Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 19399. (Read 26609709 times)
February 08, 2016, 03:18:05 PM
Or never happen....
BTC is holding up ok in this medium term down move (and oscillators are bottoming).
February 08, 2016, 03:02:48 PM
February 08, 2016, 03:02:06 PM
http://www.coindesk.com/private-satoshi-roundtable-bitcoin-exec-scaling-debate/
sounds like a bilderberg meeting,lol
sounds like a bilderberg meeting,lol
yep.. i wasnt supposed say anything but since u mentioned it.... i will be there too... i will be speaking about how " bitcoin does not scale, and that until it does scale, it still doesnt scale " .. and then i will roll out the BitcoinPure fork of mega-chains of 12M blocks ready for Golden Week of Chinese Bears..................... assuming everyone at the Satoshi Round Table is on board with the plan ... if we have consensus, then right as we fork the network we will have Coinbase, in conjunction with BFX and the chinese exchanges PUMP the lightneing chain forks of the secret bitcoins we are going to release ... at that point we will be able to collect more fees since we will have multiple lightening forks of bitcoins and mega-chains of 12M blocks ...
phase two will then be happen: we will have billyjoe raid all five lightning forks of mega-blocks with the #FourPunchRaiders to cause massive volatility to attract newb traders to the ligthening forks during the Golden Week of Chinese Bears . once we have all this in place, finally, we will .. all of us .. buy boats and rule the world from right here from 'wall of observer thread' of bitcoin forum. everyone except juangee ... we are going to 'blockchain blacklist' him during the purification ... lol..... its going to be exciting times for all ye landlubbin HODLERS!!
To the extent that there is any substance in your above fantasy post.... you appear to be in a bit of a lala land to think that there is any kind of "we" going on in bitcoin. Bitcoin is structured in a such a way that it is peer to peer and decentralized and there are going to be a variety of ins and outs and in the end, as it expands, it will likely involve all types (good, bad and ugly).... well at least hopefully fungibility will be preserved in such a way that blacklisting is not any kind of meaningful dynamic.
Lots of interesting times ahead indeed to see how some of this plays out regarding whether BTC is a storage of value or a currency or something else and to what degree.
juangee... its a joke post dumbass.......... the fact your tiny brain could not detect SARCASM proves your doing nothing but trolling people that you disagree with in this thread . first week of February is in LALA land and still your precious coin still cannot scale . ...what a joke that btc is a store of value ..... there aint gonna be NOTHING for anyone with bitcoin until it can scale.. period .
Jokes and sarcasm is not lost upon me, and in essence your whole participation in this thread seems to be a kind of joke with your superficial dumbass claims.
Yes Bitcoin has been suffering some downward price pressures and we also suffered for about 10 months with btc prices hovering largely in the $200s.
We are doing quite well right now, and we appear to be on a fairly clear path for Segway implementation and likely some other reasonable scaling solutions thereafter, to the extent they may be needed.
Accordingly, the Bitcoin network already seems quite prepared for a 20x to 40x increase in today's price in the coming months, if there were such a surge in prices.
Even though the current contents of your posts seem pretty ridiculous, they are likely to appear even more ridiculous as some of these already vetted solutions are implemented and additional potential solutions are continuing to be considered be core developers to the extent that those solutions may be good for Bitcoin.
In the end there seems to be considerable consensus, as well, that softforks are the preferred path forward, to the extent that they can be attained and so long as there's no emergency requiring a hardfork, which seems to be the current status of the Bitcoin space.
until bitcoin scales.. it still doesn't... amazing how that concept is ridiculous and hard for you to understand.
February 08, 2016, 03:01:33 PM
i got my bids in the 320s
February 08, 2016, 03:01:20 PM
February 08, 2016, 03:00:03 PM
if kraken goes down.. we can expect a PUMP to $500 . (oops i did it again, i used "we" again, juangee gonna go into full retard again trying to figure out who i am talking about)
February 08, 2016, 02:54:31 PM
Not really, because you know what?
ASICminer is the actually doing really well on Havelock. Best volume, too.
https://www.havelockinvestments.com/fund.php?symbol=AM100
Caveat: There is no such thing as ASICminer. Hasn't been for years. Because failed & ran away.
February 08, 2016, 02:49:45 PM
February 08, 2016, 02:46:38 PM
are we still above 350???
February 08, 2016, 02:46:14 PM
Classic only has 2 experienced developers maintaining it where Core has 45.
[...]
Logically, supporting Classic doesn't make much sense.
[...]
Logically, supporting Classic doesn't make much sense.
Maybe you haven't noticed, but nowadays it is startups who actually innovate an have the ability and agility to jump into tiny gaps (in other words, they closely listen to the users or offer an unique feature).
As always, startups are quickly consumed by the big boys when they get somewhat successful: consider Classic as a great opportunity to safely figure out what the market wants. If successful, the 2mb feature will be adopted. A win-win situation I would say.
I think that I kind of understand your point regarding start-ups, and surely your description works fairly well when discussing dynamics of a variety of centralized institutions competing against each other for market share and frequently that is going to result in a lot of failures and a lot of amateur mistakes and also, sometimes targeting by vulture capitalists to "turn around" the project - whether that makes the project better or not.
You start up analogy seems to be somewhat week, when you seem to be attempting to describe centralized attributes to persons on the core developing team and bitcoin miners, etc. These are decentralized dynamics, and even though some better ways may be introduced, the open sourced nature of bitcoin allows for the adoption of better ideas in order to avoid "hostile" and/or centralized-like attempts at take overs.
February 08, 2016, 02:40:17 PM
Classic is just Core with at 2mb block size limit and a governance coup that will alienate our best devs.
FTFY.
And don't forget 2mb blocks + segwit hurts decentralization (because of bandwidth/storage constraints).
Your post failed to mention segwit. Why is that?
Are you unaware segwit exists, is being tested, and approximates the tps increase of 100% block size increase?
Or are you lying by omission?
Wow, I guess I said a lot.
I like segregated witness and hope it gets implemented. It is a safer bet since it's a soft fork. I like the lightning network as presented and hope it works out as well. I think that all of these updates will have more time to be properly implemented if the 2mb block limit is implemented so there is no rush which could cause mistakes to be made.
But you are correct in that I am unaware of many things when it comes to the development. I do have some trust in developers making a sound decision hopefully based upon math and logic instead of listening to the peanut gallery turning it into a political process. I upgraded for the last fork and was pleased that the developers came up with a solution. I have confidence that it will work out again.
I actually do enjoy political discourse but do not care to get down to that level of the Bitcoin protocol. When IPv4 was being developed I'm sure there were a lot of developer and technical discussions about various bits to reserve for which features, security concerns, worries about running out of addresses, etc. But even though I know all about IPv4 down to the bit level I would rather use the Internet than sit around and discuss the tiny nuances of it. I have confidence that the geeks who deal with it on a daily basis can make better decisions on it than I can.
I leave the block size debate back to those that are really passionate about it and I'll go back to using bitcoins.
February 08, 2016, 02:13:18 PM
And the stampeding herds of noisy Gavinista Lolcows are more comedy than adversity.
This made me smile. You guys are funny at times.
Can we all just shut up for a minute and HODL
This is literally what we should all be doing 'FOR NOW'
February 08, 2016, 02:01:26 PM
February 08, 2016, 01:22:16 PM
Can we all just shut up for a minute and HODL
I don't think the village idiots are open to reasonable requests.
February 08, 2016, 01:22:08 PM
And the stampeding herds of noisy Gavinista Lolcows are more comedy than adversity.
February 08, 2016, 01:20:36 PM
Can we all just shut up for a minute and HODL
February 08, 2016, 01:01:30 PM
February 08, 2016, 12:28:00 PM
...
Segwit and classic have practically similar 0-0.25MB difference capacity differences , with segwit allowing for better longterm scaling by fixing tx malleability(something that is required for payment channels to progress) .
Logically, supporting Classic doesn't make much sense.
Segwit and classic have practically similar 0-0.25MB difference capacity differences , with segwit allowing for better longterm scaling by fixing tx malleability(something that is required for payment channels to progress) .
Logically, supporting Classic doesn't make much sense.
TL;DR: Classic takes an existing kludge (1MB limit) and changes it to 2MB. No complexity added.
Core keeps the existing kludge (1MB limit), and *adds another, horrendously convoluted kludge, just to keep the *other* kludge*.
In technical circles, this sort of thing is called "fucking retarded," "a patch on a patch."
The 1MB limit is a sanity check to prevent DOS attacks, not a kludge.
You clearly have never coded a line, iCICLE, because that's the very essence of a kludge.
It's an afterthought, a conditional meant to discount information that's clearly out of range, in this case 1MB worth of data when a few kb is the most that's expected under normal, non-DoS circumstances.
It's quick, it's dirty, and, like all magic number fixes, it works great til shit change. And then it don't. Hence kludge.
Quote
It is also a serendipitous supply demarcation line useful for establishing fee markets.
Eww! Sounds like a used lingerie store. They teach you to talk like that at "Lrn 2 talk like an aging divorcee impressing the pants off her plumber" school? FFS, icicle...
February 08, 2016, 12:26:12 PM
That's why I say, only if that is the change.
Frankly I don't understand why it would need many coders or time to change a line of code from 1mb to 2mb. I can do it quickly, just give me an hour, grep and vi.
I don't want to support a hard fork that does anything but the block size change. Throwing in last minute changes along with it is similar to politicians throwing in their shitty little laws here and there with major laws that everyone supports.
Frankly I don't understand why it would need many coders or time to change a line of code from 1mb to 2mb. I can do it quickly, just give me an hour, grep and vi.
I don't want to support a hard fork that does anything but the block size change. Throwing in last minute changes along with it is similar to politicians throwing in their shitty little laws here and there with major laws that everyone supports.
There are indeed more changes to Classic than you are implying... There necessarily has to be because simply changing maxBlockSize from 1,000,000 bytes to 2,000,000 bytes would be dangerously irresponsible and introduce new attack vectors.
Here is a list of the changes done -
https://github.com/gavinandresen/bips/blob/92e1efd0493c1cbde47304c9711f13f413cc9099/bip-bump2mb.mediawiki
What I find most deplorable about these changes is the 75% threshold and extremely small 28 day window which goes against the miners wishes of 90% . Even Bitmain's CEO believes this is too small. Softforks require 95% mining consensus for goodness sake and they want to push through a contentious hardfork at 75%.... This is essentially a political coup.
Good points.
Sure, Classic is "just a simple 2MB patch." And some new sigop-bothering cruft. And a contentious hard fork, done at "75%" (variance notwithstanding) with one month for everyone to upgrade. And a political coup.
It's very simple. As long as you ignore the new 20k/block sigop limit, the optimally dangerous hard fork, and the core-dev-alienating governance coup.
These Gavinistas are either fucking idiots, fucking liars, or both.
Well, you are both, so what are the symptoms? And please don't start ranting about that thai "girl" and your spotted dick again. I'm pretty sure that's unrelated.
February 08, 2016, 12:21:09 PM
The facts:
If half a million people wanted to send a single bitcoin to another address the same day, THEY COULD NOT ALL DO IT, NO MATTER HOW HIGH A FEE THEY PAID.
People know this and so we do not buy bitcoin. This is why the price is falling. Price will continue to fall or stagnate until capacity is raised.
If half a million people wanted to send a single bitcoin to another address the same day, THEY COULD NOT ALL DO IT, NO MATTER HOW HIGH A FEE THEY PAID.
People know this and so we do not buy bitcoin. This is why the price is falling. Price will continue to fall or stagnate until capacity is raised.
What? I was not aware the scaling problem was so high!
Why are most people saying that everything is fine and that scaling will come then? It's really not going to help bitcoin adoption! Especially considering how many transaction are made everyday that are "automatic transactions" like faucets or games that are added to the human exchanges.
Most people are not saying everything is fine. The people who are saying that either want to sell before the price crashes again or are attempting to prevent or stall scaling. They are a minority.
your using common sense ... we expect the price to fall due to the scaling problem dragging out and more versions of bitcoin forks being created.. however, your forgetting the Marshal's Auction Pump 2015 when bitcoin should have went down but instead soared to $500.. i think they are attempting to cover the Marshal's Auction Pump is why this is staying up over $300 .. think about it.. the Marshal's auctioned all those coins out for much more than they were actually worth at the time of the auction.
First. Who the fuck is this "we" that you are referring to? Do you have a rock in your pocket?
Second. Your ongoing illusory painting of a us marshals pump makes no logical sense , and makes you look like a bigger looney than you already are. The us govt has trillions of dollars that they pump and print in a variety of ways, and they would love to hand onto such system for a mother 100 years if possible. Bitcoin brings a variety challenges to traditional fiat systems and it would really be in the us govt interest to bolster such decentralization and empowering of people regarding their money, which is intrinsic towns increasing Bitcoin market cap(reflected in bitcoins price). Helrow??
Jump to: