Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 19368. (Read 26610718 times)

This must be how Edward Snowden feels.  





@BitUsher   I'm not even Catholic.

Yeah, that's why it's so insulting to have your honest opinion paint you as a government agent.

On the subject of book talking... don't pretend we don't know about the opinion agent referral bonus schema. 

I'm not going to make assumptions about you but it is of interest the GCHQ just was given explicit permission to break the law where others would be jailed kidnapped and tortured for similar actions-

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-35558349


They have been given the legal power to subvert, exploit, hack, spread trojans and viruses, introduce backdoors security vulnerabilities, and invade peoples privacy without a warrant. This double standard is highly offensive and we all should consider the GCHQ our enemy.

Hey, congratulations. You're now an official enemy of Bitcoin. That's pretty cool when you think about it. If you're not already getting paid by 3/4 letter agencies let me know and I'll put in a good word for you.

Be warned though that you'll be kept out in the cold to an extent. You won't be invited to any golf games or garden parties because the Blockstream guys get the main perks.

I'm not hating on anyone, including you, Cconvert2G36.  

O.k., sometimes it may seem that I am hating a bit on BJA, but really, I believe that I am hating more on the substance of BJA's posts rather than on him.... .. but sometimes when he or others become so ridiculous and repetitive in their content, it sometimes will begin to seem more personal than I mean my response to be.


I try to be very open to any discussions of meaningful and/or trivial topics, so long as we are attempting to grapple with real, rather than made up facts... so long as we are attempting to apply actual rather than made up logic.

Sometimes there can be troubles, however, when we are grappling in our attempts to understand facts that are presented to us, which may sometimes lead us to employing bad logic based on emotion rather that real attempts at resolution(s).

This sinister sounding abbreviation keeps popping up.


I really ought to know what this is I'm a part of.

Coin



Explanation

I'm hardly like BJA because I am not really trying to sell anything or to talk my book or to brag in various ways,... which BJA seems to attempt a lot.

Surely, I am overall bullish about bitcoin, and I am expecting it's price to go upwards in the longer term (and so I do not buy any supposed "bleed" hypothesis, but I do not really know and I am open to learn if the evidence seems to support that direction. 

Accordingly, I participate in these forums in order to be interactive in my learning with other participants about bitcoin and discussing my attempts to invest in accordance with my perspective and my risk profile, and if the evidence begins to support that I need to shift my investment or to reallocate towards some other crypto, then I don't have a problem doing that, if I am able to identify it soon enough to make such a move seem feasible (which sometimes, there may be transfer expenses and losses).

I am not engaging in discussions in this forum in any attempt to push the short term BTC price direction and/or to propagandize regarding any kind of short term bet that I may have or trying to compete with anyone regarding whether I am correct in my views or regarding my BTC holdings and/or my claims to profits.  Accordingly, if I can learn from various posts, then I find that helpful.

In recent times, I had claimed to be neutral regarding whether a hard fork needed to occur and even regarding the possible implementation of classic or XT... but as time has evolved and I have read up about these potential pushes towards a hard fork, I have gone over to viewing those pushes for hardforks as being overly coercive, unnecessary and bully type behavior.  My mind is not closed on the topic; however, that seems to be my current leanings, especially coming from some readings of threads in the forum and my participation as well.

agreed, it seem that 450 is the target near term.

You think I would give a shit about any of this if I wasn't net long?

hahaha hate on buddy 

Would like nothing more than to solve this dispute and go back to juvenile market banter, remember those happy days?

     

The price is likely to rise again on Monday as China gets back from holiday, combined with the fact that gold seemed to have bottomed and started to increase, and the Yuan is supposed to be devalued by like 30-40%, so I went all in at $375 and already up $10 a coin.  No matter how much bullshit BJA says, there are too many positive external factors on price right now to be that dangerous to hold.  The Yuan devaluation thing alone is yuge and might turn out to just be shoveling free money at you by holding BTC.

A halving + huge yuan devaluation at the same time?  Are you shitting me?  It's like god himself is trying to increase the BTC price.  Even if the blockchain stopped and never worked again it would probably go up.

Than the solution to this dilemma is to do more testing , grow our market share with users, write more software, startup more businesses faster than the other alts. Its still too early to know how to solve our problems or what a fee market event will look like... the only thing we can do is innovate and create redundancy plans.... This does mean we should try and strengthen other implementations(I don't know If I can ever agree on a low threshold for a HF though )

I understand , the above is easier said than done.

You either are attempting to get it or you are not.


You are likely not to have any run ins with me, so long as you are at least attempting to provide fact based posts and attempts at logical opinions and conclusions. 

On the other hand, when you seem to be talking your book or coming to various illogical and provocative conclusions, then you are likely going to receive some haters..   hahahaha     

You have been away for a while.


You really expect BullyJA to tell the truth?

 



 

You're leaving out permanent off chain solutions. You might have seen the alt markets lately... This is not a space without competitive pressure, open source code vs periodic table.

I think your final point is true, the questions are when, and at what cost?

Block reward is the manna to consume while eating everyone else's lunch with unmatched utility. More capacity, more fees, and the inflation curve is ridden with ease.

I'm not against secondary layers, nor structural changes with demonstrated utility, they will be absolutely mandatory for massive scale. However, they build on Bitcoin, sacrifices shouldn't be made to do it the other way around.

@JJG, don't be like BJA, it's not a crisis where everything explodes and fails all at once... it's a slow bleed away of utility and potential.

There has also been new more efficient asics deployed.  I have no way of knowing what portion of the increase is due to what.

If things go as usual the bull run should happen right before I get fresh fiat next month
@ the world revolves around me

Yeah, a crash of 20%, even after there had already been, more or less a crash of 20%... so that looks like about 40% under the Tzupy "bull-ish" scenario.

Regarding the part that I bolded above, I am a little bit unclear about your apparent desire to be combative on these various points.  It is like you are buying into some kind of argument that bitcoin is in a state of emergency and that there's got to be a hardfork, or else we are screwed.

Hello?  How could there have to be a hardfork in order to achieve a technological limitations issue... That 1mb versus 2mb technological change is likely not a big deal, and there seems to be absolutely no need for a hardfork in order to achieve such technological change.

In fact, it appears that the ONLY reason for a hard fork, rather than a soft fork, is because one part is trying to force the issue and therefore to cause some kind of precedent for being able to make emergency changes via non-consensus, and there is no need to force any issue because a large majority already agrees more or less that an increase will be needed at some point.  There is no rush to create a timeline blah blah blah.. because seg wit is right around the corner, and seg wit should be incorporated first in order to see how that plays out, and thereafter, after seg wit has been incorporated for a few months, then likely there can be additional and/or lengthy investigation into the impact and possibly even a timeline for causing some kind of block size increase, and again no need to hard fork such a decision, unless you are attempting to take away consensus decision making and to attempt to rule from a smaller group of peeps.

This gone be good.