Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 19560. (Read 26609705 times)

With the indirection of the aggregator in between, I don't think most customers will give it a second thought. Quick - what actual bank underwrites your 'Best Buy' or 'Frontier Airlines' credit card?

You may wish to ponder his assertion that it is unlikely that anyone will customize a client to provide pushbutton 'rescind payment' abilities. If we have learned anything about script kiddies, it is that there are plenty who destroy only for the lulz of watching the world burn.

hahahaha...

I just have to read about some of these various phenomena in the history books and hear from some of you peeps in the forums (and maybe some day I will meet more people in real life - not so many people in my real life have bitcoin backgrounds).

In essence in early 2013, I was too busy gazing at my own navel and other aspects of my own real life, and even though I had heard the word bitcoin several times before, the reality of the matter is that to the best of my recollection, I did not really notice any meaningful live details about bitcoin until sometime in November 2013.....

Seems that cannot go back in time and change personal experiences, because I have already kept attempting to drudge up in my own memory what I knew or recall hearing about bitcoin before November 2013, and really, there is no real substance of any memory there... so, it is what it is... no?

Hate to bust your chops on this, but that would be 'dogs and cats... _living_ together...'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3ZOKDmorj0

Don't know. If so, then how could those BTC be lent to others?

I have stayed away from BFX all these years, as its entire biz model seems predicated upon systemic risk of fractional reserve moral hazard. What am I missing?

Well, maybe then I should stop waiting for $372, and buy a little more at $374...  because surely anything below $392 is going to seem to be a bargain...  hahahaha..

And some of us watched -- fascinated -- as it unfolded in real time.

I consider myself to be really fucking skeptical about people and not trusting them to be generous to me without having various selfish motives; however, at the same time, if I sit down with anyone, I consider that people generally are attempting to make various contributions to society beyond their selfish motives, and that both selfish motives and contribution can live side by side and simultaneously.

In other words, if you actually sit down with people or hear them out in various ways, they are not all trying to get ahead by screwing everyone else like you seem to attribute to a large majority of public bitcoin figures. 

Maybe we can draw an analogy with cops?  Cops have a lot of power, and surely some police forces are more corrupt than others, but frequently, if they are getting paid a decent salary, for example in the USA, then less than a few percent of them are going to be with bad motives, even though frequently when bad incidents are occurring, a larger majority are painted as corrupt.

Surely, sometimes we can agree that some of the folks are just evil or they have become evil, and Karpeles may be one of those figures, but even though Charlie Shrem has been convicted, he shouldn't necessarily be considered as evil.. .and even Brock Pierce has been accused of a lot of negative things, but he generally seems to have a large number of contributions to bitcoin.  Maybe it's not easy to get caught up in various personalities because I generally do not want to get caught up in that and I prefer to see ideas and contributions, and yes, if there comes out some specific facts that may demonstrate that someone is not acting in good faith, such as Mike Hearn's public temper tantrum, then his personal motives may become an issue in my thinking about whether s/he is acting in good faith to contribute rather than destroy.

And, yes, I have some bias in that I want bitcoin to succeed in a variety of ways, and not only because of my own probable financial gain in its success but also because I believe that bitcoin has a lot to offer in a variety of ways that are currently unknown and on a weekly basis, i am still learning about bitcoin and its variety of contributions towards making a more interesting world.

Close. But omits illustrative detail. BU block size limit is whatever the emergent consensus of the entire network is, configured by means of each user setting their own block size limit value.

ha. haha. Haha. HahaHa. HaHa HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Ha.


Oh - you had me going there for a bit.

Every coin that they withdraw before the fork ends up being one coin on each chain after the fork. If they leave one coin on the exchange, there is likely no existing contractual agreement that the exchange might grant them back one coin on chain A, while keeping the one coin on chain B for itself.

OH TEH NOEZ CORE GETTIN REKT FOR REAL DIS TIME

He's talking about this...


But neglects to give what Chun said earlier.  

Not long ago.

I'd advise you act quickly.  

It is not clear whether the USD (or BTC) volume of the settlement traffic will be 100% of the USD (or BTC) volume of LN payments.  IIUC, the LN will not only aggregate payments but will also cancel opposite or circular payments.  Or maybe not, not sure.

Settlements between banks have lots of cancellation, so they are much less than the total volume of interbank bank wires issued by clients.  It would be a shame if the LN cannot not do that

The personalities in "bitcon space" are fascinating, quite unlike those of other communities I have known in the past 30+ years of forum surfing.  Most in a negative way, unfortunately.  People like Mark Karpelès, Danny Brewster, the BFL gang, the Bitcoin Foundation, and many other far too numerous to list.  

I cannot avoid taking sides in the block size limit war.  I am not exactly a fan of Mike and Gavin, but on the other hand I cannot find anything good to say about the Blocstream guys.  Not about character, not about ethics, not about respect for the project and its users, not even about competence.  Bankruptcy is the least they deserve.

A couple days ago, Luke-Jr trolled BitcoinClassic by posting a pull request that would change the PoW algorithm to make it impossible to mine with ASICs.  I then proposed that the Core devs do that on Core.  It was meant to be a just counter-trolling.  But it seems that Greg and Luke-Jr are seriously dreaming the option of doing just that in case the miners switch to Classic.  It is Idiocracy II -- but with bitcoin!

It certainly does matter to the customer. Customers will chose a BTC LN over an alt LN for the same reasons they (usually) choose BTC over alts. Those are well known so I will not repeat them.

Regarding the idea of a completely uncollateralized fiat payment network, I already answered that, twice. If people want that they will just use existing fiat networks. LN offers nothing special to them at all (nor does Bitcoin in any form, or alts).

Hum, so... 144*7=1008 or approx one week of block size data



Not really sure what to make of that. About 50 (around 5%) empty blocks, 220 (around 20%) full blocks and a fairly boring distribution over the rest of the sizes with some rather odd spikes at 25%, 75%, 93% and 95%. Of these, the 75% has an obvious explanation. I wonder if the others are pool specific.

Coin



Explanation

Crypto is done!!!