of the fork. So a transaction can be played (i.e. broadcast) on both chains after the fork and be a valid transaction and confirm. This means that if you intend on sending coins on one fork, you could accidentally end up sending your coins on the other fork as well since someone else could take your transaction and replay it (i.e. broadcast it) on the other chain's network.

    What does replay protection do?

Replay protection is something that makes it so that transactions on one chain are invalid on the other chain thus preventing transaction replay. This can be anything from having a blacklisted address or output type (e.g. if an output to address X is in the transaction, consider it invalid) to changing the signature scheme to changing the transaction format entirely. All this does it makes replaying some or all transactions impossible.
https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/61212/what-is-transaction-replay-and-replay-protection

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/segwit2x-and-case-strong-replay-protection-and-why-its-controversial/

I have a feeling I don't quite understand what replay protection is, could someone explain it please.

Errr.. Speaking about rules, what about starting by implementing a good replay-protection procedure ?

edit: my bad, the guy was speaking about futures, not the coin itself. I guess he can put all the rules he wants on his crappy derivatives.

Bizarro guys, they are complaining there is not enough vol in their stawk (un)business and then they want less vol in BTC? I wonder how much he would want to pay for taming
my coins... .

lol. quite the show it'll be.
https://youtu.be/kBxnl5nZbr0 Popcaan - Stronger Now
couldn't resist. actually it's q jolly.

As far as I understand with a Trezor, you hold your private keys and they are going to allow splitting as soon as replay protection does not present any kind of problem.. so they are kind of protecting you from yourself (why lose coins based on no replay protection or other inadequacies in the fork chain?)....  So yeah, you could park some of your coins on exchanges, but then you are up to their total whim, too?  



600watt beat me to it.. this is even better than I had recalled about their earlier announcement..... . exactly.. what is not to like about that?

I'm going to need stronger popcorn

yea, the second one, i suppose.

https://www.coindesk.com/cme-groups-leo-melamed-well-tame-bitcoin/
"We will regulate, make bitcoin not wild, nor wilder. We'll tame it into a regular type instrument of trade with rules."
Disclosure: CME Group is an investor in Digital Currency Group, CoinDesk's parent company.
someone's gonna get rekt

Users who ignore forks won't be bothered much, even without replay protection on the forks, as long as they don't reuse any addresses. See if something happens on bitcoin, like a transaction, it can or will happen on the fork. If you ignore the fork coin, then nothing happens to your bitcoins. Essentially, abandoning your fork coins makes them valueless. If some hacker gets the replayed coins, then the real owner may complain or report about this, then the fork coins has no value to the bitcoin owner.

If there is some sort of replay protection even if done manually or through some special address or what, a lot of people will just do that, dump the fork coins, and buy more bitcoins.

The other way around does not seem likely, unless someone wants to gamble.

All an exchange needs to do is not support the fork coin and not give any of them to the owners, and say they got hacked, and fork coins get stolen by hackers. If the volume or amount of fork coins is large enough, that will drive the price down close to zero.

Again, the other way around is not likely to happen.

You can fuck off with your "bitcoin segwit" bullshit, and your attempt to suggest that there is some other bitcoin, currently.  At this particular time there is one bitcoin, and the segwit that got added to bitcoin in July/August was a process of reaching actual consensus (have you heard about that?) locking in, activation, and currently development and incorporation.

Yeah, there are ongoing attacks on bitcoin to try to create other bitcoins, to dilute bitcoin or to take over bitcoin or to create confusion, but at this particular time, as I type, there is only one bitcoin and it is not called bitcoin segwit, even though most of us recognize what the fuck you are referring to.  

I understand that you and some of the nutjob BIG blockers want to use inflammatory terms because you seem to be in a state of denial that actually 95% and greater consensus actually caused the implementation of segwit into bitcoin, but there  is no fucking such thing as bitcoin segwit, at the moment, there is only bitcoin - even though in your fantasy attack on bitcoin world, you want bitcoin to become either an equal or a lesser than your other proposed pump fuck variations.

Are there any B2X supporters anywhere? I've hardly come across a single one out in the wild.