Coin
Explanation
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 19924. (Read 26608056 times)
December 10, 2015, 02:00:52 AM
December 10, 2015, 01:51:43 AM
I've always known btc had a lot of technical quirks that require either a fork or the continuation of Moore's law or both. The blocksize of all things, at first impression, seems like one of the more minor issues that could be solved with some kind of fork.
You'd think so, wouldn't you? The problem is that there is ideological as well as technical reasons both for and against any scaling solution/change. There isn't anything close to a consensus and network traffic keeps growing. Some are even hoping to overload the network in order to create a market for xaction fees. IMHO, that's madness that could catastrophically retard growth and adoption.
It's just a huge uncertainty that is difficult to price in.
December 10, 2015, 01:28:34 AM
here comes Mike Hearn's little free shit peed-in-my-pants panic derp army ... sheesh, when will you guys ever get half a clue? 
or how about posting some code to gihub with unit tests, math, simulations and well-reasoned arguments? ... nup, just we duh wunt mah-big-blocks massah.
or how about posting some code to gihub with unit tests, math, simulations and well-reasoned arguments? ... nup, just we duh wunt mah-big-blocks massah.
Hearn and Gavin already did that.
got my XT node up and running. It should have the whole chain downloaded by the time I get home from work.
Will Mike have time to maintain it after signing with r3cv? Did gavin take the reins?
I'm not against alternate implementations, but you must admit that core is a pretty competent group. A patched version of core with almost zero mining support is not going to happen. I guess it is a "vote" of sorts.
does this mean r3 is bitcoin ? -w-
December 10, 2015, 01:16:45 AM
Over the rally from $350 to $425, the bid walls on bfx steadily grew from 35k to 41k. Now suddenly they are down to 31k. Speculations?
Welcome back! My guess is there is hidden support the bid walls don't show and we're going to push higher, but I'm not confident enough to go farther long.
I really missed you. What's your take on the blocksize controversy?
Thanks.
I'm guessing that all of the whales on bfx make heavy use of the hidden order feature and that feature didn't exist on gox?
I haven't been back long enough to look into the blocksize issue and give an educated opinion. This is actually my first day back on the forum and I've only been watching btc for 2 weeks ever since a relative brought up some news article at the Thanksgiving table. This has mostly consisted of me staring at the charts and orders books on 1minute timeframe like a deer in the headlights. I really want to get a feeling for the current exchange landscape before I start trading again, if I start trading again. I'm not sure if I even trust the exchanges anymore or if I should just keep my coins on cold storage.
I've always known btc had a lot of technical quirks that require either a fork or the continuation of Moore's law or both. The blocksize of all things, at first impression, seems like one of the more minor issues that could be solved with some kind of fork.
December 10, 2015, 01:12:48 AM
here comes Mike Hearn's little free shit peed-in-my-pants panic derp army ... sheesh, when will you guys ever get half a clue?
or how about posting some code to gihub with unit tests, math, simulations and well-reasoned arguments? ... nup, just we duh wunt mah-big-blocks massah.
or how about posting some code to gihub with unit tests, math, simulations and well-reasoned arguments? ... nup, just we duh wunt mah-big-blocks massah.
Hearn and Gavin already did that.
got my XT node up and running. It should have the whole chain downloaded by the time I get home from work.
Will Mike have time to maintain it after signing with r3cv? Did gavin take the reins?
I'm not against alternate implementations, but you must admit that core is a pretty competent group. A patched version of core with almost zero mining support is not going to happen. I guess it is a "vote" of sorts.
December 10, 2015, 01:02:59 AM
How big would Facebook or Google be if they tried to sell advertising their first year? Smallblockers want to monetize too early, before we really even get off the ground. It's short-sighted.
We need new users now, fees later. Much later.
We need new users now, fees later. Much later.
December 10, 2015, 01:00:53 AM
December 10, 2015, 12:54:47 AM
here comes Mike Hearn's little free shit peed-in-my-pants panic derp army ... sheesh, when will you guys ever get half a clue?
or how about posting some code to gihub with unit tests, math, simulations and well-reasoned arguments? ... nup, just we duh wunt mah-big-blocks massah.
or how about posting some code to gihub with unit tests, math, simulations and well-reasoned arguments? ... nup, just we duh wunt mah-big-blocks massah.
Hearn and Gavin already did that.
got my XT node up and running. It should have the whole chain downloaded by the time I get home from work.
December 10, 2015, 12:50:26 AM
here comes Mike Hearn's little free shit peed-in-my-pants panic derp army ... sheesh, when will you guys ever get half a clue?
or how about posting some code to gihub with unit tests, math, simulations and well-reasoned arguments? ... nup, just we duh wunt mah-big-blocks massah.
or how about posting some code to gihub with unit tests, math, simulations and well-reasoned arguments? ... nup, just we duh wunt mah-big-blocks massah.
December 10, 2015, 12:49:44 AM
Low fee transactions could take days to confirm. Zero fee xactions may never confirm.
Sounds like it will finally work like it should be.
The blockchain is too valuable a resource to be wasted by zero and ridiculously low fee txs.
And it's not only scaling but usability too. If I have a 100mb block size and it takes me a couple of hours just to sync the last day or a day to sync the last week (before I send a payment), will this be usable? Or will people say, ah yes, now you lost the ability to run bitcoin-qt, just use a thin client...
That's either stupid or dishonest. Nobody is proposing 100 MB blocks and won't unless bandwidth gets much much greater. The design is for block reward to subsidize miners until the network grows big enough to be supported on fees. How is that possible with ~ half million xactions/day?
This is supposed to be a peer to peer network for the people, not <1 million elitists, criminals and middlemen.
December 10, 2015, 12:44:48 AM
Low fee transactions could take days to confirm. Zero fee xactions may never confirm.
Sounds like it will finally work like it should be.
The blockchain is too valuable a resource to be wasted by zero and ridiculously low fee txs.
And it's not only scaling but usability too. If I have a 100mb block size and it takes me a couple of hours just to sync the last day or a day to sync the last week (before I send a payment), will this be usable? Or will people say, ah yes, now you lost the ability to run bitcoin-qt, just use a thin client...
Stop with the hyperbole, a 2MB patch was offered, a 2-4-8 was proposed. All too dangerous... we need to rewrite the way the entire system works so that we can get 2-4MB with a soft fork. Not saying that SegWit isn't a good idea, but you shouldn't berate people for harboring a bit of frustration with the way the negotiations have gone, and with the incentives attached to those making the arguments.
December 10, 2015, 12:43:16 AM
Quote
It's one thing too see a need and an opportunity to profit in meeting it. It's quite another to make everybody sick before selling them the cure.
oh, i see you are in the conspiracy camp, I guess I should have known by your toxic tone on this issue.
How about you are just slow to the punch in recognising the technical limitations that network operates inside of and others, how shall we say, weren't so slow? And now it just looks like ugly envy and sour grapes manifesting as a political power struggle.
The limitations aren't technical. They're political. Why would I be envious of parasites? Bitcoin was supposed to free us from people like that.
the limitations are technical ... run the numbers before your mouth.
December 10, 2015, 12:39:47 AM
Quote
It's one thing too see a need and an opportunity to profit in meeting it. It's quite another to make everybody sick before selling them the cure.
oh, i see you are in the conspiracy camp, I guess I should have known by your toxic tone on this issue.
How about you are just slow to the punch in recognising the technical limitations that network operates inside of and others, how shall we say, weren't so slow? And now it just looks like ugly envy and sour grapes manifesting as a political power struggle.
The limitations aren't technical. They're political. Why would I be envious of parasites? Bitcoin was supposed to free us from people like that.
December 10, 2015, 12:35:05 AM
Low fee transactions could take days to confirm. Zero fee xactions may never confirm.
Sounds like it will finally work like it should be.
The blockchain is too valuable a resource to be wasted by zero and ridiculously low fee txs.
And it's not only scaling but usability too. If I have a 100mb block size and it takes me a couple of hours just to sync the last day or a day to sync the last week (before I send a payment), will this be usable? Or will people say, ah yes, now you lost the ability to run bitcoin-qt, just use a thin client...
December 10, 2015, 12:31:16 AM
220,000 transactions in last 24 hours. To me this is the real indicator bitcoin is going mainstream.
To me this is an indicator that we're going to hit the 1 MB limit before resolving the scaling issue. We're over half maximum capacity. If the network bogs down, people on the exchanges will turn to the only exit left: fiat. It will be Gox in reverse. Worldwide on every exchange.
Low fee transactions could take days to confirm. Zero fee xactions may never confirm. And what if some exchanges are running a fiat fractional reserve? They would have to liquidate BTC holdings to fill withdrawal requests, pushing prices down farther. Leveraged longs hit a margin call cascade. Miners forced to sell a larger percentage of mined coins to pay for electricity.
Nothing's been fixed. Nothing. 600,000 xactions/day could create a backlog that will never clear. Companies with business models that depend on low fees could dump everything and cut their losses.
You'd better pray we get the capacity up before we grow much more or we could crash so far that we lose first mover advantage and never recover. Don't think there aren't people waiting, wanting and actively working to make that happen.
... smells like a ripe opportunity, you should build a business to meet all this unmet demand you are predicting and make some serious bank. Say a lightning hub or sidechain for inter-exchange transactions?
Seems there is a certain highly placed and well funded competitor to kindly eat BJA's lunch in that arena.
December 10, 2015, 12:27:36 AM
Quote
It's one thing too see a need and an opportunity to profit in meeting it. It's quite another to make everybody sick before selling them the cure.
oh, i see you are in the conspiracy camp, I guess I should have known by your toxic tone on this issue.
How about you are just slow to the punch in recognising the technical limitations that network operates inside of and others, how shall we say, weren't so slow? And now it just looks like ugly envy and sour grapes manifesting as a political power struggle.
December 10, 2015, 12:15:39 AM
220,000 transactions in last 24 hours. To me this is the real indicator bitcoin is going mainstream.
To me this is an indicator that we're going to hit the 1 MB limit before resolving the scaling issue. We're over half maximum capacity. If the network bogs down, people on the exchanges will turn to the only exit left: fiat. It will be Gox in reverse. Worldwide on every exchange.
Low fee transactions could take days to confirm. Zero fee xactions may never confirm. And what if some exchanges are running a fiat fractional reserve? They would have to liquidate BTC holdings to fill withdrawal requests, pushing prices down farther. Leveraged longs hit a margin call cascade. Miners forced to sell a larger percentage of mined coins to pay for electricity.
Nothing's been fixed. Nothing. 600,000 xactions/day could create a backlog that will never clear. Companies with business models that depend on low fees could dump everything and cut their losses.
You'd better pray we get the capacity up before we grow much more or we could crash so far that we lose first mover advantage and never recover. Don't think there aren't people waiting, wanting and actively working to make that happen.
... smells like a ripe opportunity, you should build a business to meet all this unmet demand you are predicting and make some serious bank. Say a lightning hub or sidechain for inter-exchange transactions?
It's one thing too see a need and an opportunity to profit in meeting it. It's quite another to make everybody sick before selling them the cure.
December 10, 2015, 12:10:20 AM
Yay, btc continuing the upward trend.
I love it!
I love it!
December 10, 2015, 12:09:54 AM
220,000 transactions in last 24 hours. To me this is the real indicator bitcoin is going mainstream.
To me this is an indicator that we're going to hit the 1 MB limit before resolving the scaling issue. We're over half maximum capacity. If the network bogs down, people on the exchanges will turn to the only exit left: fiat. It will be Gox in reverse. Worldwide on every exchange.
Low fee transactions could take days to confirm. Zero fee xactions may never confirm. And what if some exchanges are running a fiat fractional reserve? They would have to liquidate BTC holdings to fill withdrawal requests, pushing prices down farther. Leveraged longs hit a margin call cascade. Miners forced to sell a larger percentage of mined coins to pay for electricity.
Nothing's been fixed. Nothing. 600,000 xactions/day could create a backlog that will never clear. Companies with business models that depend on low fees could dump everything and cut their losses.
You'd better pray we get the capacity up before we grow much more or we could crash so far that we lose first mover advantage and never recover. Don't think there aren't people waiting, wanting and actively working to make that happen.
... smells like a ripe opportunity, you should build a business to meet all this unmet demand you are predicting and make some serious bank. Say a lightning hub or sidechain for inter-exchange transactions?
December 10, 2015, 12:09:24 AM
Over the rally from $350 to $425, the bid walls on bfx steadily grew from 35k to 41k. Now suddenly they are down to 31k. Speculations?
Welcome back! My guess is there is hidden support the bid walls don't show and we're going to push higher, but I'm not confident enough to go farther long.
I really missed you. What's your take on the blocksize controversy?
Jump to: