Monkey vision: Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.
You know this is wrongThat makes me feel better about my buy @ 427
Best wishes to you and Monkey
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 19785. (Read 26610987 times)
December 21, 2015, 06:49:41 PM
That makes me feel better about my buy @ 427
Best wishes to you and Monkey
December 21, 2015, 06:48:43 PM
they have tried ... they have fail.
December 21, 2015, 06:46:57 PM
Monkey vision: Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.
You know this is wrongThe wrong bit was you keeping that monkey in a cage forcing it to watch Bitccoin charts.
And giving it Rage Virus was probably against an international convention or two.
December 21, 2015, 06:42:01 PM
Monkey vision: Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.
You know this is wrongThe wrong bit was you keeping that monkey in a cage forcing it to watch Bitccoin charts.
December 21, 2015, 06:37:36 PM
@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree.
Quote
The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.
The network is ridiculously oversecure for it's current market cap. How many goddamn exaflops or whatever?
You might be able to snow the noobs with technobabble but I've been around too long. I'm not buying.
Security is the most important feature. Without a block subsidy today the Bitcoin network would be extremely insecure. The subsidy is going to go away. I want Bitcoin to work long term. It doesnt seem that those that want to increase the block size want that....
You don't overinsure a house for fire damage. It's called "moral hazard" and it makes the house statistically MORE likely to burn. You don't put a $1000 case ona $100 phone. It means someone will be MORE likely to steal it. If you put too much armor on an armored truck, you limit it's cargo capacity to the point that you have to make two trips INCREASING the chance of losing the cargo. There IS such a thing as too much security.
December 21, 2015, 06:36:16 PM
December 21, 2015, 06:34:48 PM
Monkey vision: Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.
You know this is wrongCONFIRMED
December 21, 2015, 06:29:07 PM
Monkey vision: Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.
You know this is wrong
December 21, 2015, 06:28:56 PM
If colored coins, title transfers, and timestamps are out, it's just a less useful technology.
Yeah I mean we could fit the world's data in the blockchain and it would be very useful and stuff when it reached a few zillionbytes, but guess what... it doesn't scale and it becomes unusable. When you go for too much you may end up losing even the basic functionality:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.28935
Obviously Satoshi was a cripplecoiner for not wanting his bird to fly as high as it could... so much untapped potential wasted. Right?
December 21, 2015, 06:27:56 PM
@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree.
Quote
The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.
The network is ridiculously oversecure for it's current market cap. How many goddamn exaflops or whatever?
You might be able to snow the noobs with technobabble but I've been around too long. I'm not buying.
Security is the most important feature. Without a block subsidy today the Bitcoin network would be extremely insecure. The subsidy is going to go away. I want Bitcoin to work long term. It doesnt seem that those that want to increase the block size want that....
December 21, 2015, 06:24:41 PM
@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree.
Quote
The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.
The network is ridiculously oversecure for it's current market cap. How many goddamn exaflops or whatever?
You might be able to snow the noobs with technobabble but I've been around too long. I'm not buying.
I've heard it's way oversecure. Good point. Idk.
I'm not trying to snow a n00b.
December 21, 2015, 06:21:11 PM
@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree.
Quote
The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.
The network is ridiculously oversecure for it's current market cap. How many goddamn exaflops or whatever?
You might be able to snow the noobs with technobabble but I've been around too long. I'm not buying.
December 21, 2015, 06:18:31 PM
You smallblock cripplecoiners don't get it. I can't lose. If the price goes down, it's a market rejection of your vision. If it goes up, I can sell. I don't have to buy another single bitcoin now.
Whenever something sells on Bitquick, I can rebuy with my trading account cash on BFX. When that runs out, I'll start selling from cold storage. I can sell for a looooong time before I run out. I got your asses.
Whenever something sells on Bitquick, I can rebuy with my trading account cash on BFX. When that runs out, I'll start selling from cold storage. I can sell for a looooong time before I run out. I got your asses.
December 21, 2015, 06:18:13 PM
Didn't see Gavin's name on that list.
I'm just glad to see BtcDrak on the list. The Viacoin guy is essential.
I didn't see lambie though.
December 21, 2015, 06:03:33 PM
@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree.
Quote
The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.
of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block
reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a
type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin
network.
December 21, 2015, 06:00:33 PM
December 21, 2015, 05:33:48 PM
If colored coins, title transfers, and timestamps are out, it's just a less useful technology.
Screw this. Taking the megawatt rating of the network into account, there is an effective >$3 cost per transaction now. If we moved to 8 MB blocks, that cost per transaction would go down to ~40 cents. You expect holders to subsidize transactions at that cost? Not me. Not for bogus reasons.
Screw this. Taking the megawatt rating of the network into account, there is an effective >$3 cost per transaction now. If we moved to 8 MB blocks, that cost per transaction would go down to ~40 cents. You expect holders to subsidize transactions at that cost? Not me. Not for bogus reasons.
December 21, 2015, 05:33:33 PM
Blockstream has reached consensus on Blockstream's future plans for Bitcoin. (2 weeks ago)
Don't like it? Fork off.
Don't like it? Fork off.
December 21, 2015, 05:20:18 PM
Didn't see Gavin's name on that list.
December 21, 2015, 05:19:53 PM
Didn't see Gavin's name on that list.
He's probably on the phone asking his NSA handler
Jump to: