No TA-ta-tas in the the last 5+ pages, so this thread can suck me off ad infinitum and it wouldn't do shit for me. Can someone stand up and give us a decent standpoint besides the relentless Bull (capital) s w/ a hit that is going on here? Good grief. Before you say it, shut your face.
huh? 
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 19180. (Read 26608317 times)
February 26, 2016, 01:48:56 AM
February 26, 2016, 01:43:59 AM
No TA-ta-tas in the the last 5+ pages, so this thread can suck me off ad infinitum and it wouldn't do shit for me. Can someone stand up and give us a decent standpoint besides the relentless Bull (capital) S w/ a hit that is going on here? Good grief. Before you say it, shut your face.
Vote Trump and stfu where no legit TA is up in here. do something positive and make a call.
Vote Trump and stfu where no legit TA is up in here. do something positive and make a call.
February 26, 2016, 01:41:50 AM
Everyone are arguing about the block size of a gimmicky currency. And I'm just sitting here.. making money on the smooth swings of the ETH market. It's currently probably better to keep away from buying ETH for a couple of days, but I will surely buy back. I truly like this market.
The bitcoin community is out of original and innovative ideas for development, so they spend their time quarreling about issues that should be solved much quicker. This is just slow and boring.
The bitcoin community is out of original and innovative ideas for development, so they spend their time quarreling about issues that should be solved much quicker. This is just slow and boring.
ya that project doesn't sound like it hurtling super fast towards a huge bug that kills it... nope.
February 26, 2016, 01:40:58 AM
JayJuanGee, now you are the one that is going bonkers.
Maybe it is like a contagious disease... ?
If you cured yours, then maybe you can suggest some remedy for some of us other folks who may catch it?
My suggestion would be for the BTC price to add $100, so that would be approximately $522.04, as I type.... I believe that kind of price movement could cure several of us of our blocksize limit discussion, at least temporarily.. until the price dumps back down to $444.
February 26, 2016, 01:38:30 AM
responding to adam's asserted agreement about segwit and 2mb blocksize limits "now".
what i meant is:
for now,i am happy with segwit ASAP + 2MB in about a year.
only because segwit is apparently the fastest way for a block increase and thats all i really want. i want more blockspace asap and i don't care how it gets done, and then i want the blocks to get bigger and bigger and bigger, until it breaks the internet.
That's fair enough.
I did technically sparse your words a bit to emphasize the "now" portion of what you had said... hahahahahaha...
Seg wit is probably going to be amazing... but I doubt that it is going to get rid of the fud.. and probably, there are going to be a few unexpected implementation issues... I mean, this kind of thing is dealing with money and value and is not going to just come off seamless....
what, passing a battery of tests != safe impl.
lol! of course not...with so many lines of code, segwit is a little dangerous... it's hard to say what holes it could potentially create without knowing wtf segwit is.
we must TRUST our devs.
February 26, 2016, 01:36:00 AM
Everyone are arguing about the block size of a gimmicky currency. And I'm just sitting here.. making money on the smooth swings of the ETH market. It's currently probably better to keep away from buying ETH for a couple of days, but I will surely buy back. I truly like this market.
The bitcoin community is out of original and innovative ideas for development, so they spend their time quarreling about issues that should be solved much quicker. This is just slow and boring.
The bitcoin community is out of original and innovative ideas for development, so they spend their time quarreling about issues that should be solved much quicker. This is just slow and boring.
February 26, 2016, 01:34:57 AM
Why? I am talking substance here responding to your various points (that you snipped out).
February 26, 2016, 01:30:15 AM
responding to adam's asserted agreement about segwit and 2mb blocksize limits "now".
what i meant is:
for now,i am happy with segwit ASAP + 2MB in about a year.
only because segwit is apparently the fastest way for a block increase and thats all i really want. i want more blockspace asap and i don't care how it gets done, and then i want the blocks to get bigger and bigger and bigger, until it breaks the internet.
That's fair enough.
I did technically sparse your words a bit to emphasize the "now" portion of what you had said... hahahahahaha...
Seg wit is probably going to be amazing... but I doubt that it is going to get rid of the fud.. and probably, there are going to be a few unexpected implementation issues... I mean, this kind of thing is dealing with money and value and is not going to just come off seamless....
February 26, 2016, 01:29:06 AM
JayJuanGee, now you are the one that is going bonkers.
February 26, 2016, 01:28:19 AM
Loss of censorship resistance is a bigger problem than lack of scalability. Classic addresses that. Core doesn't.
A vote for Core is a vote for the Communist Party of China. That's not sloganeering. That's a direct consequence of not fixing mining concentration.
People are sick of arguing over blocksize? Fine. Let's argue over this.
People may want to invest in a crypto controlled by the biggest currency manipulators in the world, but if they do, they'll make me rich in the process. Somehow, judging by the slipping value of the yuan, I doubt that will happen.
Like I said, it's my chain. If you want it, you're going to have to pay for it. Or you can get cheap coins by helping us with the Classic option and then taking advantage of the market turbulence as the tide shifts. If Classic wins, expect a good chunk of those millions pouring into Etherium and other blockchain solutions to find their way into Bitcoin instead. Those cheap coins may not stay cheap very long.
Your call, really. I can live with either outcome. That's the advantage of being hedged.
A vote for Core is a vote for the Communist Party of China. That's not sloganeering. That's a direct consequence of not fixing mining concentration.
People are sick of arguing over blocksize? Fine. Let's argue over this.
People may want to invest in a crypto controlled by the biggest currency manipulators in the world, but if they do, they'll make me rich in the process. Somehow, judging by the slipping value of the yuan, I doubt that will happen.
Like I said, it's my chain. If you want it, you're going to have to pay for it. Or you can get cheap coins by helping us with the Classic option and then taking advantage of the market turbulence as the tide shifts. If Classic wins, expect a good chunk of those millions pouring into Etherium and other blockchain solutions to find their way into Bitcoin instead. Those cheap coins may not stay cheap very long.
Your call, really. I can live with either outcome. That's the advantage of being hedged.
February 26, 2016, 01:27:51 AM
February 26, 2016, 01:26:03 AM
What the fuck are you talking about?
Is your point, anyhow related to the substance of anything I said in the post?
or are you just striving for some quasi-off-topic and irrelevant dig (which by the way would classify pretty strongly as an ad hominem attack, because there is no there, there in your assertion.?
Surely, BTC prices are relevant in this thread, but in that particular post that I just made, the topic was responding to adam's asserted agreement about segwit and 2mb blocksize limits "now".
Is your point, anyhow related to the substance of anything I said in the post?
or are you just striving for some quasi-off-topic and irrelevant dig (which by the way would classify pretty strongly as an ad hominem attack, because there is no there, there in your assertion.?
Surely, BTC prices are relevant in this thread, but in that particular post that I just made, the topic was responding to adam's asserted agreement about segwit and 2mb blocksize limits "now".
Yes, this is one instance where you can correctly hoist the ad hom flag.
Ok. so you admit it.
There's no real need, here, or really any time for an ad hominem attack, except if you are being disingenuous or trolling or you are getting emotional, and accordingly, you are resorting to weak (and irrelevant) arguments.
Don't you even know what an ad hominem attack is..? it tends to shed more negative light on the person who is making it, rather than it does on the target...
Same reason I view a blind man as incapable of performing a delicate surgery on my heart.
You are continuing to make little to no sense. I mean I agree about you regarding the hiring of skills necessary to competently carry out a job, but how that would justify your ad hominem attack, makes little to no sense.
But, I will roll with this suggestion a little bit, just for shits and giggles.
O.k. I've probably explained my $1,200 BTC purchase a large number of times, and went into fairly detailed explanation in this thread and likely other parts of this forum. I am not ashamed of the context of such purchase, and I don't think that it says much about me except for that was the time when I first got into bitcoin.
I don't invest balls to the walls, and I did not invest balls to the walls at the time. When I bought the 1.24 bitcoins at $1,200, I had about $30k that I had allocated to investing into bitcoin over 6 months, and my very first purchase used $1,500 of my 6 month allocation.
Whether you appreciate details or not, I will provide a few more, thereafter I invested the remaining $28,500 over the remainder of the 6 months, and I did end up going a bit over the $28,500, but my average price per BTC was around $630 at the end of the 6 months.
Yes, I am likely giving way more details than shit fucks like you who engage in ad hominem attacks, but likely does not share any personal details, except to spin bull shit made up stuff and to make up shit about how wonderful you are or on the other hand try to proclaim that you are smart and insightful because you invested in bitcoin or some other asset before some bubble... blah blah blah.
You've made it clear you're the agreeable type, fine.
bullshit. I made no such thing clear. You see when shit heads like you engage in ad hominem attacks, they also likely either have poor reading or comprehension skills in other regards and jump to faulty and inadequate conclusions.
More or less, I said that the burden of persuasion and the burden of production is on the one attempting to make the change to the status quo, and in this instance 1mb is the status quo.... classic, XT and other FUDster attempts at changing have not met either the burden of production nor the burden of persuasion... and therefore, they are not going to get their proposed change.
Probably, you don't really understand what I mean, because you are too busy assuming and thinking about other irrelevant facts or faulty logic.
You have an innate deference to authority figures, swell. Others see the incentives laid out clearly before them, and will call a spade a spade. Miners may be just as agreeable as you are, I guess we'll find out.
You are repeating yourself. You say that I am agreeable, and then you say it again and again in different ways, but you provide no facts or logic to support your conclusion that I am supposedly, "agreeable."
I already repeated my point in the above paragraph, so see above.
February 26, 2016, 01:17:37 AM
...
All of this presumes that Bitcoin has a monopoly.
Hint: It doesn't, and the market will punish you until you figure that out.
There is no altcoin that has efficiently solved the issue of scaling, near zero cost txs and and near zero cost abuse. If anything, they have worse of a problem due to being forced to go low-fee mode (to increase their adoption) at the expense of getting abused.
Dear guy who uses a fake satoshi email from 2015 as a signature,
Satoshi thought it was a no-brainer that we'd gracefully scale up after 5 years of tech improvement...
It can be phased in, like:
if (blocknumber > 115000)
maxblocksize = largerlimit
It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.
When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.
if (blocknumber > 115000)
maxblocksize = largerlimit
It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.
When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.
Not quotable for "reasons"... but here's what he thought of your raspberry pi middle men:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6306
February 26, 2016, 01:12:26 AM
The only good news you need is right here:
If there are people who genuinely believe that THIS guy (Adam Back) is some kind of evil corporate lying back-stabbing individual, who runs an evil blockstream company that wants the bad of bitcoin, then they seriously need to readjust their evil-detecting radar.
ohh boy! and what if he signs with S.N. - Inventor of HashCash and BitCoin??
Huuhh
February 26, 2016, 01:10:15 AM
In a few months 12.5 BTC of subsidy will be cut. Can we have 330mb of extra block space to compensate with 1 cent fee txs? The answer is no. Even if price goes 10x, we still need 33mb blocks - which is also a no-go.
did you segwit that 330mb block ?
maybe miners will make fees min 5cents, and maybe they can survive on 8BTC
what block size do i need now, does it break the internets?
who cares? this is a problem for tomorrow...
baby steps, lets get segwit + 2MB blocks and then we can go ape shit again in a few years
February 26, 2016, 01:05:11 AM
...
All of this presumes that Bitcoin has a monopoly.
Hint: It doesn't, and the market will punish you until you figure that out.
There is no altcoin that has efficiently solved the issue of scaling, near zero cost txs and and near zero cost abuse. If anything, they have worse of a problem due to being forced to go low-fee mode (to increase their adoption) at the expense of getting abused.
February 26, 2016, 01:01:26 AM
...
All of this presumes that Bitcoin has a monopoly.
Hint: It doesn't, and the market will punish you until you figure that out.
February 26, 2016, 01:00:46 AM
February 26, 2016, 12:59:58 AM
responding to adam's asserted agreement about segwit and 2mb blocksize limits "now".
what i meant is:
for now,i am happy with segwit ASAP + 2MB in about a year.
only because segwit is apparently the fastest way for a block increase and thats all i really want. i want more blockspace asap and i don't care how it gets done, and then i want the blocks to get bigger and bigger and bigger, until it breaks the internet.
yes, bro! I still download the Internet right now. It's huge!
February 26, 2016, 12:55:57 AM
responding to adam's asserted agreement about segwit and 2mb blocksize limits "now".
what i meant is:
for now,i am happy with segwit ASAP + 2MB in about a year.
only because segwit is apparently the fastest way for a block increase and thats all i really want. i want more blockspace asap and i don't care how it gets done, and then i want the blocks to get bigger and bigger and bigger, until it breaks the internet.
Jump to: