Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 18234. (Read 26610315 times)

Are you sure that you are not a paid shill troll? 

You are assuming no progress is being made, and nothing is being done, and there is some kind of urgency in doing something. 

Your various assumptions are without merit.


If you worried, you begin to diversify before whatever competitors become "the better coin"


Based on the current state of bitcoin (and it's supposed state of brokenness as asserted by various big block advocates in this thread), I see little to no value in diversifying at this point based on those alleged and insubstantially backed arguments.   

It's not that I'm impatient, but I don't want potential or current users leaving bitcoin because of these problems.

The blocksize issue is a real problem, and you can't just wait for SegWit/LN to get their shit together while the blocksize is becoming problematic.

The blocksize was never supposed to stay at 1MB for as long as it did. The false promise of SegWit made people think we didn't need to upgrade the blocksize from 1MB, so now here we are, with 80% of the blocks being full, no blocksize increase in sight, no SegWit and no LN, and mainwhile bitcoin is rapidly losing marketshare.  

It won't take long for bitcoin to no longer be the #1 crypto in marketshare. Do you want bitcoin to become the myspace of crypto? Because this is how you get bitcoin to become the myspace of crypto.


If by better you mean abandoned, than yes. But it won't have value then.

"I'm a simple man..." I see JJG spam like crazy... it means something must be happening... and btw... its 23 September.  

Of course, I am not exactly certain about how to describe the price ranges, but really, it seems that earlier in the year, the price range was more or less between $350 and  $450... There were several attempts in both directions before the price finally broke out to the upside.

And, maybe in the end, the bears are only able to hold down the price for so long before they are just forced to allow it to break out?  That seems to be a kind of dynamic going on when you have continued buying and expansion and even recently the halvening that is likely soon to cause additional upward price pressures due to lessening of the increased supply.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NU9JoFKlaZ0

stepwise 'shocker' up to $850 range is the next medium term move

Localbitcoins and Paxful are some decent places holding the prices up. When people buy at a 10~20% premium I don't see how they would sell bellow their ROI zone, unless ofcourse something bad happens which excluding exchangers hacks never really occurs. Also may I add that sustaining the prices between 560 to 630 since July has also helped form a huge wall forbitting bearish moves for the time being.
For me it's like the 390 to 420 scene we had earlier this year, a big straight line and then a sudden jump up which is quite healthy!

I certainly don't mean my most recent interrogations as any kind of attack.      

Yeah, the trade volume has been relatively low for a couple of months,  and even the May/June spurt up to nearly $800 did not come with sustained high volume... on the other hand, we did get pretty decent and sustained high volume for around 20 weeks in fall of 2015 .. those were the days... hahahaha

Regarding pending  ETF(s), yeah, who knows whether we are going to get any definitive news on that in the coming months - and most of us realize that any kind of significant approval of this kind of ETF matter could be stalled for a considerable amount of time.

I am a bit curious about how long BTC prices can be sustained in the current levels.  There is quite a bit of evidence of increasing trade volumes on local bitcoins, which also seems to be an indication of upwards price pressures... Furthermore, it seems that the recent halvening has a decent chance of being felt in the coming months, too.. and that would be providing additional upwards price pressures.  There are also decent chances that we could experience a significantly sized dump prior to any pump of 5% or more..

A 20% move in either direction is not out of the question, yet to me the odds of a 20% move in prices seems a bit more likely to travel upwards, rather than downwards. .

I said today to highlight how quickly sentiment changes as a bit of fun. One day it's going to the moon and another day it's blocksize, no etf, low volume bullshit.

Don't take anything I say to heart. I come in peace

Why do you specify "today?"   

What is special about today?

As far as I see the matter, we haven't really bounced out of the channel of the past couple of months, which is about $560 to $630, so unless we are trolling, exaggerating or spreading FUD, how can we get excited about price movements within such a channel? 

Does someone want to suggest that the channel is more narrow? or that we should get excited based on smaller price movements (such as price movements of less than 5%?) ?

This is incredible. The attitude here changes faster than my wife's during her "time of the month".

I can't keep up. Are we rich or is it all going down the pan today?

That's not a bad idea actually.

I don't understand how your saying that the problem is urgent over and over and over, makes the problem more urgent.


I think that seg wit was revealed as a potential and agreed upon solution in early December 2015, and code was released several months later and thereafter, there has been testing and even various forms of implementation that is not completely live yet, but getting really close.

You also frame this blocksize limit discussion as something going back to 2013, and sure you can exaggerate whatever history that you want.

I would think that if there had been serious proposals of code, besides XT and classic, that just focused on technical issues, then that code would have been considered more seriously.  XT and classic both made attempts at changing governance, which certainly is not focusing on technicals or  technical necessities.

The fact of the matter, there is no urgency if you focus only on technical necessities rather than getting caught up with governance concerns.





What do you mean by "he who shall not be named"?  Are you getting into personalities rather than focusing on actual facts?




This quote was coming from someone else, so I am not suggesting to make the blocksize smaller... I think that part of the point of the matter, is that you don't want to go around making willy-nilly and unnecessary changes, and moreso if the changes seem to be rushed and/or controversial.  You err on the side of non controversial and necessary changes.
 


I doubt that there is any kind of major influence of price based on the actual technicals of the blocksize limit debate.  As you may recall, and you even seem to concede, the blocksize limit debate was ramped up in mid-to-late 2015, and soon thereafter BTC prices shot to $500 and then again in May/June 2016, prices shot to nearly $800.   Sure there is some concern over having a dividing and controversial community, but that is different from the actual technicals and the actual technical improvements that are in the very soon^tm bitcoin pipeline.





Whatever, the problem has not gotten much worse between November 2015 and now.  Bitcoin transactions are still being processed securely and in a fairly timely manner with fairly low fees.  And by the way in an immutable decentralized manner, which is bitcoin differentiating factor and claim to fame.  

This is more or less a repeated and stupid set of points that you are bringing up, yet I sense that if these points are not addressed, some folks are going to come to the wrong and misleading conclusions that you are arriving at.

What is this supposed April 2016 promise that is often repeatedly brought up, who made it, and what was said exactly?

Anyone with any kind of knowledge of process of a decentralized system and a technical system such as bitcoin that is securing billions of dollars of value at the present and potentially inspiring even more value in the future have to realize that the process should not cave in to quick implementations without proper vetting and testing and whatever is needed to ensure that it is done properly and without unnecessary controversy when it finally is released.  The release of this kind of thing should be rushed.

The tone of your comment also seems to devolve into a meaningless suggestion that there is some kind of urgency in releasing seg wit, which there is not.  Bitcoin is not broken, there is no fire, fees are not too high transactions are not taking too long... sure releases of innovation will likely cause improvements, but there is no rush, and it seems much more important to accomplish improvements with prudence than to make stupid ass rushed mistakes (such as the ETH hard fork should illustrate kind of things that can go wrong with rushing and without proper vetting)







Too late for what?  Again you are implying some kind of urgent need.



To whom is bitcoin losing market share?  and even if it were true that some marketshare were lost, who cares?  In the end, we go to the better coin, and if bitcoin does its implementation correctly, it will remain the better coin, if bitcoin implements some bullshit rushed job with flaws, then investors in bitcoin will likely be much worse off.



I don't see what is incompetent about vetting and testing...   




look at you, exaggerating.. 2017 or 2018 might be o.k., but I suspect seg wit will be live before april 2017, but of course if there are reasons not to release it, bitcoin will be fine, even without such a release.

You suggest that increasing the blockchain size to 2mb would be an obvious solution, which is not true, also brings problems, and is likely not even necessary because bitcoin is not broken.  transactions are continuing to go through securely and in a fairly timely manner with relatively low fees - decentralized and immutable.

Good morning Bitcoinland.

Still going sideways... $599 on Bitcoinaverage.

Ho effing hum.


That's "September Song", written by Maxwell Anderson specifically for actor Walter Huston in the 1938 Broadway musical "Knickerbocker Holiday". It has since become a pop standard, covered by everybody from Bing Crosby to Frank Sinatra. The music, written by Kurt Weill has become an instrumental jazz standard.

Lambie has a way with words but she's not that good.

Good piece of poetry you got there. Do you have any other poems? and hey! don't worry everything will be fine as time goes, there is nothing that time can't heal.

I am going to set up a trading bot to buy when this thread gets full of "block size" talk and sell when there are debates about how many thousands of dollars bitcoin will soon be worth.

And I have lost one tooth
And I walk a little lame
And I ain't got time
For the waiting game

And the days dwindle down to a precious few
September ... November!
And these few precious days I'll spend with you. These precious days I'll spend with you

There is urgency.

Bitcoin is losing market share to altcoins (both in market cap as well as transaction volume and trading volume).    

Blocks are more often full than not, indicating there is demand for bigger blocks.

To say the matter is not urgent is a lie.  

There's a reason the debate started in 2013 and the debate became more fierce in 2015.

It was because people actually recognized the problem before it became a problem, but for some reason (he who shall not be named) now that it has actually become a problem because no action was taken it's barely even discussed anymore.



the pump wont come as long as the blocksize debate isn't resolved.


Of course no one gave a crap about the blocksize back than, because the average block size was not anywhere near the blocksize limit back then.

Now it is though, and it's not supposed to be.

SegWit was promised to arrive in april 2016, it's now September.

By the time it actually arrives (if ever) it will be too little too late.

Meanwhile we're losing market share as bitcoin, while 1 change to a simple line of code could have fixed this easily.

And yet, you put your trust in this incompetent core dev team.


April 2016 2017 2116 20116

(´• ‿ •`)



                     Stay Puft Marshmallow Man likes those walls!