Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 16569. (Read 26623431 times)

BTC will grow more just wait for SegWit technical activation in 23 August Coming soon

And for this times u can check new great revolutinary technology with XtraBytes Coins here : https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/new-xby-ann-xtrabytes-because-the-blockchain-can-be-better-1864397

Really great new project

Have fun boyz, volume is coming back.
I'm just too tired to play with you tonight

old generation :
- "need medic !",
- frag time,
- fear of the metro 2033 (with earphone and dark chamber)

new generation :
- play with altcoins.

Im in 

moon, then?

Thank you for your explanitation!

Segwit2x signaling is only a "political" stance now. No technical implications (no BIP's) yet. They are just signaling that, when the time comes, they are going for th 2x part of the Segwit2x agreement. It may have been slightly reduced in the past few days because ViaBTC has directed much of its hasrate to BCH mining, maybe Bitmain is doing the same, and both of those are part of the Segwit2x signaling in BTC.

BIP141 was already locked, no matter if the signaling goes to zero.... it will inevitably activate in 396 blocks.

Edit: i mean the SegwitX2 mining is dropping But still we need 390 blocks
With bip141 mining..

What do you mean?

Probably, but I'm not aware of them.

Why is the mining SegwitX2 dropping? Still need 396 blocks to be mined..

Also many factors in the calculation would need to get out of the ass, like user adoption growth, number of tx's per user, distribution between on-chain tx's and LN tx's in case of Segwit chain and potential blocksize increases in both Segwit chain and Bcash chain -the latter is suppossed to keep increasing the blocksize in the future if demands rises-.

It is a falacy that miners need to get their income from fees because of reward halving.... atm the price increase have had a MUCH bigger impact than the halvings. Also, when the day comes that fees are more important than the reward they will be least interested in price increases but only on milking the most out of tx fees. Not good for investors.

The moment the fees are more important than BTC price, the price will probably stagnate or even decrease.

Also, a constantly increasing blocksize is not sustainable in the medium/long term.

That doesn't mean Bitcoin should not keep increasing its blocksize LIGHTLY over the years, but the idea of "all tx's must go on-chain" is absolutely ridiculous.

Really, now that we almost have Segwit and LN is in the works... let's just comply with Segwit2X, implement that reasonable blocksize increase, and fuck them all. No more fucking scaling debate for many years.

Not only it will be WAY harder to spam the blockchain when it is not already near full with "legit" tx's, but also they won't have any economical incentive to keep doing it.

Probably, but I'm sure any model you come across will be skewed by the analyst's own bias.

Are there any prediction models about what the fees would look like in the years to come assuming different scaling methods?

Nice analysis - I am less concerned about the potential spiraling down if hash power moved (substantially).  Sold a few more BCH, might be too late soon!

They didn't think much to the Ocean
The waves, they were fiddlin' and small
There was no wrecks and nobody drownded
Fact, nothing to laugh at, at all.

https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/898023883361722368
Who needs replay protection when you have grapes?

Keep in mind that profitability calculators do not factor BTC fees into the equation. When you have 1-3 BTC per block, that's a substantial amount that can increase BTC profitability by 8-25%.

In fact, BTC fees are also a mechanism which allow BTC to "recover" in case of hashrate going away. Let's say tomorrow a very hot sha256 coin appears and hashrate goes down a lot. At that point block emission is reduced substantially, but the competition between people wanting to get first priority, in the first mined block, increases a lot also. So the first block mined will include the highest-fee transactions, and this could amount to something like 6-7-8 BTC - or more. If blocks take too long, at that point the block reward may even be doubled or surpassed by the tx fees that want first priority. This remedies profitability despite difficulty remaining the same.

On the other hand, if BTC's blocks were large enough to clear the mempool of any minimum-fee-transaction, even if the blocks took an hour to arrive due to lost hashrate, this built-in incentive wouldn't even be there. In a way, the increased fee pressure, which currently replenishes some of the lost miner income (after the halving), acts as a protective shield. In other words it pays to follow a "glide path" from a full-blown subsidy economy that has near-zero fees, to a full-blown fee economy where subsidy is practically zero, and doing so in steps.

I'm going to lather myself in richly oils and feed myself grapes all day.

You should treat yourself..... oh go on  

What will it be?