All posts made by Cconvert2G36 in Bitcointalk's Wall Observer thread

If this bear market has been largely caused by Chinese miners that can do nothing with bitcoins except sell them, then it is likely to end when one of two things happen: Either they run out of stockpiled coins to sell over and above coins they are mining, or when the Chinese economy gets so bad that they realize that the killer app is to sneak out of the country with them.

Right now Bitcoins seems to be an answer in search of a problem: Most obviously capital controls in a world where capital is still largely mobile. When this situation changes, it is likely to be sudden and swift although the time frame is difficult to predict with any accuracy.

Miners aren't the ones selling in this market. It's pure speculative manipulation. A miner would never dump coins and cause the price to decline. They would sell the minimum number of coins necessary to cover costs at the best price possible and stock the rest for a much higher price.

Lets put this one to bed, miners are not dumping coins and they are certainly not doing them as a market order.

Best... Post... Recently.

Gotta agree with rolling. Miners are among the most optimistic of the bulls as a group.

It doesn't matter how optimistic miners are. Miners have to service their debt and to meet expenses just like everybody else. If you postpone selling because of a bear market, you can end up NEEDING to sell more rather than less because the price is lower, the loan payments are higher and all your other expenses remain the same. It doesn't matter one bit if it's market orders or limit orders creating more overhead resistance.

Partially true. Miners may have to start selling at some point if they are no longer able to service debt with other income streams but a market order has a huge difference in this market compared to a limit order. A miner would NEVER dump 5k coins in single market order. It causes too much slippage and the market seems to stabilize at a lower price after a big downward movement. It's not miners causing these major movements.

A flash dump of 5k coins is actually the only way to get the least slippage on the public exchange market, doing it piecemeal would chase the bids down. Place bids a bit lower than that, and you can claw some back from the panic sellers.

Most industrial miners have some OTC deal they can look to which is some % under market, or above market if locked in. I suspect most of the action we see these days on the exchanges is whales and sharks, their gambler lackeys, stop hunting, etc.

There are still veterans from 2010-12 who need to be shaken out, or at least forcibly diversified. The Jan 14 shakeout was part of that diversification, not sure it was the last. All that considered, as a speculative bet on a new technology... you could do worse than the good ol' BTC.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 23, 2015, 03:54:57 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 23, 2015, 03:28:10 AM

There are still veterans from 2010-12 who need to be shaken out, or at least forcibly diversified. The Jan 14 shakeout was part of that diversification, not sure it was the last. All that considered, as a speculative bet on a new technology... you could do worse than the good ol' BTC.

Oh, really? And what if Big Money doesn't want to wait that long? What if a new innovation sparks a grass roots recovery? There's as much danger in waiting for the optimal time to buy as there is in waiting for the optimal time to sell.

I'm one of those veterans and the reason I have survived this long is because of ideological commitment, not money. You could be waiting a long time if you think you can shake me out.

Don't take it personally, there are many that were in for single digits, some double, some triple. I was talking on a general basis, a portion of those holders need to diversify, we've been watching that for 14 months.

I treat it as a binary bet, all or nothing, as long as you can stomach nothing, you've hit the minimum height for this ride.

The possibility of a positive outcome is the only reason the longs are here, just like a negative outcome is the only reason the shorts and trolls are here. (Setting aside certain mental health conditions, which are evident on both sides.)

Quote from: octaft on February 23, 2015, 05:14:44 AM

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on February 23, 2015, 04:55:25 AM

Quote from: octaft on February 23, 2015, 04:44:37 AM

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on February 23, 2015, 04:30:51 AM

billyjoeallen have been real intellectual boons to this thread.

Was it the racism, the sexism, or just the ignorant bigotry in general that sold you on him?

Dude, none of what you allege about him is correct in this recent period.

I mean how recent are we talking?

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 17, 2015, 11:44:16 PM

The reason I never learned whatever tribal grunts is your native tongue is because I don't have to. English speakers rule the planet. And I'm drunk too so back at ya, you foreign fucking foreigner fuck.

That's pretty recent, and not even close to the most offensive thing I've ever seen him post.

Not saying you're wrong or right, but include context. Or ignore it all because it is wholly meaningless.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 17, 2015, 11:44:16 PM

Quote from: tarmi on February 17, 2015, 10:59:47 PM

english is my third language and I am drunk .

now, unless I am speaking to sorosh, goat or mircea gtfo you poor, english centric troll with your ad hominem attack.

Your critique is so stale it only merits an ad hominem attack. The reason I never learned whatever tribal grunts is your native tongue is because I don't have to. English speakers rule the planet. And I'm drunk too so back at ya, you foreign fucking foreigner fuck.

My ignore list stands and will stand at 0.

This forum has a proud tradition of good trolls. A check on hyperbole and dare I say... euphoria.

ElectricMucus
Proudhon
~~Walsoraj~~ Edit: Jaroslaw, been too long
NotLambchop

The pretenders/socks are less funny.

If the coin fails, they get "lels". If not, they fade away, it's cheap entertainment.

If you can't take some criticism and hilarity about your cryptocoin investment, you're in the wrong game.

Notice I didn't say everyone else must not ignore him.

I think the guy's funny.

And I'm bullish on BTC's long term future... imagine that. I can ride this thing to 0, or 10k, and someone typing on a forum has nothing to do with it.

Bulls had their run to try and take $250 a couple times, now bears have their chance to make a run at $220.

I think nothing major happens (220-250) until the hours before auction news.

Quote from: JimboToronto on February 26, 2015, 03:29:22 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 26, 2015, 03:18:05 AM

Bulls had their run to try and take $250 a couple times, now bears have their chance to make a run at $220.

I think nothing major happens (220-250) until the hours before auction news.

Why so much concern for the auctions?

The last 2 USMS auctions had almost no effect on the market. Why do you think it will be different this time?

They were won by institutional investors, not by trader kids who use online exchanges.

News relating to it, # of bidders, potential leaks of prices paid. It is 50k BTC of demand satiated in a day. Not inconsequential.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 26, 2015, 03:50:30 AM

23,985 BTC swaps on bfx! Why would anyone sell short when they could just sell their coins? Oh, that's right.They don't have any. Leverage is piling up on bith sides. This is gonna blow big one way or the other.

USD swaps at 70,500 BTC equiv. I agree with the rest of your sentiment.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 26, 2015, 04:11:02 AM

Quote from: JimboToronto on February 26, 2015, 04:02:01 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 26, 2015, 03:33:03 AM

It is 50k BTC of demand satiated in a day. Not inconsequential.

But is it 50k of demand from those that would use exchanges, or from those who would buy off-exchange?

It's also 50k BTC of selling pressure relived in a day. It's been know for a long time and priced in.

The fact that .gov has 94k btc to sell has been known, who the hell will buy them is more of an unknown. Will you help?

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 26, 2015, 04:31:06 AM

Quote from: KryptoFoo on February 26, 2015, 04:27:47 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 26, 2015, 03:06:45 AM

Quote from: KryptoFoo on February 26, 2015, 02:51:37 AM

Nice try with that throwback Chinese panic dump. Market giving shorts false sense of hope and dealing pain to longs with tight stops. Figures.

P.s. why today's announcement of the new bitcoin derivatives exchange is a "game changer".

m/id/102456187]http://www.c[Suspicious link removed]m/id/102456187

Quote

This is why the announcement of a bitcoin futures-and-options broker is so exciting. Merchants will have more options to hedge bitcoin exposure which eventually could lead to fewer merchants immediately converting to fiat

And you can expect bitpay and coinbase will be using this new service!

If you could tolerate the third party risk, why not just take your cold storage coins and double down by putting them into 1 or 2 YR futures and go long? If youbelieve long term priceis headed up, you could increase your profit w/oputting additionalcapital at risk. Also a futures market would be a much more accurate gauge on upcoming price movements than the nearly universally terrible technical analysis from Coindesk, cryptocoin news etc.

EDIT: the above link says NOTHING about the derivates exchange. Not a launch date, not a URL, not a name. nada.

Coindesk hasn't picked this story up yet?!?

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ex-goldman-director-launches-bitcoin-derivatives-brokerage-2015-02-25-5203121

I found the name of the exchange: it's called LedgerX. You think those morons could have mentioned it in the article.

This is a former Goldman analyst via his linkedin. I guess Goldman Director sounds better for your press release. May even be true, most banks have thousands of "VPs".

Well, that escalated quickly.

Shorts holding a trembling finger over the panic button.

$266 on finex is in sight. Hory Shet.

Edit: Got to within 750 coins or so before relief valve kicked in.

Stamp: "Profit taking, what's that?"

Observing dat 1200 btc bidwall at 255.5 on finex.

There's a 500 btc bid wall right below it so 1700 in the area, not sure if the same trader.

I used to like bitcoinity for the bubble days gifs, but it's pretty weak as a tool these days.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 28, 2015, 12:26:36 AM

Observing dat 1200 btc bidwall at 255.5 on finex.

Pulled.

Edit: 500 wall below it being nibbled, then fully eaten.

Strange ass candle on OKCoin on wisdom, what happened there?

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 28, 2015, 03:25:57 AM

Quote from: DaRude on February 28, 2015, 03:21:06 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 28, 2015, 03:19:53 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 28, 2015, 02:32:57 AM

Strange ass candle on OKCoin on wisdom, what happened there?

a leveraged position blew up.

On such a low volume? prob. just a glitch

It may not have been a margin call. It was prolly someone 20:1 long lost his nerve when he saw the chart sinking.

Nm, likely glitch.

I gotta say, coinbase exchange volume and order book is filling out nicely for being a month into the game.

I remember when every big spike would be met with THE one trading site going down (the original goxxings) and a precipitous crash to follow. This is going to be a wild ride for a few years to come, but at least we have gone from one point of failure to many. You have to perceive progress with the wide view, and not just today's exchange rate on today's market.

Jesus chop, you're supposed to go out and get some drinks and sleep when the price is up and it's friday.

Order books are slanted, same amount to go from 253 to 250 as 253 to 264 on finex.

8000 coins dumped and we end up within $3 in hours... bullish.

Looks like the whale buys from friday have some new context now.

Quote from: Ezmoneyezlife on March 01, 2015, 09:43:16 PM

Quote from: KryptoFoo on March 01, 2015, 09:38:27 PM

hello people. If you are skeptical of another move higher, I understand. But now we have unexpected good news to build on the technical breakout of a few days ago. The 4h charts beginning to look like the move down out of the bull flag was a head fake. We still need to see a move higher, with good volume, but right now bears are nervous. We have already retraced the sudden move lower from earlier today.

Yep, pal, but its obvious that they are manipulating the price of btc, apparently for now - to hold the price around 250$ for a while. Why do they publish such rumors about some new shit at sunday evening, while price is about to continue falling down? Another pump and dump right before an auction, nothing more, i bet it wont go over 260$, the agenda is clear - to force traders to place buy orders higher + squeeze shorters, nothing new.

At least say won't go above $280, $260 gonna fall in minutes at this pace.

Edit: And done.

Quote from: shmadz on March 01, 2015, 09:54:32 PM

Jorge should be pleased now that the BIT investors will finally have a way to sell their shares.

So true, that's one of his favorites. I wonder if he will post about the change on r/buttcoin?

Quote from: caga on March 01, 2015, 10:28:37 PM

What the hell's happening. Does anyone know why we are seeing a rise all of a sudden right now ?
Can't believe this Cheesy

Barry's ETF got approved.

Quote from: ensjovis on March 01, 2015, 10:39:56 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 01, 2015, 10:29:47 PM

Quote from: caga on March 01, 2015, 10:28:37 PM

What the hell's happening. Does anyone know why we are seeing a rise all of a sudden right now ?
Can't believe this Cheesy

Barry's ETF got approved.

It's not an ETF. It' s an OTC (over the counter), a penny stock. Institutional money is not allowed to trade this.

It's a fund, and will be traded on the pink sheets exchanges. Obviously not as big as news of COIN going live on the nasdaq. And no one was suggesting pension funds would be jumping in.

Edit: Most importantly, this is the first time investors can gain exposure to BTC with almost any personal brokerage account.

The news today has skewed my prediction of 220-250 range before auction. It certainly puts a new spin on things. We will know by march 6 what direction this market wants to go Wink

The true impact of the pink sheet will not be a real factor until the coming weeks/months.

Edit: looking at $266 going from resistance to support on the upside, opportunistic dumps on "sell news" mantra for the downside pre auction

Quote from: spooderman on March 02, 2015, 05:03:50 AM

It feels like 2012 to me.

Shift a couple decimal places, yep. Let's see what can happen without willy, with state sponsored dumpage, 5 major exchanges + a pink sheet share, and less rabid chinese. Too many variables to calculate reliably, but sure to be fun for someone.

$266 pierced again, and rebuffed. Resistance might be... becoming support.

500 coin ask wall at 263.5, another 500 at 264

Edit: as fast as I could post... pulled. And back, I give up. This wall observing is for the birds.

Sizable dumps completely rejected for higher highs in minutes...

NLC turns out to be a clinical troll who cut her teeth a decade ago on yahoo using her mom's computer...

Does this day get any lolzier?

Shotrers cut your loose!!1!

Quote from: billyjoeallen on March 04, 2015, 03:56:24 AM

12 hr chart on bfx is striped. Massive buying during the day in the west and dumping during daylight hours in China. Four days in a row. two days before that it shows up again.

If this pattern continues, buying at night could generate FAST profits. Hold for 12 hrs, dump, buy backlower, rinse and repeat.

Comparing the okcoin and huobi 12hr pretty much confirms this western bias to the rally. Not sure that the east cares or understands completely what the pink sheet might facilitate when it starts in 2 weeks�.

Bid book on finex is pretty strong down into the low 270's. Asks are looking weak until we bump that 286 line again.

Quote from: rikfredsy on March 04, 2015, 04:18:54 AM

Quote from: xingming on March 04, 2015, 04:15:03 AM

Nice jump for the price I just returned to my laptop and saw the price in the top , And was asking my self
what really made this jump is it traders or new users ?

you can read this http://cointelegraph.com/news/113598/ukraines-272-hyperinflation-rate-boosts-bitcoins-prospects-in-eastern-europe
if you want a good analyse for the price boost those days . It say it because of Ukrain ....

If you think people in Ukraine buying coins off localbitcoins is behind this rally... you're gonna have a bad time, or at the least, be completely perplexed as to what is going on.

Quote from: Specular on March 04, 2015, 04:53:59 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 04, 2015, 04:06:37 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on March 04, 2015, 03:56:24 AM

How do you know it will be 2 weeks until the pink sheets start?

Don't forget that 2 weeks� does not always (ever?) mean two weeks.

http://www.nasdaq.com/article/the-first-bitcoin-etf-offers-easy-way-to-profit-from-virtual-currency-gbtc-cm450589

Possibly, yes. Probably? errr... Let's try for $300 again.

Forecast for the next 40 hours looks cloudy with a chance of dumpage. If news comes out that a single bidder took the whole stash, we go up.

If the winning bids are less clear, so is the resulting direction.

Holy green dildo batman.

Somebody knows something?

Big finex wall at 286 pulled.

Quote from: inca on March 05, 2015, 10:29:20 PM

Quote from: Ezmoneyezlife on March 05, 2015, 10:25:48 PM

Quote from: KryptoFoo on March 05, 2015, 10:16:55 PM

dafuq, two rumors? auction bids at 30% above market, and china legalizes bitcoin?

Yep, BTC market rulers wanna less shorts before they start a final rape, nothing new.

1) Post a rumor (like OKCoins 20 bln$ hedge fund on november 12th)
2) quick buy 3-5k of BTC to provoke fools
3) look at the fools canceling shorts
4) wait until fools go full ~~retard~~ long on rumors and incoming next auction news
5) create a quick coordinated dump like previous one and retest "bottom" to force a final shake off (on next auction + some rumors news)
6) make a real reversal once stock markets starting to collapse (1-2 months)

They made same thing on the last auctions spreading rumors. Welcome to non-organic manipulated by its own Bilderberg BTC club "market".

Why do you keep posting this?

Anyway, nice bullish action following the recent intermediate top. Let's see if we can push 300 this time round.

Edit: still just shy of 20k shorts..excellent - the fuel is already there to propel us well into the 3xx's..

When you make ezmoney and have an ezlife, why wouldn't you write bearish conspiracy scenarios and wring your hands after a 4% move against you?

Quote from: alesx.onfire on March 06, 2015, 01:27:57 AM

why everybody are dumping Huh

?
what's the reason??..

just was a simple chinese pump?

What dumping? Are we talking about 32 hrs ago?

Teach a man to short with leverage 14 months into a vicious bear market.

Take his money with a margin call.

(Strange 2k flash dump on huobi with no reaction?)

Bitstamp is just a rumpled husk of its former self. I saw 7 minutes between trades a while back... sad. Gonna take a while to make back that near 20k btc lost with commissions.

This market is splashed around too much by whales with their own motives to take too much stock in TA. Thankfully we have a professor with academic interest only to run regressions against the aftermath.

Quote from: enryk on March 07, 2015, 07:45:07 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 07, 2015, 07:37:33 AM

Now now, dont be so pessimistic about the market. It has been recovering already.

Pessimism is in the eye of the beholder. I thought my statement was rather neutral.

Movement... Let's see if it's sold back to 275.

Finally... something?

Quote from: YourMother on March 09, 2015, 03:37:31 AM

A new batch of retards just flooded the market...

Retards with apparently more funds than you could put up to short moar coinz.

Quote from: YourMother on March 09, 2015, 03:53:37 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 09, 2015, 03:42:48 AM

Quote from: YourMother on March 09, 2015, 03:37:31 AM

A new batch of retards just flooded the market...

Retards with apparently more funds than you could put up to short moar coinz.

I quit trading this volatile leftover descending trash that was resulted from the biggest ponzi scheme that ever happened since the old days of tulip bulbs and beanie babies
... a long time ago.

That's even sadder. You refuse to short sure failure for mad profitz.

Grumble, wash volume (drink), grumble grumble.

Quote from: 12345mm on March 09, 2015, 04:31:55 AM

zero volume zero volume zero volume all day all day all day ... jam jam up up up for no reason ... followed by immediate collapse back followed by zero volume zero volume zero volume ... if that shit doesn't look like dieing with no organic support and only whales playing i don't know what does ...

Define: "immediate collapse".

You've had an hour and a half to close your long and open your short.

Observing dat 292.55 1000 coin buy wall on finex.

Quote from: coinableS on March 09, 2015, 08:00:47 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 09, 2015, 07:57:28 PM

Observing dat 292.55 1000 coin buy wall on finex.

It's just for show. What kind of real trader puts in a 1000 BTC bid and actually expects it to get filled? If someone really wanted to buy 1000 on finex, they would spread it out in multiple smaller bids.

Of course it's intended for show. But it becomes very real if someone decides to drop a big enough sell order on it.

Finex wall was real, and eaten.

Quote from: derpinheimer on March 09, 2015, 08:44:29 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 09, 2015, 08:40:50 PM

Finex wall was real, and eaten.

I missed it, what happened? All I can see is the 7m USD bidsum on Bitfinex, up from $4.8m earlier today...

Somebody placed a 1000 coin bid wall at 292.55, was nibbled then eaten when profit taking kicked in.

Asks at 300 on finex getting nervous, 4300 to go.

BearStamp living up to the name, below BTC-E, and 7k+ to break 300.

I remember we had to pierce 266 a couple times before resistance turned support. If we are going to take the lands of 3xx, I assume the same will have to happen here, with even moar volume.

When the market moves against you by 30% in a couple weeks...

Quote from: Loaded on March 10, 2015, 06:52:09 PM

root@bitcoin:~# bitcoin-cli signmessage 14j6jLececs66ZQ8ew6vTFNiEn2NupacWJ 'Cold storage update, nothing to see here.'
INpeb+jOvfyXpg9n9hzCzKjZJGzyPzPcvWft+PAB+WXgd3z9qJzsu4gk86SrSCIEhEzaWZ3I2utcMGdCwrn2Ctk=

Wink

Thanks for the heads up. Good to see you around still.

Quote from: empowering on March 12, 2015, 12:01:28 AM

Are you about to garrote someone?

Ha, just feeling the tension here. Like something is about to break.

Also a good graphical representation of the action lately Grin

Baby bear says hello. Watch as they gaily gad about.

$21,075,000 current USD swap, $294 bitfinex BTC price

$14,664,000 Jan 14-15 Panic USD swaps, $166

$6,411,000 increase at a simple avg of$230 = 27,873 BTC

15,678 current BTC swap

26,954 Jan 14-15 Panic BTC swaps

11,276 BTC decrease, at $230, $2,593,480

There is obviously a bias towards going long, but this shouldn't be too surprising as it's taking place on a BTC exchange. I'm glad interest rates are putting a heavy cost on the gamblers at these levels.

Baby bear's momma is pissed.

Edit: Well, maybe just slightly annoyed.

"Chinese miner dumps." "No, margin long squeeze."

Quote from: derpinheimer on March 13, 2015, 08:19:01 PM

Quote from: inca on March 13, 2015, 08:08:41 PM

Amazing how a 1% drop after double digit gains and the shits come out the wood work again

Amazing how double digit gains after triple digit losses brings back the bulltards Wink

Triple digit losses...

Edit: Must not have been thinking in %, still, 166-280 is two digits?

It's all over guise.

Time to delete the private keys and go post trains and rockets on USDtalk.org

Honestly we're due for a pullback. Bulls couldn't get it done at the 300 line, and longs got ahead of themselves on the borrowing.

The longer term looks more interesting, should be a matter of days before people are able to trade GBTC from their brokerage account (for better or worse).

Quote from: fonzie on March 14, 2015, 02:30:53 AM

I do not deny that there is a huge currency war ongoing, but Bitcoin is lightyears away from taking any part in this game. It barely got a ticket as a spectator. He�s sitting in the back row, on a broken chair, in the rain watching the big boys play dreaming of a better future for himself when it grows up. But i fear that that his dreams will burst like a bubble... which will lead to another another teenage suicide for the statistics Undecided

So many other "next big things" are already waiting for him in the forest of suicides.

More "trolling" like this please.

Take note, those aspiring to reach the higher echelons of crypto coin denigration.

Not sure why a redundant and markedly less adopted coin like LTC would be a factor in the above analysis.

Quote from: tarmi on February 19, 2015, 09:48:27 PM

Quote from: inca on February 19, 2015, 09:19:17 PM

Quote from: tarmi on February 19, 2015, 08:29:11 PM

great plan!

btw thanks for an extra hundred bucks!

I thought you don't trade?

no, I said I dont margin trade and use obscure exchanges like bitfinex.

and yes, I sold a bunch of bitcoins in 266 range.

Quote from: tarmi on March 15, 2015, 09:42:57 PM

Quote from: shmadz on March 15, 2015, 09:40:53 PM

Quote from: dreamspark on March 15, 2015, 09:25:14 PM

Quote from: tarmi on March 15, 2015, 09:22:58 PM

Quote from: dreamspark on March 15, 2015, 09:21:51 PM

Quote from: tarmi on March 15, 2015, 09:18:55 PM

good time to short.

Do it, jump on the OKCoin casino and go all in short 20x. Sure thing right?

already did on bitfinex in 295 range few days ago...

Surprised you still have coins to sell, been short all the way up Wink

When you go short, don't you just borrow the coins? Shouldn't need any coins to sell.

Also, question for tarmi: don't you pay daily fee for holding an open position with your borrowed coins? After a "few days" doesn't that start to erode any profits you might make?

Lastly, don't you have to buy those coins back at some point to close your position? Why didn't you close already at 285 or lower? Are you that confident? That greedy? What is your target?

I am not telling you my target and yes I am confident. so confident that I am ready to add more to my position if it comes to it. and yes, you are right. you dont need coins to go short at all.

I am paying very low interest on borrowed coins. 10 times less than the ones who borrowed cash.

Quote from: michaelGedi on March 15, 2015, 03:59:49 PM

Quote from: bank of bits on March 15, 2015, 03:51:56 PM

There's a wall in under 300$, let's see if we can cross it.

Filthy bitcoiners.

Watching the 3m on wisdom no doubt.

OKcoin Huobi buying, finex is like... wha?

RIP Stamp, it was a good run.

Looks like coinbase ate their lunch.

Quote from: seleme on March 16, 2015, 04:37:52 AM

Quote from: uhoh on March 16, 2015, 02:43:25 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 16, 2015, 02:41:42 AM

RIP Stamp, it was a good run.

Yup, totally left in the dust, just had to refresh to make sure the feed hadn't crashed.

they still have 10-15k daily volume, with their fees that's probably around 1000 BTC of profit monthly. Hardly RIP.

Full on RIP might be premature, but they haven't had a single trade in the last 6 mins. Hardly encouraging.

So... 18 months of $0 expenses and they hit even, after their hot wallet got legs. Sorry if I'm not overly confident on their future competitiveness in this sphere.

The point about margin trading not being a factor in the 2013 manias is a salient one. Back then, you were either in or out. There was also a frappe sipping frenchman in japan mucking up accurate price discovery.

This time we have a whole slew of 2014 bagholders who will be looking to cut losses or get out even at every significant increase. There is still 68k btc held by US and Aussie govt that will need to be absorbed, taking buying pressure away from the exchanges.

The positives: Coinbase exchange is live with non-trivial volume. Gemini to open when NYDFS gives them "blessing". Silbert's pink sheet should start trading soon.

Quote from: dreamspark on March 17, 2015, 03:35:48 AM

A lot of 2013 bull run bag holders wil have sold and those who haven't are unlikely to just sell for break after holding for this long. They either beleive in btc in the long term or know that if we get up to their prices again we are likely on another bull run.
Margin trading was arounf before the 2013 bull run so thats a moot point. Plus it being easier to short is just the same as it being easier to long. In fact with instruments such as 20x and 50x futures the upside potential of margin trading has more of an impact than the downside during a bull run.

All good points. Bitfinex usd sums have doubled, btc sums have quadrupled from the start of 2014 though. Not sure about the other chinese exchanges.

Been a rough month for the longs.

Stolfi, adding Blythe Masters to your list would give a little more weight to your (rather unconvincing) argument. ^

Your vacation may have interrupted and curtailed the amount of attention you normally dedicate to this worthless ponzi.

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on March 17, 2015, 11:02:49 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 17, 2015, 10:46:53 PM

You seem to know a lot about regular, long term posters for a supposed Jnr Member.m
#sockpuppet

Cute.

Yeah, I registered this account in 2012 with the express intent of confusing you with my sarcasm several years later.

Quote from: Bitcoiner_cph on March 18, 2015, 02:09:40 AM

Quote from: hyphymikey on March 18, 2015, 02:03:21 AM

About 10,000 coins were sold on Bitfinex alone to only bring us down $10, but the bid side remains the same. Take that info how you see fit. I know what that means to me.

Let me translate: Bull-market is ON. Bear-market is off. This 10$ move was an last failed attempt to reverse the trend. I see the we are going up.

Quote from: dreamspark on March 18, 2015, 03:11:55 AM

Evolution dark net market admins have just run off with the users money. 43k btc. Still feeling super bullish everyone?

Sheep 2.0

No mention of 2.7 tx per second, the current disincentive for miners to mine larger blocks? And the component of the community that views it as heresy to even consider changing? This would probably be my points 1-6.

Quote from: Erdogan on March 18, 2015, 04:55:13 AM

Looking forward to your pension?

Whoa. 40% slump. Sounds too volatile and inflationary for mainstream use.

Why you no close margin longs? Get it over with.

Like a band-aid... right off!

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on March 19, 2015, 01:44:22 AM

Quote from: damiano on March 19, 2015, 01:36:57 AM

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on March 19, 2015, 01:34:53 AM

This is ridiculous.
There are some weak mother fuckers around reacting to bad news & a sell off.
I'm expecting to wake up tomorrow & see 230 USD.
Embarrassing.

Whats the bad news? I haven't been following anything today

hectic work day

Well, the latest drug market place BTC scam.
I don't know the exact number but I think 40,000 odd coins scammed & stolen.
~~Presumably them being dumped caused this avalanche.~~

ftfy

Quote from: abercrombie on March 19, 2015, 03:27:30 AM

is crypto done? Huh

What the hell just happened to the bid book on finex?

Quote from: YourMother on March 09, 2015, 03:53:37 AM

I quit trading this volatile leftover descending trash that was resulted from the biggest ponzi scheme that ever happened since the old days of tulip bulbs and beanie babies
... a long time ago.

I don't get this whale.

If he's trying to protect a long position, wouldn't it make more sense to paint the bid book with walls for a while? Maybe let the little fish do some of the protecting in front of you? Instead he adds 5k to the losing position in market buys...

Quote from: michaelGedi on March 19, 2015, 11:26:41 PM

so let me get this straight, 700k went long on that spike to 269.5 on finex, and at about the same time 450k went short. I guess one could well have been in response to another. It looks like the long was a margin buy, did anyone see it?

There was a 5k wall placed at 250, minutes later it broke up into staggered walls, seconds later it looked like all 5k plowed into the asks.

Quote from: shmadz on March 20, 2015, 01:48:07 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on March 20, 2015, 12:28:01 AM

As low as possible for as long as possible actually works for me. I ain't even mad

Amen, fist bump!

Thank you for your courage.

Everybody's free to an opinion. And Tarmi does put at least some of his trades on the record.

I tend to agree with his qualms about the amount of margin fueling the runs at 300, and the defense of 250.

But now we have spiking shorts, a triple "bottom", a valiant bull whale. As usual, this coin is a fickle mistress.

Jab acknowledged.

Let's put it this way.

This place can be just as annoying when it is filled with only moonbooters, as when filled with ponies and lambs.

And see I thought your name was referencing a certain fission device.

Believe me, if the market goes your way and bitcoin succeeds, you will cherish tarmi's posts.

That has avatar written all over it... alas

In a long forgotten year, people could use pictographs as a sort of representation, below their names on this esteemed fora.

The fact they are apparently dropping coins onto btc-e so soon makes me wonder about what other brilliant choices they've made before exiting stage right.

Quote from: Sitarow on March 21, 2015, 03:55:33 AM

Quote from: lightfoot on March 21, 2015, 03:49:35 AM

So at what point does the (insert govt name here) Govt come to the exchanges and demand all of these "dirty" coins. After all they were part of unlawful activity, therefore they all go to the Govt. Kind of like cash forfeitures.

This is an interesting little slope here......

One thing to remember about technology and the btc network is that it will adapt to deal with intolerable actions. Such as a distributed exchange.

And how does this distributed exchange deal with fiat transfers to not so distributed bank accounts? A sort of localbitcoins with a distributed back end?

Bitcoin was designed to be able to transfer bitcoin globally without controls, not to be able to cash fiat in and out at both ends without control.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 19, 2015, 03:34:18 AM

Good selling so far. 3k to new lows, or 3k to 272 on finex.

Thanks doc. Chartbuddy was about to have this joint all to himself.

The real question... who/what did she troll in the intervening decade between elderly women in maine and these esteemed fora?

So about $500k worth of longs added on bitfinex? The rest were non-margin buys unless I'm mistaken.

Shorts unchanged?

I don't see much resistance until $275.

$264 on the decent size dump, not much incentive to dump though when it is trying to drift up.

Quote from: 12345mm on March 23, 2015, 01:10:38 AM

Enter Key.

Somewhere, anywhere, I don't even care if it is mid-sentence fragment.

Quote from: 12345mm on March 23, 2015, 01:27:17 AM

Just giving you a hard time. Angry

Primates have an aversion to diving into walls of text on the internet, or at least one does. A main driver of posting something on a public forum is to hopefully have the maximum amount of people read and understand it.

Stolfi has tricked me into reading many typed pages worth of posts. All through clever use of grammar, paragraph structure, and punctuation. Wink

Quote from: lyth0s on March 23, 2015, 02:10:07 AM

I still wonder why almost all of the recent price increases are based on small time frame large 2-3 thousand volume candles. And I still wonder if some sort of institutional investor is buying the coins, waiting for the next dip and rebuying in order to cause less of a price hike. If you look at the finiex 15 minute candles you will see two large 3k volume boosts in price followed by a decline back to the baseline ~300 volume. Looks like a single person buying to me.

interdasting

Coinbase Exchange getting some action.

Page 12k, ATH!

Meanwhile, buying pressure is pitiful at these levels. Shorts, what's your target for closing... 210-220 again? Or are we set for a retest of the mid 1xx's?

Elliott wavers serve as the main post hoc graphical artists of our age.

Quote from: Bozuatle on March 25, 2015, 04:00:57 AM

"As such, the representative added that the service will not be available initially for users in the US."

No Pump For You!

A one way channel to a poker room (via bitpay) wasn't grounds for a pump any way you slice it.

JayJuanGee is NOT amused.

So Agora came back up eh, so far no real reaction. I guess that drop from 26x to 23x wasn't completely related. Asks are looking mighty thin. Bears seem sleepy, I'm prepared (hoping) for some upside reaction back to mid 250's.

Quote from: Bozuatle on March 26, 2015, 04:35:52 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 26, 2015, 04:29:43 AM

keep dreaming, this market is flatter than a pancake.

That's the defining characteristic of the bitcoin market lately, flat as a pancake with a chance of stop hunting whale splash.

Quote from: BitcoinIsLiberty on March 26, 2015, 05:23:35 AM

I noticed http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/GBTC/quote went from OTXPink to OTXQX this time and isn't hiding the bids with latest $31.50.

Level II bids are showing up. Each lot is 100 shares, each share is 1/10th of a bitcoin. Looks like 7450 btc worth of bids at $310/btc or above. This is obviously open to abrupt change when it actually goes live.

Quote from: Norway on March 26, 2015, 08:02:03 PM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on March 26, 2015, 07:59:20 PM

Would be funny if that 100 at $50 bid gets filled.

Yes, and just buy new coins on another exchange. Great arbitrage opportunity for the ask side.

Seems obvious that no one has gotten their 12 month aged BIT shares into their brokerage account yet. That bid is 100 x 100 = 10,000 shares, or 1000 btc bid at $500. You would have to be insane not to take advantage of that arb opportunity. Unfortunately for BIT owners, stock shares can't be transferred between brokerages with a simple 10 min confirmation. Grin

Level II quotes are given in lots of 100 shares. This is why you see the (100 x 1) after the bid. That bid is 10,000 shares, or 1000 btc. If you are going to offer advice and criticism, at least get the facts straight.

Black swan singularity they said...

Don't make me draw new lines, bitcoiners.

What's your mark? 210? 190? 80?

To New Horizons

(Could someone please dump or add shorts, I missed the hit on $239 Angry

)

What kind of dump is this? 2/10

Hard to foresee a lying frenchman who lost 6 figures of coins in 2011 and runs a bot to buy them back with fake money.

Lambie ignores those in need?

This is bitcoin's hero?

We're doooomed.

Whoops, someone didn't check the ask book on okcoin.

Stable is the one thing you definitely don't get in the bitcoin market, maybe some hours of flatlining. If it ever is stable, you wouldn't ask the question.

My guess: The desire to be long for monday morning news. The possibility of GBTC doing something. Expect covering and sell off if nothing.

Quote from: coinableS on March 30, 2015, 02:49:42 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 30, 2015, 02:46:31 AM

My guess: The desire to be long for monday morning news. The possibility of GBTC doing something. Expect covering and sell off if nothing.

Winkies have been pretty quiet lately. Could be gemini news.

Doubtful, they can't even keep their winkdex api up. Undecided

Quote from: BitcoinNewbie15 on March 30, 2015, 02:54:06 AM

Hmm.. another dip in the price. What could be causing it?

Accept no substitutes. (Especially ones that pass through bank wires from beanie exchanges.)

Quote from: cmacwiz on March 31, 2015, 02:48:36 AM

Weirdest boner I've had since watching 2 dragonflies copulate

Bid book on finex is looking very healthy. Selling volume is weak in the face of little slippage. Forecast looks like up.

She's not gone. Adam has just given himself a full time unpaid job.

Leaving the global financial establishment behind at 2.7 transactions per second? Undecided

3K btc borrowed by bears in the face of this rise. Margin longs don't seem to have played much of a role. Bid book looks primed for dumping on, but so far no takers. Let's see if it can break out of this mid term channel.

Quote from: adamstgBit on April 03, 2015, 02:59:35 AM

Quote from: shmadz on April 03, 2015, 02:39:05 AM

Is it just me? Or does $250 in 2015 feel a lot like $5 in 2012?

feels more like the 2$ bottom

What did $166 feel like?

Blockchains, not that silly bitcoin, are the future. They are secured by Proof of Hand Waving (POHW).

I'm so curious as to what Stolfi's other obsessions have been. Model trains?

(Could we get some shnappy DOOOOOM going? Looking for an entry point.)

Interesting. Especially the Voynich manuscript. Thanks for sharing.

What sorcery is this?

The "top 4-6 chinese miners" will fork bitcoin to delay the halving. Thereby giving themselves 0% revenue, instead of 50% revenue. TIL

A brief moment of silence for tarmi's short going briefly into the red again.

No mention of this d00d today?

Does the burglar's booty bag become worthless when he steps over the threshold?

http://siliconangle.com/blog/2015/01/26/colorado-man-facing-5-years-jail-for-buying-and-selling-bitcoin-without-a-license/

http://www.jmwagner.com/

There is a venn diagram out there. Of people who knew about and owned bitcoins in 2011, and US citizens that don't know or care that OTC trading of bitcoin is regulated by federal and state money transmitting laws. Bruce occupied part of this cohabited space.

Quote from: Ibian on April 04, 2015, 04:45:40 AM

What's with the random destruction? Is it really just a mind game to better break people? Can't think of any better reason.

Quote from: keewee on April 04, 2015, 07:12:13 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 04, 2015, 03:39:34 AM

http://siliconangle.com/blog/2015/01/26/colorado-man-facing-5-years-jail-for-buying-and-selling-bitcoin-without-a-license/

http://www.jmwagner.com/

Jeezus! This fkn sucks

Tell that to mybitcoin.com users.

Quote from: Phinnaeus Gage on October 14, 2012, 01:38:44 AM

Quote from: BladeMcCool on October 14, 2012, 01:26:35 AM

it was an online wallet. it ran off with everyones money. those people that used it, including Bruce, were stupid. sorry to say.

And Bruce was the only that got his money back. But it was only 25K BTC at an exchange rate higher than it is today. The act of kindness did show that Tom Williams had a heart, but he quickly came to his senses and kept the rest on deposit. Shortly thereafter, Bruce and Ed went to Pattaya and made a many young boys very, very happy with their infamous three-prong attack.

Quote from: tarmi on April 05, 2015, 01:27:36 PM

Quote from: WeltMaster on April 05, 2015, 12:33:14 PM

DO NOT BE AFRAID TARMI

of what? of sneaky bulls that are trying to start something on easter sunday?

no. they will fail miserably.

1. Short at 255

2. Watch it become quite profitable, dropping into 23X.

3...

Quote from: Dump3er on April 05, 2015, 11:16:28 PM

Bears are quiet since you Bulls managed to rise to 260?

Oh dear, please...price is now ~600 below my average sell price (even ignoring shorts and leverage) You guys make me tremble with your 10$ pumps within the 200+

Is it that you folks are hodling since ~1150$, so each 10$ has to relive your wet dreams?

Quote from: inca on April 05, 2015, 11:55:01 PM

My assumption is bitcoin has at least one more bubble in it even if it fails as an alternative private currency.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement from one of the biggest bulls around these parts... Just one more spike to unload your bags?

Winkie ETF is a long way away, if it ever does happen. The Gemini exchange needs to happen first. Gemini exchange doesn't launch without Lawsky's regs.

I am quite curious as to what happens to GBIT once someone finally puts an ask in with their shares. While the volume of bids at this point is negligible, the interesting bit happens once they start getting filled. The longer those bids at $350/btc sit unfilled, the more bullish things appear (contrary to bears and trolls saying it's dead). It seems likely that no one can sell shares at this point. We don't see immediate action as these shares travel by post, secretaries, and primate entry. It's even slower than I expected.

There has to be at least one BIT investor with 12 month shares that is willing to sell at a 30% immediate gain. If not... that's even more bullish.

Quote from: tarmi on April 06, 2015, 03:31:58 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 06, 2015, 03:19:44 AM

gains? dude, did you see the charts and where the price was 12 months ago?

those who bought those shares 12 months ago are bag holding hard.

the volume will be pitiful. penny stock trading at its best.

Of course you're right about the majority of BIT hodlers, not all, but statistically most. Thing is, as you know... it doesn't matter what the price was yesterday. A 30% gain tomorrow is a 30% gain tomorrow. Especially when you could buy back the same asset within the hour.

Edit: Not the same asset, the real deal.

Quote from: BlackSpidy on April 06, 2015, 04:57:54 AM

I start feeling that I care less and less about the daily changes in bitcoin price... I feel as though it won't matter in two years, because my coins will be worth at least twice what I bought them at ($280-ish). Now, I'm watching the market with not a care in the world. I feel a bit liberated. Time will tell if I'm wrong.

Not a care in the world, and watching the market?

Je suis BlindMayorBitcorn

Quote from: Sitarow on April 07, 2015, 11:42:33 PM

Is it just me or has BTC on exchanges and even BTC-e volume been dead the last 4 hrs...

Not just you.

Quote

[�]d4d5c4e5 1 point 11 days ago
Trollfi does stuff like that intentionally all the time. Most likely he has a copy/paste wall of text from Wikipedia ready to lecture you that the letter T is really an F!

Huh? "Trolfi" seemed to explain it more accurately (aside from the acronyms) than the other redditors. Especially this one.

Quote from: coinableS on April 08, 2015, 03:13:59 AM

Only $500K away from $260. Let's do this bulls!

That'd be like pissing in the wind. Looks like the sideways until some news, 250-260. I think any move to the upside will be using initial trading of GBTC as a catalyst. The complete lack of volume and downward drift, with occasional pumps up and drifting down, feels like probability of dumpage if that doesn't happen soon. The bid book is flush if a whale wants to exit here.

8 minutes between trades on finex. Not gentlemen.

Much Style. Very Critical.

Quote from: shmadz on April 10, 2015, 03:18:58 AM

By the way, I just ran numbers again, Even if I were paying $0.10 per kWh I'd still be breaking even at 150 per coin.

Sounds like pretty efficient (new) gear. That means many months of stable diff to see the rim of that hole.

Quote from: shmadz on April 10, 2015, 03:47:45 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 10, 2015, 03:34:15 AM

Quote from: shmadz on April 10, 2015, 03:18:58 AM

By the way, I just ran numbers again, Even if I were paying $0.10 per kWh I'd still be breaking even at 150 per coin.

Sounds like pretty efficient (new) gear.

Old gear, paid for it in January 2014, didn't arrive till much later of course, but efficient for sure.

What was out around that time... Ant S1? They cost $.864 in power a day, and generate 44 cents worth of btc, at the stated $0.10 kwh and current diff. There was that upgrade kit to S3 I guess.

On topic: look at that scary ask wall. Always good to telegraph your intentions to your victims right?

Quote from: Dump3er on April 10, 2015, 06:59:59 PM

Be more emphatic please! Today they got dumped again, so they are all a bit pissed off.

Oh she's plenty emphatic in the delivery. You might have meant empathetic... which will always be in short supply in a game where the winners derive gain directly from the losers.

It would be folly to assume anything other than satoshi still controlling the keys to each and every one of his coins. Not a shred of credible evidence has been provided to suggest otherwise.

#6 He's already an intelligent and successful individual, with all immediate needs and desires met. He has the understanding that moving or selling his coins could kill off the experiment while in its infancy. The principle and idea is worth more to him than a yacht filled with prostitutes.

Quote from: NotHatinJustTrollin on April 10, 2015, 11:30:13 PM

Crave:

hahahahahahah

Charge your phone, you madman!!1!!

Huobi with some buys. Retrace back to 235.99?

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on April 11, 2015, 02:56:04 AM

How dare you bully my sock. You monster.

Quote from: BlackSpidy on April 11, 2015, 04:51:49 AM

wow, and entire year in the $200s? I'm not entirely sure how to feel about that.

Quote from: Fatman3001 on April 11, 2015, 05:15:08 PM

Norwegian. Don't get me wrong, I like americans. They're just a bit... binary. It gets to be intense sometimes.

Don't confuse the established left-right political parties and their media arms with the actual views of the people. There is actually a fair amount of nuance and diversity of views at the human level.

Quote from: Fatman3001 on April 11, 2015, 05:08:59 PM

I worked for a hostel a long time ago and spoke about politics to both americans and canadians, and it's weird how uptight americans are about politics. Canadians had no problem with it. I kind of think of canadians as americans without a personality disorder.

A rather binary viewpoint, no?

I understand criticism of US policies, hell, I participate in it often. Especially the proclivity to play "world police" (as long as there is strategic interest in doing it).

As long as we are making sweeping generalities though... I could say it is easy for oil states (Norway, Canada) with small populations to be very generous with social programs. The ones not so generously endowed with resources and productivity (Greece) tend to lecture other nations less (smugly).

Not "up in arms", sorry if I gave that impression. Wink

The price is doing F all, and still floundering in 230's, just trying to block our chart buddy from getting on a roll.

I've seen the process of "guaranteed care", second hand in the UK, and first hand in AUS. Let me say I am quite content with my exorbitant private insurance rates. I won't speak to scandinavia as I have no experience with those systems.

I am also not defending the policies of the US. We spend more money on health care per capita than anyone. "Obamacare" was simply another subsidy for a "private" industry, the insurance industry.

My main point was that you can find leftists, socialists, anarchists, religious fanatics, capitalists, statists, nihilists, and everyone else under the sun here. They may not have direct representation in the government, but they're here.

Quote from: KFR on April 12, 2015, 02:02:55 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 12, 2015, 01:24:19 AM

...
My main point was that you can find leftists, socialists, anarchists, religious fanatics, capitalists, statists, nihilists, and everyone else under the sun here. They may not have direct representation in the government, but they're here.

Well that's kinda the point isn't it. If a substantial part of your population sees the sense in socialised healthcare and welfare support but both of their political leadership options consider such things anathema, then their opinions count for nought and all the outside world sees is the US' sense of nationalist exceptionalism getting in the way of plain economic and socio-political practicality. This conflation of socialism with communism and the resultant phobias and misinformation have caused a complete misunderstanding of the fundamentals among the American population at large.

I don't think I'm alone in thinking that US politics has been destroyed by private interests, greed and outright corruption. Get some of the billionaires out of media and party politics and it'd be a whole different story I'm sure.

To those of us outside the US that have harboured a longtime and deeply held affection for the nation, its people and its culture, it's looked pretty bleak for many years to be honest. Undecided

My view is that the states should be able to set policies, giving an opportunity for a diversity of arrangements. The one sure thing is that managing all 50 states from washington DC is folly. Some states have their own low income safety net plans, which are largely covered by the taxpayers. There is also welfare and housing, child benefits.

If you don't like the state you are in? Moving is not incredibly difficult. Like a free market of at least some govt policies.

Quote from: KFR on April 12, 2015, 02:21:12 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 12, 2015, 02:13:24 AM

...

Quote from: KFR on April 12, 2015, 02:02:55 AM

...

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 12, 2015, 01:24:19 AM

...

I understand. But you make it sound easy to uproot and move to a new home. I believe that if you'd experienced true poverty and hardship personally then you'd have a broader perspective.

I feel that the US would be better served by establishing consensus, looking to its peers and indeed population for critical counsel rather than unquestioning loyalty. Expecting people to move to a State they like based on its own volatile interpretation of the apparently holy and untouchable Constitution is somewhat unrealistic in my opinion.

I have experienced at least mild poverty for a good chunk of my life, and can't say govt was particularly helpful in that situation.

I appreciate the latter part of what you say, the US is indeed deeply fucked up in many ways, corrupt to the core in others. But the entire world has a dash of that these days.

Quote from: shmadz on April 12, 2015, 02:33:29 AM

It's becoming obvious, the collapse is near.

I don't disagree with you. What was bad in 08 got printed into worse. It won't be an isolated event, however.

Edit: Chinese wash volume... grumble grumble.

Quote from: KFR on April 12, 2015, 02:53:31 AM

Somebody should invent something.

That part's done. It's the scaling up section that gets sticky with disparate incentives and motives.

I think there's a fair amount of reluctance for average investors to send international wires to bitcoin exchanges. I think the redemption terms really killed the traditional BIT as a vehicle (also the center of their stealth listing of GBTC option).

Not to say that I think GBTC will unleash a tidal flow of investment, but it is a channel that hasn't existed before. Buying paper bitcoin exposure with a Scottrade acct.

11 minutes between trades on finex gentlemen.

Surely you don't mean those big volume spikes that move the price exactly nowhere?

Quote from: Wings1987 on April 13, 2015, 10:36:07 PM

Interesting bot running on Finex. Is continually topping off buy order at 226.00 at 100 BTC and now moved up to 110 BTC.

Stopped all together after 5 mins. Never noticed something like that before. Probably just haven't watched long enough.

Looks like it went stealth.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on April 13, 2015, 11:11:08 PM

Question: how will we know DOOOM when it gets here? Is it here yet? Is it in arrivals?

When you see giant 20-30k red dildos and the price dropping $30-50 in minutes. Pretty simple really.

Quote from: macsga on April 14, 2015, 01:01:42 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on April 14, 2015, 12:56:45 AM

Quote from: macsga on April 14, 2015, 12:51:29 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on April 14, 2015, 12:49:11 AM

I'm trying to understand ~~his~~ my ways!

There, FTFY! Wink

I think our writing style is different. I don't really have writing style.

This is the second time I've been accused of being his sock. I'm sure a mod could easily set that straight. But it shouldn't be necessary, even to the casual observer.

Your methods are different but the outcome tends to be the same. Either you stop quoting him and quit trolling or you're in the list again. This place looks really great without all the sockpuppets making a trollfest. Being one or "looking like" one makes no difference to me (and most possible to all the others that use the list).

You've been warned.

If you put BlindMayorBitcorn on THE LIST, put me on there too.

He seems like a bloke who's long term bullish on bitcoin, but just likes to temper the sting of near constant declines with some hilarity.

Quote from: solitude on April 14, 2015, 01:31:39 AM

sell your coins you fucking retards

i'll be the guy dying of laughter when you're fighting over yourselves to panic buy when it starts approaching four digits again.

now go fuck your mother.

Quote from: solitude on November 09, 2014, 02:22:31 AM

Quote from: vm89 on November 09, 2014, 02:20:23 AM

Quote from: solitude on November 09, 2014, 02:02:10 AM

What if my cold storage laptop dies or gets stolen? How do I spend my bitcoins?

Is the only way to make a fresh install using my paper wallet?

I think paper wallet would work better than a cold storage laptop.
Just don't throw your jacket in the washing machine without checking if there's a piece of paper inside!

That's also what I have. From what I've read, you'd me a moron to not have a paper wallet backup WITH a cold storage laptop

Quote from: solitude on September 09, 2014, 07:30:39 PM

Mr. Slush, please lower the minimum threshold to withdraw buttcoins from account.

.01 is not low enough!~!

It should be @ .001 !

Watch out: Huge Whales At Play

Quote from: xcrabber on April 14, 2015, 02:17:38 AM

I am always surprised to see it go down! What happens when a scant 21 million people want to hodl an average of 1 measly bitcoin each???

Always surprised?

How about when 10,000 own most of them, top 100 a huge chunk of that, and one owns 1m+? Joe retail public has to eat all their diversifications, plus a portion of 3600 mined coins per day. Impossible to say where bottom is, but in theory it should seek/lead mining cost +/- speculative sentiment.

Speculative bulls are probably pulled back and waiting on GBTC trading to try some kind of buying push. 2 weeks�. Not averse to sitting there for cheaper coins in the interim. Not that the pink sheet volume will really mean much for the market, but as a catalyst to stop-hunt/bounce.

Quote from: Zombie123 on April 14, 2015, 04:06:54 AM

Currently everything is fine.. world markets are performing good.. mostly everyone is upbeat. people will rush to bitcoin ( its unfortunate but true ) when markets turn bear/ crash and they run to gold etc..

So in a flight to stability, the general public will sell fiat, stocks, and bonds into bitcoin exposure. Just, no. At least not for a long while and after huge technical developments, maybe never.

Quote from: noobtrader on April 14, 2015, 04:24:33 AM

i think in mining perspective this is the lowest price possible at current difficulty.

Undecided

Nope, around $200 before it hits the limit for antminer s3 around these parts. Significantly lower for S5 efficiency levels. Think $110-170 for the big industrial guys at current difficulty.

Quote from: noobtrader on April 14, 2015, 04:31:39 AM

$110-170 is just for the electricity, you forgot rent and maintenance, security guard and profit. dont ever forget the profit.

There's been a slight blurring of things over the last year. Often(always) the hardware manufacturers themselves run big mines. They can pay for the facility rent/construction with hardware sales to retail. My projection would be much lower if I wasn't factoring that in.

I've got some coins I'm willing to ride till the end, or the beginning. But people should be careful walking that line of what they can afford to loose�.

Quote from: Ezmoneyezlife on April 15, 2015, 11:00:43 PM

Exactly, so glad to see people who are starting to see chinese price manipulations, btc is going to sub 200$ before the real trend reversal, but most of people are blinded by "bull" or "bear" dogma, its non-organic manipulated market, you cannot be a blind bull or bear, people just need to expose those price manipulations to not lose their money, btc is not chinese little bitch but chinese do think it is so they fuck market by their bot-created volume on their shitty exchanges trying to force people on other exchanges to follow. And this fucking silly chinese scheme (wash volume spikes on goxobi or okgox without any buy support) repeats over and over again raping market, stop blindly follow chinese gox-like exchanges folks, btc is an international project, not a chinese scam machine.

Drink! It's the EZmoneyEZwomenEZlifestyle game!

Bye 500 coin baby bidwall, it all happened so fast.

Quote from: Shatoshi on April 16, 2015, 01:51:29 AM

a what? A WHAT? TELL ME.

He looked at the executed orders and realized he couldn't back that statement... yet.

Funny thing about the dark orders, if they're not elusive you're doing it wrong.

Bitstamp shits the bed at 100 coins sold, poor bitstamp.

Quote from: Torque on April 16, 2015, 04:37:02 AM

Why do I get the feeling that everyone on this thread is an obsessive gambler, but no one ever wants to be wealthy?

For all the fkn around with bitcoin you guys do day trading (and mostly losing), I could have pointed you to at least 5 stocks that in 2014 would have doubled your money going long and holding.

Do you have a newsletter?

Wash volume, grumble, grumble, goxkcoin, grumble.

Save us Barry.

What's with the near linear volume ramp on huoboy?

Nobody else is buying it.

Finex bids retreating.

Two posts deleted in this thread for me.

Quote from: shmadz on April 18, 2015, 04:40:46 AM

Well, isn't that cute. First wall I ever remember seeing at coinbase. Shocked

Was non-existent just a few short hours ago... Not sure if bullish.

5k at 220, I've seen them before but they're like regulated US unicorns.

Curb your enthusiasm.

Chart buddy chalk block.

Quote from: BayAreaCoins on April 18, 2015, 07:16:51 AM

Fuck the 1%.

Coinbases last blunder they sold TONS of BTC off the real positive news with their lie.

So sell a bunch of expensive $320 BTC and buy them back the next day for $240.... fuck the 1%.

I think Bitcoin is due to pop pretty good... it would be a sham to see Coinbase try to suck up some of the limelight with fake news again Lips sealed

.

Really excited about Rand being at the Bitcoin event tomorrow. Even a small glimmer of hope with a USA president that likes Bitcoin... he could set the pace as far as accepting it and not wanting to make USA coin.

http://www.coindesk.com/rand-paul-new-york-bitcoin-event/

Small glimmer, feels familiar.

Not unprecedented with the coinbase wall. But not an everyday thing either.

Nice illustration of the psychological impact and ultimate result of the coinbase wall shenanigans.

Relatively little volume on any exchange for this move.

Quote from: hyphymikey on April 19, 2015, 08:01:39 PM

Over 30K shorts. There isn't enough coins for sale to close those shorts out. If they cascade close we could see million dollar coins!

This is just as (un)convincing as:

Over $25.5 million worth of longs. There aren't enough bids to close those longs out. If there is a giant red dildo cascade we could see single digit coins!

A significant percentage of the oil/gold/alpaca? market is speculative, based on global conditions and psychological perception. Obviously some of this by participants that will never utilize the underlying asset.

Almost sounds familiar. Aside from the fact that BTC is not generally consumed at the end of the chain. Aside from private key loss I suppose.

"Trolfi" has it right when he says that funds with high risk profile have already had an opportunity to accumulate. They have, to the tune of tens of millions of $.

The only thing GBTC/(or COIN in a very lucky 12 months) could change will be to open the door to the segment of people with a brokerage account that have scoffed or balked at any other method. Could be the difficulties of storage, taxes... in general having someone else to blame? They also see wacky chart with a spike and a relentless downtrend, hard to call the outcome of all this.

I've had 5 posts deleted in the culling, all enough off-topic and without relevant content to warrant it.

I'll leave the rest to your imagination.

Quote from: Norway on April 20, 2015, 04:04:45 AM

On topic: I predicted that this monday is going to be "Wall Street Monday" for several reasons. But you would expect inside rumours to cause a lot of buying today before the news are in the media. And it's not happening. Tomorrow evening, I will probably have to admit that my first short term prediction on this forum was wrong... Angry

Don't worry friend.

The big buys kicked off right around the closing bell of US markets. Likely coincidence, but interesting.

I wonder if this is where some of that mysterious coinbase liquidity went? Not enough business days to do two wires though.

More questions than answers I suppose. Good to remind shotrers that freak candles of doom can happen to them too.

Something is going seriously wrong at Huobi. Huh

Quote from: derpinheimer on April 21, 2015, 09:38:10 PM

Quote from: Norway on April 21, 2015, 09:30:59 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 21, 2015, 09:27:13 PM

Something is going seriously wrong at Huobi. Huh

Yes, insane!

EDIT: Maybe manipulative dumpers have lost their power!

Did y'all notice OKCoin dumped down to 1387 during the rise?

That one looked like a short position getting liquidated.

He followed the leveraged day trading rainbow to the...

Congrats on the gain and nice work on the risk mitigation. Food, water, sleep. Tomorrow is another day.

Interesting how a ~2 million $ finex buying spree happens right when bulls needed it. Dead volume, looking dumpy. The speed in which it happened points to a single or small group of traders.

They may have been targeting the okcoin futures market, trying to use the liquidation of a massive/levered short for extra fuel. This didn't quite happen the way it was supposed to, complicated by other traders and the short himself. It still was a pretty shrewd move. Skewing sentiment in their favor when GBTC news could add some fuel to the fire.

Quote from: camolist on April 22, 2015, 01:41:19 AM

where'd the volume go?

Back to where it was before a single actor bought in.

One thing is really different from original bitcoin bull runs. The exchange infrastructure has improved hugely. Gone are the days of mtgox going dark and falling $166 in value. Huobi had some problems today, at least with their data api (I don't trade there.), and no one cared.

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on April 22, 2015, 01:53:42 AM

Quote from: coinableS on April 22, 2015, 01:14:30 AM

Nothing is more funny to a bull than the OKcoin bear that got margin called today for 31,000 BTC/3 million dollars. His wife is gonna kill him.

No kidding, this guy was slaughtered on the alter of doom and it was a major shot across the bow of the bearmobile. If it can happen to this guy, it could happen to anyone. Wink

That guy appears to be a pig, that leverage, that amount... dead on a $10 rise. I bet most bears are laughing at the guy too.

With other commodities and stocks, often everything happens from the same accounts. Bitcoins are often tied up offline, some are buried in mining activity. There are barriers and non-trivial risks to having everything up for sale at a certain price. This makes the spot price somewhat inefficient in reacting to market changes.

This in itself won't push the price down, it's more of a tailwind. The headwind is the unwinding of a bubble that started in the mid $1xx, and 3600 coins a day being minted. Increasingly, minted by big industrial farms with industrial size costs.

Quote from: greenlion on April 25, 2015, 01:20:24 AM

Quote from: sAt0sHiFanClub on April 24, 2015, 05:08:11 PM

If bitcoin is to succeed, then these points must be argued against. But that rarely happens. The poster will be simply called a troll, a few ad hominen attacks on him and then put on a stupid, pointless ignore list.

The sad thing is that even the most rabid bitcoiners find it difficult to string a few words together into a logical argument to defend bitcoin. Thats what worries me most.

There's a world of difference between genuine argument, discussion, debate, etc., and humoring someone with a proven track record of shameless concern-trolling.

The misguided "professor" in question is an inveterate Buttcoiner through and through, believes that Bitcoin is inherently a scam, yet feigns airs of curiosity and moderation to suck people into his egotistical troll web. He has very predictable patterns of disingenuously just "asking questions" as troll bait to setup pre-conceived wall of text rants.

It's impossible to really engage this kind of mentality because he bombards you with a sheer volume of pointless text that is too exhausting for anyone sincere to deal with, whereas the troll revels in this imaginary domination of people on the internet on the basis of nothing. You can confront this kind of person with facts and arguments all you want, and he repays you with passive-aggressive self-deprecation. No amount of rationalization for this behavior as some kind of self-appointed do-gooder obligation overcomes the natural reaction that such a toxic participant can fuck right off.

You drastically underestimate the benefits bestowed upon the fervent if the exchange rate looks northward. You should thank the lucky stars for "trolls" as frank and unwaveringly persistent as our dear professor.

If bitcoin chokes on its own parameters, and slides into the dust, he wins, and can pat himself on the back. It is added to his life's catalogs of ideas he was clever enough to classify and predict an outcome. If it grows, adapts, perseveres, you are thankful that Jorge has been with you for the ride. He will have watched his concerns and misgivings sacrificed on the altar of history.

Thou doth protest too much, me thinks.

Order book on finex pretty balanced, similar to 225 or 235.

Handuken!
Allukan!

(delete this dear lord modship)

You maniacs, you blew it up.

Localbitcoins and/or their users: Sorry for your loss Huh

New shorts on bitfinex sure hope this thing has legs.

Hi Chef Ramsay

Try condensing your incoherent rambling to a single post. Lord modship has a hard enough time.

488 baby buy wall at 219.51 finex.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 26, 2015, 04:58:01 AM

488 baby buy wall at 219.51 finex.

Munched.

A well capitalized and brave enough bear would do well to break that $216 level so this doesn't turn into a higher low.

It would take much less volume this time to breach it vs Apr 14.

Blood moon? Smh.

Quote from: cyclotronmajesty on April 26, 2015, 06:15:34 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 26, 2015, 05:55:02 AM

But what is breaking a level is it just one tick below a limit, or does it require an extended period of time?

I'd say a level isn't broken really until it's a 3 hour period of time.

3 seems like a good number. So i'd say 220 is almost broke not completely broke.

Lately it seems this market moves in square patterns, following the actions of a few major players. Breaching levels even briefly is a sort of psychological warfare they can use to maximize gains or minimize risks against smaller traders.

$220 fell without a real whimper, so I don't see serious buying pressure until people can get cheap $1xx coins, or GBTC adds some kind of narrative that the bulls desperately need right now. (Guaranteed to not happen until next week, and even that is very unclear.)

BTC "investment" is a kind of elaborate binary option, you win, lose, or try to out-dance the bigger fish while the music still plays.

Quote from: YourMother on April 26, 2015, 06:38:16 AM

Talking about new when Bitcoin is 6-7 years old hehehehehe hihihihi lol hahaha

MySpace went to global adoption and back into the shitter in that time frame.

PLEASE
have some dignity...

If any of those things required you to send a wire transfer to slovenia/~~tokyo~~/hong kong/bulgaria, or even link your bank account? Probably would result in a different graphic. Apples and orangutans and such.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on April 27, 2015, 02:24:07 AM

Quote from: DieJohnny on April 27, 2015, 02:22:13 AM

I think we are going lower. Crytpo is complete dead right now..... all crypto is a sewer of scammers and thieves. Price of everything is being completely destroyed. Start of 2014 market cap for all cryptos was 10 times what it is now and just getting worse......

I am thinking of liquidating, just feels like we are 10 years away.

Same.

Yes, let the despair flow through you. It will get worse before it gets better, do it like a bandaid.

12k before 1xx finex coins... maybe 8k after the fake ones melt.

Barry, his cap, and rabbit, better do something this week.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on April 27, 2015, 02:38:37 AM

I'm almost sure you're right... Undecided

Never trust internet anons.

Blythe Masters... goddess of doom.

11.7k to 200 finex

Well I never... Someone is willing to take huge hits just to get out.

Quote from: bassclef on April 27, 2015, 10:12:52 PM

Possible front running of GBTC trading?

Doubtful, it wouldn't trade until tomorrow at the earliest, and probably won't until late this/early next week.

BTC-E only seems like the last place someone would do that, and they would do it quietly, not with silly market buys.

This looks like one or two individuals panicking to leave the exchange at whatever cost for currently unknown reasons.

Quote from: gentlemand on April 27, 2015, 10:21:39 PM

Quote from: bassclef on April 27, 2015, 10:19:31 PM

Like someone has insider info about institutional demand of GBTC and bought up all the cheap coins for themselves.

Isn't it a walled garden though? Virtually nothing can get in and out. It'll be fun to look at but won't have much relevance for any other market.

Quote from: BTC4Victory

"What ensures that the price of the ETF shares closely tracks the value of the underlying assets held by the Trust, is that specialized "Authorized Participants" have the ability to either create new ETF shares at any time by delivering a "basket" of the underlying asset (Gold, in the case of the Gold Trust, or a specified number of shares of every company in the S&P500 Index, in the case of an S&P500-tracking ETF, or bitcoins, in the case of the BIT Trust) to the ETF itself; or, alternatively, at any time the same Authorized Participants have the right to put a "basket" of shares back to the ETF to have them redeemed out in-kind for the set number of bitcoins per share. So, if the price of the BIT Trust gets out of line one way or the other with the underlying price of Bitcoins, it's risk-free money for the Authorized Participants to either buy and contribute more bitcoins to the Trust in exchange for new shares that the AP can then sell at a profit (if the ETF is trading "too high" relative to the underlying price of Bitcoins), or can buy up ETF shares at a discount and immediately cash them in for the Bitcoins which it will sell at a profit (if the ETF is trading "too low" relative to the underlying price of Bitcoins) -- it's this built-in arbitrage opportunity which keeps the price of the ETF closely in line with the price of the underlying."

Quote from: medialab101 on April 28, 2015, 04:31:57 AM

The way coins were bought on BTCe today makes me think someone... somewhere... is running a fractional reserve and needed to acquire some BTC fast before being discovered.

Now that's a positively sinister idea. After watching this market for a while though, I can't say it's crazy.

The fact that this was btc-e makes one think that privacy was a priority for this buyer. The reckless speed at which they needed the coins reeked of account compromise though. Whatever information btc-e has, they haven't been hasty about disclosing it publicly. Why should they? Trading continues without further flights from the exchange.

Quote from: Brewins on April 29, 2015, 02:57:39 AM

Quote from: coinableS on April 29, 2015, 02:01:28 AM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on April 29, 2015, 01:59:12 AM

Quote from: Norway on April 28, 2015, 11:29:27 PM

Nobody believes you have a class.

The important thing is not to have a class, but to have class. Wink

Stolfi, have you bought any bitcoin yet?
I always find your signature very hard to believe with how much time you spend on here and /r/bitcoin.
It's okay to admit you are one of us Wink

He could earn lots of BTC with signature programs, even with the ones with lowest rates.

I guess he somehow is allergic to BTC or can't figure out how to install a wallet

He already has a signature campaign. And his reason for not wanting btc is explained therein.

He gives better data than most on these esteemed fora, you may disagree with his conclusions, and that's kinda the point of a discussion forum.

He's pretty fascinated by it obviously, a combination of intellectual challenge, the possibility of being completely vindicated in the future, and a side of gallant protection of vulnerable rubes being separated from their savings.

I don't see why he's so irksome, he's not forcing people to keep quoting him. Slow days like today would be all chart buddy and taunting of/by tarmi without him.

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on April 30, 2015, 02:45:59 AM

Quote from: edgar on April 30, 2015, 02:15:08 AM

Quote from: Sitarow on April 30, 2015, 12:34:30 AM

bullish

every single one of these people needs putting down!!

aka - euthanised

aka - culled

Because they are letting a bull out of a cage or are you talking about actual bullish folks on bitcoin? I don't think I've ever heard such terrible speak on this forum if the latter is true.

He's talking about brutal treatment of a sentient creature, unless I'm mistaken.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on April 30, 2015, 02:55:30 AM

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on April 30, 2015, 02:45:59 AM

Because they are letting a bull out of a cage or are you talking about actual bullish folks on bitcoin? I don't think I've ever heard such terrible speak on this forum if the latter is true.

This place hasn't been the same since the geezer porn incident of about an hour ago. I think it changed some of us.

Again?! Didn't fonzie do that last? The time when he got drunk and high and cheated on the trading simulator?

Quote from: brg444 on April 30, 2015, 03:10:01 AM

Quote

Today we announced a major step forward in the execution of our vision and product strategy. We've closed a new $50 million strategic investment round co-led by Goldman Sachs and IDG Capital Partners.

http://blog.circle.com/2015/04/30/new-circle-investors-new-us-dollar-account-features-china-horizons/

Gentlemen, get your engines ready

Whoa. You would have been called a dreamer predicting this kind of news "in three years" in 2012.

Quote

New Dollar Features

We�re also introducing new US dollar features that enable customers to hold, send, and receive dollars. Customers with dollar accounts gain all of the benefits of digital currency -- instant, secure and free payments to anyone in the world -- without holding or explicitly converting dollars into bitcoins. Dollar account balances held by Circle customers are FDIC-insured.

We have presented fiat users with a magnificent wooden horse sculpture, to be rolled within the gates with great fanfare.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on April 30, 2015, 03:26:02 AM

I'd like to know more about that bikini girl. How does she figure into all of this?

http://blog.circle.com/2015/04/30/new-circle-investors-new-us-dollar-account-features-china-horizons/

She's simply very excited to hold, send, and receive dollars. FDIC insured!

LOL, it wasn't the 30th in NY. They got a $50 mil round, and their plans for the future (how they sold the investors in the round).

Circle's philosophy hasn't shifted. They've been focused on dollar balances using bitcoin rails since their inception. They're just now attempting to close that "circle".

What's more surprising is that Goldman Sachs is interested in the utility of an asset that has been crashing for a year and a half. Wall St. tends to stay away from such things.

An alumni taking a paid board position is slightly different than plowing company venture funds in.

Quote from: Wary on April 30, 2015, 05:09:45 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on April 30, 2015, 04:54:10 AM

I hope they think that the asset had been crashing for 13 months and then - has been consolidating for 3 months.

Stop messing with my dig at stolfi Wink

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on April 30, 2015, 05:18:30 AM

That is my point, the VC investors of Circle and Coinbase must not be interested so much in bitcoin as they are in the fiat-to-fiat service. That market is MUCH larger than bitcoin-to-fiat or fiat-to-bitcoin.
-
You were too subtle. I really thought that you were finally seeing the light. Grin

The first point nods to the trojan horse. Bitcoin doesn't need to market itself when its competition is run by heavily indebted governments who have shown time and time again their inability to manage economies. In dramatic cases the currency is devalued overnight, sometimes a slow bleed, sometimes more abrupt. A $150-250 bitcoin over months can seem fine and dandy in these circumstances.

As long as the option is there, it is a huge coup. Establish tunnels through the current walls.

Price-wise? If there is no interest in these two securities going up soon, I would say things go south for a while. Try to find the marginal cost of mining a bitcoin? The most important part is that the network continues to function, time heals all wounds. I would be more assured if we could scale up tx per block sometime soon.

Quote from: derpinheimer on May 01, 2015, 04:34:19 AM

Quote from: cyclotronmajesty on May 01, 2015, 03:22:22 AM

Quote from: bumpk1nK on May 01, 2015, 03:14:00 AM

Is bitcoin still crashing or is now a good time to buy more?

I gave up on cheap bitcoins. Accept the loss and jump in. I tried to get in in the midst of that 8 dollar burst yesterday, but my login time was too slow ... lol.

Just remember not too long ago, hundreds of people tried to sell tens of thousands of coins for >$200 on MtGox, pressed the button, and ended up not having their orders processed for over an hour, where the price was then $100 -- without any idea that would occur. And you newbies complain about login times Cheesy

Totally agree. I remember lamenting just how crappy the exchange infrastructure was in the gox bubble/404/crash days. It's not perfect today, but miles ahead of two years ago.

Quote from: Fatman3001 on May 02, 2015, 02:42:07 AM

Quote from: Wary on May 02, 2015, 02:38:19 AM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on May 02, 2015, 02:04:33 AM

You bunch of dimwits! Yesterday was about celebrating unions and labor. Not thanking CEOs and shareholders. Not even thanking workers. Are you so ashamed of your own choices in life that you can't let this great force for good be celebrated without lashing out as if someone took a dump on your lawn?

So it not about thanking hard-working people (CEOs and non-unionized workers)? It was about cartels that boost prices by forcing competitors out?

Quote

Thanks god, it's mostly in the past. In civilized countries children are prevented from doing something useful.

The Bitcoin Community!

Read it and weep!

You new here? Wink

Bitcoin has a certain form of monetary policy, and a subsequently limited "proletariat economic toolbox", hard coded.

Quote from: scryptasicminer on May 02, 2015, 04:01:03 AM

Quote from: ChartBuddy on May 02, 2015, 03:58:03 AM

Coin

Explanation

These pictures give any prediction on price movement?

Yes, previous price and volume movement.

Quote

Hard-coded in our genes? Where did you dig up that chunk of pseudo-science? Give me a week, and I can make you salivate at the sound of a bell, and drop to the floor, shitting yourself in terror, when I turn on a blue light. Tell me more about this hard-coding tho, I'm all ears.

The Selfish Gene

And yes, more of this NLC, not your pedobear straw folk.

Something about needing $200+ dollars to coax a worthless internet token from a seller's hands seems to refute newb's wise words.

Have 2/10 troll points for trying tho Undecided

Oh, and please short with leverage to reap those mad gains from the inevitable collapse.

Bids are looking firm as hell on finex. Asks are light. So... down?

Edit: Holding 1/18th of your cash in precious metals? Seems almost recklessly exposed to USD.

And the number halves in 2016 to 12.5 btc per block. Participants will come and go, adding hashrate and subtracting it to reach economic equilibrium, we know you know this prof.

The only danger is a precipitous drop in hashrate, leading to impossibly long confirmation times and a backed up cache of transactions. Until we hit the adjustment block.

A small example, I use a few kW of bitmain miners every winter lately(sept-may). Even at break even (about $205) for me, I am harvesting the "waste" heat, offsetting non-negligible fuel costs. Selling the hardware when temps dictate I would need AC to cool them, and yes there is a market for nearly outdated used gear.

The big industrial farms are at a disadvantage compared to these kind of uses, which is offset by scale usually, but they still exist.

From the 2014 Annual Report published last month:

Quote

Authorized Participants who make deposits of bitcoins with the Trust in exchange for Creation
Baskets receive no fees, commissions or other form of compensation or inducement of any kind
from either the Sponsor or the Trust. No Authorized Participant has any obligation or
responsibility to the Sponsor or the Trust to affect any sale or resale of Shares. Authorized
Participants may realize significant profits buying, selling, creating and redeeming Shares as a
result of changes in the value of Shares or bitcoins. In particular, an Authorized Participant may
profit from the �spread� (or difference) between the prices at which it purchases and sells Shares
and bitcoins (or obtains Shares or bitcoins through the creation and redemption of Baskets). For
example, when creating Shares, an Authorized Participant may deposit bitcoins with the Trust that
it has acquired at a price that is lower than the current Bitcoin Market Price and thus receive Shares
with a value greater than the Authorized Participant�s cost of acquiring the deposited bitcoins.
Similarly, an Authorized Participant may sell Shares to a customer from its inventory at a price
higher than the Authorized Participant�s cost in acquiring such Shares. As another example, when
redeeming Shares, an Authorized Participant may receive bitcoins and then hold them for later
resale at a profit if the price of bitcoins increases. The frequent and significant fluctuations in the
price of bitcoins increases the extent to which an Authorized Participant may profit from its
transactions in Shares and bitcoins. As of the date of this Annual Report, the only Authorized
Participant is SecondMarket, Inc., an affiliate of the Sponsor.

Sponsor
Grayscale Investments LLC

Custodian
SecondMarket Holdings

The Only Current Authorized Participant
SecondMarket, Inc

The main question for me: Is it is possible for SecondMarket, Inc to receive creation baskets of shares and place them for sale on the OTC market without the 12 month lockup?

If yes, SecondMarket could quickly arbitrage the OTC share price closer to the NAV of the trust while providing liquidity that the OTC share needs at this point.

If no, the ask supply of the OTC share will be completely dependent on 12 month aged shares from individual investors. Meaning very low volume and little impact on the bitcoin market in general, at least for the reasonably near future.

Care to comment Barry?
I won't hold my breath.

Looks like the recent dumpage kicked off on okcoin, finex reacting strongly.

Quote from: molecular on May 05, 2015, 05:55:13 AM

Quote from: (Lithium) on May 05, 2015, 05:21:21 AM

dump time

1 Million USD worth of shorts got closed on finex:

I like seeing these closed at low prices

Agreed. Bulls cutting margin risk after GBTC landed without a jump. Much better than them going up to counter significant real selling pressure.

Lamb is risen... and he's PISSED.

Healthy bid side on ze finex.

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on May 06, 2015, 06:17:30 PM

Quote from: Feri22 on May 06, 2015, 06:14:36 PM

You are right ^^...well i think it is possible and if we break 262-265 its possible we would start finally new bull trend...but we will see...it depends when whales and market manipulators will decide if the new bull trend should start Wink

but i find kind of interesting that btc-e is not higher than all other exchanges...i remember it was almost always lower...any thoughts about this?

I'm not an expert trader mate.
If I'm honest I've never sold anything, I just buy & HODL.
Bitcoin is a long term investment for me, I'm not looking for small, short term profits.
I've just got my fingers crossed, hoping for maybe 5,000 USD per coin one day then it's party time.

Isn't this just the "bagholder waiting for a greater fool" mantra? I mean global, non-state, algorithmically controlled means of wealth storage and transfer... and you just hope for a quick 20 bagger to go party?

Quote

The state may have the power to go after the bad actors, but Bitcoin makes it far more difficult, because pseudonymity. Unlike fiat, Bitcoin transactions are not linked to identities - only addys.

Paper cash.

Quote

The state also has no real interest in maintaining a semblance of order & respectability in a pseudocurrency meant to unseat the state-backed money. It has great interest in maintaining the value of the currency it issues. Bitcoin's value? Not so much

It was not requested nor desired from the beginning.

Quote

No mechanism for self-governance(?); no incentive for state to help; more difficult to enforce even if the incentive was there.

Again, designed that way.

No need to worry bears. Double digits right around the corner. Chinese wash volume, grumble, grumble. Where's Tarmi?

Quote from: Fatman3001 on May 07, 2015, 07:17:24 PM

He be chillin. Waiting to short from $3500.

Ah, a man of leisure. A day on the water is a day well spent. Bulls of 2014 can do it too.

5% range trading is fun

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on May 08, 2015, 02:18:15 AM

Sorry to interrupt again, but I ran into this "bullish" prediction that I made back in 2014-03-27, when China was bouncing up or down at every PBoC rumor and counter-rumor:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg5940459#msg5940459

The 70 $/BTC did not happen, of course; but please check what that plot says about May 2015... Grin

Ha, I'm selling when Stolfi turns bull. Can you go back to the evil miner incentive for a while Jorge?

Quote from: BitchImightbe on March 28, 2014, 12:02:48 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on March 27, 2014, 11:57:26 PM

This is what goes passes for capitulation for me. I'm out of fiat. out of leverage. Might lose everything in a margin call. Pawn shops are closed and I just bet the mortgage money. I'm just a spectator now. Good luck, Gentleman. I did everything I could.

how did I get here?

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on May 08, 2015, 12:16:09 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on May 07, 2015, 11:20:17 PM

Starting to look like a bullish pennant on the 1 hr chart.

edit: or not.

Price discovery = finding out just what a mother will pay to keep her child alive.

Sorry for those that have BMB on ignore.

Quote from: oser41eric on March 31, 2013, 08:08:51 AM

Quote from: thenight on March 31, 2013, 07:43:40 AM

well guys do you have any idea to get fast bitcoin beside mining?

The fastest way how to get or loose bitcoin is gambling.

Cut your loose.

I don't see anyone trying to control anything here. You would see it in the volume. All I see is slow drift up on tiny volume, dropped back towards 240 on small selling.

GBTC volume was less than impressive today. Nasdaq Private Market news was nice, but pretty meaningless for near term price levels. Another bit of evidence that wall street skepticism and disdain is fading though.

Best short term strategy to stave off the boredom seems to be trying to trade the chop with play money.

If anyone else is bored sick of this chart doing its best impression of hardwood lumber...

I found this the other night, great read. Also serves as a nice inoculation against flirting around with the altcoin markets.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1032166.msg11314634#msg11314634

Quote from: YourMother on May 12, 2015, 09:02:30 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on May 12, 2015, 08:48:20 PM

Good read, but the original thread is here

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=896480.0

I've been through the majority of those scams, trying to convince the newbies not to invest, but they never listened

Thousands upon thousands of bitcoins were redirected from the pockets of the greedy dumb newbies into the hands of the whales that were manipulating the entire scene. The business was booming in 2014, not so much now, though. The death of Mintpal also had a huge effect on the scamcoin market.

Ah, thanks.

The post history definitely didn't match well. And now I know why. The command of the written word reminds me of someone... Undecided

Still bored errybody?

Quote from: bad trader on May 13, 2015, 10:48:49 PM

Quote from: slowerloris on May 13, 2015, 10:44:36 PM

And yet ...they're right!

You are them!

I lol'd.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on May 13, 2015, 11:15:11 PM

Someone hasn't been paying attention: toasters mining Bitcoinz!! Bullish. Guise??

I received my $0.99 toaster from the secretive 21 Inc. today...

I DEMAND A REFUND!

Quote from: BayAreaCoins on May 14, 2015, 01:25:58 AM

BTC-e leading the way Cheesy

love it.

BTC-E leading the way. Wait, which way?

Quote from: Fatman3001 on May 14, 2015, 02:28:15 AM

Ouch! You're like the RPGminx of the WO thread.

Or The Nutcracker.

Careful big guy.

Quote from: Fatman3001 on May 14, 2015, 03:17:26 AM

She be dangerous or you be dangerous?

One might say she can/will send it back better than you can dish it.

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on May 14, 2015, 03:41:44 AM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on May 14, 2015, 03:31:11 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on May 14, 2015, 03:25:00 AM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on May 14, 2015, 03:17:26 AM

She be dangerous or you be dangerous?

One might say she can/will send it back better than you can dish it.

Superiority was never my strength.

Besides, I didn't know I was dishing anything, it was more a case of awe. But if it offends I can take it away.

Women expect dudes to be decisive and not to second guess themselves (said the cougar I dated a few yrs back). Just be a boss and call the shots but don't take no crap. The younger chicks will shell out crap and that's your battleground. There's not much of a neutral ground here based upon what I've seen thus far.

Quote from: Sitarow on May 14, 2015, 04:04:18 AM

They should ask for a refund on their most valuable resource.

Similar walls on finex to get to 228 or 250.

Quote from: molecular on May 14, 2015, 06:18:32 AM

lol, couple pages back (5 or 6, after the drop), some noob accounts came in here yelling "ponzi". wtf is this? 2011?

Nope, 2015, about 18 months into the unwinding of the Karp/chiner gambler bubble. You haven't met lambie before?? Cool

Quote from: Fiat_Hodler on May 14, 2015, 07:11:09 AM

Quote from: dakota neat on May 14, 2015, 07:03:15 AM

how many coins have been dumped at bfx?

Around 14,300 coins were dumped on bitfinex.

If that many coins were bought, price would be 300+ .

Hello friend.

Here is crash.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on May 13, 2015, 09:56:28 PM

Still bored errybody?

As you see it is not 14k coins. Total volume is total volume, and market dumps are market dumps.

Everyone thinks you get more money selling slowly into the bids. Guess what? There aren't enough of them to sell thousands of coins. You'll slip as you chase them down. Best to bite all the bids that are there. Bulls do the same thing on the upside as I'm sure you've seen.

Quote from: inca on May 14, 2015, 08:37:48 AM

A large trader market selling 8000 coins into the bids isn't a crash, it is a large trader selling 8000 coins without care for what price they obtain, purely to push the price lower by temporarily outstripping natural supply and demand.

They didn't get what they wanted - a cascading waterfall of sell offs - nor lots of shorting to help piggyback the price lower.

If we move up from here back to 240 then that is bullish. If the price is forced lower then the bulls will continue to accumulate. The lower the price is forced the heavier that accumulation will be. I would have expected the price to break higher yesterday but it was well managed by the invisible hand, despite increased longs and closing shorts the price didn't move higher, effectively capped while the massive short position was gradually whittled down. A big buy today or tomorrow could make things interesting once again.

Yes, I was being overly dramatic for our newfriend.

25 April had similar action, but near $20 lower. I'm not all gloomy, if you're going to buy, better do it after one of these.

ItBit had a random 10.1k volume spike today without price movement. Anybody know what happened there?

https://tradeblock.com/markets/itbt/xbt-usd/15m/

Quote from: yefi on May 15, 2015, 07:14:19 PM

Quote from: Stevenirving on May 15, 2015, 06:59:40 PM

~~When~~ If the coin shoots back up and I am wealthy once again I ~~will~~ might be much smarter with everything.
The fact I am profiting now ~~playing~~ gambling with leverage proves ~~something~~ nothing.

Ugh. This forum sometimes does not make for easy reading.

Quote from: Wandererfromthenorth on May 15, 2015, 10:06:29 PM

Quote from: BayAreaCoins on May 15, 2015, 09:56:37 PM

Quote from: Wandererfromthenorth on May 15, 2015, 09:51:09 PM

Dump incoming?

https://twitter.com/factomproject/status/599243489008685056

lol

There was a 1,100 sell wall on Coinbase just a minute ago that got bought

Where do you see that?

I don't see it here http://coinsight.org/coinbase, and on bitcoinwisdom it doesn't show trades/volume.

https://cryptowat.ch/coinbase/btcusd/5min

You've been right for 18 months Fonzie.

Do you ever call a bottom and buy? Is it double digits, single? Or you shorting this mofo down to 0 and network failure?

Quote from: fonzie on May 16, 2015, 12:49:33 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on May 16, 2015, 12:38:25 AM

You've been right for 18 months Fonzie.

Do you ever call a bottom and buy? Is it double digits, single? Or you shorting this mofo down to 0 and network failure?

Nah, i�m just going to sell my account with that freshly achieved "hero member" status (it suddenly popped up after my last ban ended 1-2 days ago Angry

)and live from that money on my own private island for the rest of my life. No further plans.

Sounds legit. Cool

Absorbing $800k of mining payments (and real associated costs) per day, flat is good.

Sarcasm fail.

Jorge has basically made us his mistress to r/buttcoin these days... Embarrassed

They truly understand and appreciate him, often treating him like that slightly aspy kid that has great ideas, but presents them cloaked in cringeworthy mannerisms.

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on May 16, 2015, 04:31:35 AM

Some have been around here longer than others and this flirtation w/ JS could be relatively new to yall but some of us have seen the circular, exhaustive and at times, ridiculous commentary coming from the guy which is why he's reached ignore status just like the other main troll round these parts. Keep subjecting your time and mentality to this crap and it's hard to feel sorry for ya. Just sayin but the active time wastes around here these days are JS and lambscrotch and her smelly sox that are born on a daily basis at minimum.

I get more from trolfi posts than yours? So there's that.

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on May 16, 2015, 04:51:18 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on May 16, 2015, 04:39:10 AM

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on May 16, 2015, 04:31:35 AM

Snip

I get more from trolfi posts than yours? So there's that.

Then by all means keep enjoying being the mistress and broadcasting his tripe x2 for the rest of the onlookers to have to be exposed to. Very responsible of you and a swell contribution to the market. Kiss

You think our banter here has an effect on the market... so cute.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on May 16, 2015, 06:28:56 PM

Not my Angus again??

Quote from: inca on May 18, 2015, 12:05:56 AM

Its quiet. Too quiet

Where is dev Huh

It was a joke HI-TEC99.

So, uh, 6 hours and change until the KnC ETN trades? Is there any info, a symbol?

Mr. Bitcorn...

You know the drill.

With the quick rejection of small dumps lately I see two scenarios.

1. Someone quickly buys back 1/3 of their dump to stave off any kind of follow through to lower levels.

2. There is some kind of benevolent whale/group that is content with accumulating at current levels, not wanting to pump the price up, but also not wanting a drop to get momentum.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on May 18, 2015, 03:25:21 AM

Quote from: Tony Abbot on May 18, 2015, 03:18:26 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on May 18, 2015, 03:13:16 AM

Quote from: Tony Abbot on May 18, 2015, 03:11:30 AM

Quote from: derpinheimer on May 18, 2015, 02:18:07 AM

I am expecting some dumps in T-30 minutes.

They will be in the range of 80,000 to 100,000BTC.

Thank me later. Wink

...if only I could tell which gossip to believe... My average buy price is around $300 and I've been hodling/slowly accumulating for a couple of years now.... I read pages and pages of what amounts to "shit" every day, all over the intermanet and have never had the nuts to attempt a single tradle. If you're not just talking your book, I thank you for sharing this tidbit of gold in this sea of faecies.

It's his book. Roll Eyes

Edit: might be yours, too. Wink

My paltry stash of bitcorns are too few in number to be considered a "book".

I've become all angsty and jaded, maybe. I guess we are all bent one way or the other. I've noticed personally that I stopped listening to anyone above Sr. Member. Nobody that bought in at $23 can possible say anything to reassure me at this point.

All yea who boarded this contraption in the afterglow... if you are ever lucky enough to see a bull market again, your hodling affliction will only become worse.

Dumps that end higher than they started. Something very weird about this flat market.

Is finex going to go a half hour between trades?

This composite operator sure is good at hiding.

Edit: data api must be down.

Quote from: bad trader on May 20, 2015, 03:21:31 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on May 20, 2015, 03:09:49 AM

Composite Operator:

She is hiding behind a puppet? Is that NLC? Everything suddenly makes sense. Even the granpa slash fiction NLC writes...

But then who's the squirrel?

1. Head up the authoring of onerous regulation.
2. Stay on board long enough for regulation to become law.
3. Set up consulting firm to help and advise companies to comply with new regs.
4. Profit

Four Punch Raiders. Confirmed.

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on May 21, 2015, 04:08:02 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on May 20, 2015, 10:53:32 PM

snip, quack

You're ignored in a large fashion at this point but we've dealt w/ with others that would lol at your stance but also want more thoughts on their posts. Rand did so well tonight that I hope yall realize it and embark on a mission to make him Prez.

Remember Ron Paul auditing the Fed and winning primaries? Oh yeah... Undecided

Quote from: shmadz on May 21, 2015, 05:41:35 AM

Btw, anyone else think Satoshi timed the block halvings to coincide directly with the U.S. election cycle?

(Think about it, as much as we would like to pretend that the change in distribution is "priced in" we all saw the massive swing the last time block reward was cut in two. Next block halving should happen some few months before next election. Will bitcoin policy be part of some candidates platform?)

Last time, the halving almost coincided with the arrival of asics. BTC was the main/only form of payment early on. I would bet this had more of an impact than the halving itself.

2016 halving will definitely be a different animal, as many mining operations are huge businesses, on fairly thin margins already, with efficiency being critical. 3600 to 1800 coins per day is a big difference in supply...

As far as the political angle? I don't think anybody running for office cares about our digital tokens too much yet.

Quote from: shmadz on May 21, 2015, 06:59:24 AM

Totally agree, the Asics coming out possibly had larger effect than any political event (argument could be made for congress hearings)

I'm just saying that you don't model your distribution to get cut in half every four years just on the off chance that it might coincide with some technological breakthrough.

Rather, I'm suggesting that if you choose to have a disruptive halving of the rewards for your new crypto coin every four years, there might be some other significant event that happens every four years that made you decide on that interval. And I'm not talking about the world cup Wink

Only Satoshi knows why 210,000 blocks per cycle, 6 per hour. I somehow doubt it was timed for the olympics... er, US presidential elections. Cheesy

Quote from: abercrombie on May 26, 2015, 01:13:19 AM

...

is crytpo done?? Huh

Confirmed. Cheesy

Ugh, chartbuddy running the place. Range trading is horrible for conversation.

Wences Casares doesn't disappoint with his picks of people to be paid for "advisory" roles. Bitfinex only "slightly" hacked, impressive non-reaction to that. Forum compromised again, at least not with cosbycoin flair... less than no reaction. The synthetic "wall street" vehicles continue on their "less than thrilling" course. Bitlicense this week? Same non-reaction from markets?

Lunchtime buying in china.

Professor Stolfi,

Is this the Bitcoin Rain scam people, or another Brazilian bitcoin rain??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LIX1ot9peI

Is this really an IBM thing? Seems too amateurish? Cloud buzzword overload. Strange comments from illuminatiman.

Generally, what the hell is this Huh

Quote from: BayAreaCoins on May 27, 2015, 10:49:47 PM

Quote from: shmadz on May 27, 2015, 10:46:26 PM

Quote from: BayAreaCoins on May 27, 2015, 09:50:45 PM

How do you think PoS wouldn't be better for the network? Do you think the average third world person deserves a chance to help secure the network?

Proof of stake serves only to enrich the stakers.

You fail it

Disagree.

Proof of stake enriches the people who are actually taking the risk of holding the coin.

Proof of work enriches the electric companies and hardware people. It completely fucks all the average Joes six ways from Sunday. PoW toxic and leaks $ like a sieve.

If you want to build Bitcoin to were you can have something to leave for your grandchildren I'm almost 100% sure at this point PoW isn't that thing.

What if people that held the most USD, got the majority of the newly printed USD? Sounds pretty bad for avg Joe.

With PoW, miners are economically "forced" to sell newly mined coins to the market in order to continue operations and pay power bills. If the amount they can earn is less than they spend... they adjust capacity to reach equilibrium. Sounds about right.

Quote from: inca on May 29, 2015, 04:00:40 AM

Quote from: Wandererfromthenorth on May 29, 2015, 02:45:15 AM

LMAO

These guys are gonna pull the biggest exit scam ever.

-Shenanigans that look like insiders wanting to GTFO of the exchange as fast as possible: check
-Big price premium: check
-Withdrawals delays: check
-Anon owners: check

Get out of that shitty exchange now.

Serious amount of FUD and bearish bias on here.

Pure speculation: Their partner bank(s) are getting leaned on over AML on the fiat wires? Btc-e has been around forever, hard to see them pulling an exit scam. But as we know (or should)... never say never in this industry. You can't blame those that would jump out for a while, btc moves easily.

Edit: Their customers seem to only be putting 1+% premium on it. Maybe 5% compared to when they traded lower than everyone.

Quote from: shmadz on May 29, 2015, 10:13:38 PM

Quote from: wakasaki808 on May 29, 2015, 07:20:34 PM

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/37q8qh/are_people_still_planning_to_do_a_tx_stress_test/

Cheesy

'bout time something interesting happened.

T-47 minutes...

And... the "stress test" has hit a whopping 1,901KB worth of unconfirmed tx. I've seen it be a multiple higher than that on just a random day.

https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions

Tis climbing tho

For context, I've seen a backlog of 6900 transactions on an exciting trading day.

Edit: It seems that bigger blocks would make a tx spam DOS attack more expensive for the attacker, not the other way around.

Quote from: shmadz on May 30, 2015, 12:12:23 AM

Quote from: Riddikulo on May 30, 2015, 12:02:36 AM

Lol 26000 unconfirmed transactions. And blockchain.info is lagged like shit.

I think what's happening is other nodes are hanging onto 26,000+ old transactions while blockchain.info drops them after a certain amount of time, with only 5000 transactions, hence the discrepancy.

Where do you get the 26000 number?

I suspect many of the transactions will be considered spam or below the dust limit or whatever.

I'll be watching this guy's attempt to see if these transactions ever get accepted.
https://blockchain.info/address/12qLgVrkW561PbpfvokKwfj7CPjCVwwCTS

https://tradeblock.com/blockchain/

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on May 30, 2015, 03:46:53 AM

Quote from: svein on May 30, 2015, 03:33:40 AM

what is the meaning of your stuff?
(that we are going nowhere but down, I guess)

It is just data.

Thanks for the effort Stolfi.

An illiquid pink sheet and a nasdaq nordic etn from KnC are about as exciting as they will be. The SEC should just green light COIN now, the lack of interest might serve their interests.

Quote from: shmadz on May 30, 2015, 04:05:08 AM

Btw, 550 transactions with less than half a cent fee took less than 4 hours to clear - even during an intentional spam attack on the network that saw unconfirmed transactions exceed 25,000.

https://blockchain.info/address/12qLgVrkW561PbpfvokKwfj7CPjCVwwCTS

There is no evidence that bitcoin will crash and burn once we reach the block limit. I would rather tackle the problem of sustainable transaction fees to support the miners now when the network is still small than push of the problem several years into the future when the network might be several times larger.

I agree that block capacity is not an issue now. But is the time of 25btc and 12.5 btc block rewards the time to be seeking byte size rents? Maybe we should allow the network to grow to the point in which the benefits of using the chain are much more meaningful? It is good to test a child when they are young, but also important to let them grow and adjust to the level at which they can withstand the test.

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on May 30, 2015, 02:48:46 AM

(+3) No data on 2015-05-25; a holiday?

Yes, memorial day in the US. Markets closed.

The battle for $23X...

A year down the road and stolfi thinks this ponzi will still be worth 80x the USD... bullish. Dump3er is even more bullish. Cheesy

Quote from: catena5260 on May 31, 2015, 04:03:46 AM

Quote from: Mrpumperitis on May 31, 2015, 01:33:11 AM

Daily chart
Silk Road successors
May 29th 2015

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/05/daily-chart-13

same volume of sales listed on dark market sites.

But how many of them aren't scams and will really deliver the products?

And won't be seized or disappear with everyone's money?

Sounds oddly similar to the "analog" dark markets.

Quote from: Fakhoury on May 31, 2015, 02:47:03 PM

Quote from: luckygenough56 on May 31, 2015, 01:36:15 PM

I FEEL BEARISH

Why ?

I guess there is something happening in the backstage and I don't know it yet, com'on people, I'm a Bull and I want to understand what is going on Cheesy

It's a little like being the battered wife of a cruel, bear shaped, and often drunk husband.

You hear the gravel crunch as he pulls into the drive late at night, likely returning from the corner pub. He may very well be coming up the stairs with a nice note and some flowers... but recent experience and memory tells you otherwise.

Quote

Mircea Popescu says:
May 31, 2015 at 10:49 am
A) In order to use "I" you need to be someone. Who are you ?

B) In order to write, chuka must first read. Has chuka read ?

C) Stop being an idiot. Seriously. It may appear to you that nobody can tell the difference between you and someone whose mind actually works, but this is merely a simptom of the problem. Everyone that's not you can actually tell you're an idiot.

Step right up egocentric contrarians and xmr shills. Hitch your wagon to the brightest star in the night sky. The best part: You don't have to propose an alternative, or do anything at all really.

Quote from: Fakhoury on May 31, 2015, 11:19:52 PM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on May 31, 2015, 11:17:49 PM

Quote from: Fakhoury on May 31, 2015, 11:15:35 PM

Quote from: GaliX on May 31, 2015, 11:11:33 PM

we broke every trendline.... This is never going to stay stable above 200$ for much longer... Just one big guy saying he is done is enough right now

Bullish ? Bearish ?

Three toed slothish?

Pardon me ?

You heard Mayor Bitcorn

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on June 01, 2015, 03:07:17 AM

Quote from: julian071 on May 31, 2015, 09:00:51 PM

I sold everything. Hope to buy back cheaper, when this whole core / xt-thing blows over.

Gavin's plan (as I understood from his posts) is to deploy a large-block version of the software now, but the change would be programmed so as to allow 20 MB blocks only starting in Q4/2016.

That way, hopefully most everybody will have time to upgrade to the new version and adapt their own programs to allow for 20 MB blocks -- including the major exchanges and services, and most miners. If that happens, the critical date will pass without a ripple for those who have upgraded. For the laggards and rebels still using the old version at that time, they will find that they cannot use the exchanges and services, or maybe even move their coins; until they upgrade too.

This is the way I understand it as well. Although the "losing" fork doesn't have to instantly die, we could see two Bitcoins. julian071... see you in 11 months?

Through version checking, we will be able to monitor the "votes" of the network.

Quote from: BayAreaCoins on June 01, 2015, 05:40:20 AM

I can't even imagine what someone is thinking if they are buying right now.... lol jesus. Brave souls.

Must be that whole "buy when others are fearful" thing.

If you're planning on wringing your hands about the fork, you've got a long year+ ahead. Take a vacation, buy back when it's decided and the halving has happened if you wish.

Well... Hello intrepid investors.

Hope everyone had a nice day.

Price Target: Remains $10 per corn.

Quote from: Fakhoury on June 02, 2015, 12:37:29 AM

Quote from: samson on June 02, 2015, 12:35:50 AM

Quote from: Fakhoury on June 02, 2015, 12:27:12 AM

Quote from: Ab-Soul on June 02, 2015, 12:25:45 AM

I can't see any more down the hill. Don't expect 180-190 $ coins.

I guess the ground will be $200 by max.

So you think the price of Bitcoin will never go below $200 again, ever ?

It may go sub $200, but will bounce again quickly.

I think a limit of 2.7 tps could be considered a "bug of sorts" when you consider the aspirations outlined in Satoshi's white paper. I know it is one of my main concerns with the protocol as it stands today.

How this issue is handled is critical to those looking from the outside, with broad implications for the continued growth and survival of the network. Allowing 20 ,21, 8MB blocks doesn't mean we would have blocks of this size any time soon, it's simply headroom. And if we did... that would arguably be a great thing, more users, more tx, more fees for miners. In fact, when block subsidy dwindles... this IS the incentive for miners to keep securing blocks. Satoshi foresaw the professionalization of miners and full nodes long ago.

A terabyte drive is well less than $100 these days, and bandwidth use at 20MB blocks isn't all that bad either, considering they are securing millions of $ worth of transactions. Given technology cost curves, it will be even better at the time we could potentially see 20MB blocks. Full nodes are already not the domain of the average user. But the demands and costs aren't out of reach for the average user either.

The concerning part of this debate is the somewhat ego driven/side project incentivized nature of the discourse. The pricing via fee of block space scarcity may well be a factor in the future, but to pursue it now... before any kind of widespread usage, seems ridiculous. It's like jumping out of the trojan horse before it has even been rolled inside the curtain wall.

Quote from: shmadz on June 02, 2015, 02:08:05 AM

<tinfoil>

Gavin has been increasingly aggressively pursuing the block size increase ever since he started receiving paychecks from MIT. It would be interesting to trace the funding he's receiving all the way back to see who's really pulling the strings now, but it's fairly safe to say that if you are dependant on another person/group/entity for your livelihood, you are exposed to potential pressure from that person/group/entity.

The only alternative way to increase transactions without increasing block size is to enable some sort of off chain transaction method. Off chain transactions allow for channels to be set up that would allow effective mixing and increase anonymity. The smaller the block size, the larger the number of transactions that take place off chain, the more difficult it becomes to trace coins.

</tinfoil>

This is the kind of speculation that's not really helpful. Was it better when Gavin was being paid by Vessenes, Shrem, Karp, etc etc? I don't think he has handled it perfectly, but he certainly isn't being shy about his vision, the steps to achieve it, and the reasoning behind it.

2.7 tx per second is an artificial and harmful bottleneck... if not today, in the near future.

If anonymity/convenience side chains are desired and functional, they will happen... with either 1MB or 20MB blocks. We shouldn't manufacture compromised capability just to nurture them.

I think it's not surprising and actually healthy the price is reacting to this rancorous debate, and it's just getting started...

This was designed to be a self directing network motivated by the mutual self interest of many disparate parties, let's see if it works.

Quote from: shmadz on June 02, 2015, 03:08:49 AM

Quote from: Mrpumperitis on June 02, 2015, 02:57:39 AM

Quote from: shmadz on June 02, 2015, 02:53:06 AM

Btw, that's 150 just for electricity, that does not include rent, wages, taxes, etc...

150 is cheap, is this for a dedicated miner or pc?

PC?

I don't even think a pool would recognize or accept your hashrate. It wouldn't even register.

my guesstimate is based on my personal experience with knc Neptune (around 3 TH/s at approx 2000 watts) and 0.10 $/kWh

Which should generate about 1 btc per month. For paid off hardware, you're looking at about $2.23 in profit per day at current prices, and you need to get rid of 2000 watts of heat too.

Quote from: keewee on June 03, 2015, 02:35:38 AM

Someone collecting a few bitcoins with a 1btc buy every 7 seconds on Bitfinex. Been going for a while now

2btc now. The little bot that could.

Quote from: Adrian-x on June 05, 2015, 07:07:37 PM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on June 05, 2015, 06:49:05 PM

Quote from: Wandererfromthenorth on June 05, 2015, 04:27:33 PM

http://cointelegraph.com/news/114481/chinese-exchanges-reject-gavin-andresens-20-mb-block-size-increase

It seems that a somewhat more accurate headline would have been: "BTCChina and Huobi agree that the current 1 MB block size limit is too small, but think that 20 MB would be too big"

you know there are only 91 nodes in the whole of China, if anyone over there wants to use Bitcoin they would need depend on one of the other 5000 nodes over here, i don't think they have much bargaining power.

A few of those 91 nodes have many peta's aimed at them though. Could be a major factor if they decide to fight for Mirceacoin Classic.

Quote from: Fakhoury on June 05, 2015, 09:12:57 PM

Quote from: ElectricMucus on June 05, 2015, 09:06:51 PM

Quote from: Zombie123 on June 05, 2015, 08:53:46 PM

Quote from: Fakhoury on June 05, 2015, 07:56:45 PM

Quote from: dmwardjr on June 05, 2015, 05:40:35 PM

We have many new players coming to bitcoin all the time in the form of retailers, traders and miners mostly. Yes, the "miners" portion is probably slowing down a little bit but they are still coming. I see newbies in the mining threads all the time asking questions about mining. The new one's who come along pick up the slack of any oldies who may have left bitcoin behind. Especially, the newbies to trading bitcoin.

We are still very early in the game for bitcoin. It's a new technology to most; much like the internet and email was to most when it first came out. These things take time. So, be patient and let the blockchain work things out.

We have many venture capital groups who have invested a lot of money into the technology of the blockchain. Many user friendly apps for financial institutions will be coming out soon and will change the way billions in the world live their daily lives. Many here may give up on bitcoin for lack of patience. However, I know billions on this earth who have yet to even hear of it who will gladly accept it with open arms and give it the support it needs in great numbers. There is strength in numbers.

As people in other parts of the world come into the fold of technology with smart phones and the like, we will see a increased enthusiasm for bitcoin - the application. As other applications are created and used on the blockchain [with a relative ease and security] news will go around about the blockchain. Bitcoin is not the blockchain. The blockchain is bitcoin. The blockchain is more than just bitcoin. The blockchain is MANY things we have yet to see, but will see in time that will change the way we do many things in the future.

So, be patient... The future is here... It only needs a little time to play out. In June of 2007 (eight years ago on June 29) we had the iPhone or the term, "smart phone." That was only 8 years ago, people. Nobody ever heard the term, "Smart phone" until eight years ago. Eight years is only a blink of an eye. The "drama" in the price of bitcoin fluctuation is what it is - "drama." We haven't had eight years yet with bitcoin.

Do not fret! Bitcoin (the app) will have it's day of recompense. We just need to be patient and wait on the many other things the blockchain can do. It's all about "the blockchain." Not bitcoin! Bitcoin, is only an application on the blockchain. Be patient and watch how many other apps created using "the blockchain" technology changes the world. THEN, you will see a change for the better in how the rest of the world values any other applications, such as bitcoin, using the blockchain technology.

All this talk of saying, "If the price goes below this amount, it's over." I feel the price of bitcoin is directly related to the value of "the blockchain." If the blockchain does well, then most any application using the blockchain will do well; as long as it's user friendly. We are making progress in leaps and bounds with "user friendliness" ever since the blockchain and bitcoin first came out. Give it time folks. The blockchain and and it's apps [Including Bitcoin] will do wonders for mankind the same way the internet has. Just give it time.

Those who give up on it will lose in the end for their lack of patience. Six years is but a fart in the wind in view of time and how technology changes. As more time passes, we will see great strides in the blockchain and many user friendly apps using the blockchain technology; including bitcoin.

David

One of my favorite replies so far here at the forum.

This is one of the very few sane posts on this thread and infact in the forum. Its all about blockchain.. bitcoin is just a tiny part of it. This is just the beginning of something great just wait and watch

I liked your signature bro lol

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on June 06, 2015, 12:14:34 AM

Quote from: Wandererfromthenorth on June 06, 2015, 12:10:54 AM

That's fucked up lol

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102737187

No place does a $5 wrench quite like Brooklyn Tongue

I'm sure the mark that was lifted of his Panerai in a craigslist deal gone bad today is miffed about the lack of media attention. Undecided

Quote from: YourMother on June 06, 2015, 07:58:17 AM

Quote from: cyclotronmajesty on June 06, 2015, 07:39:02 AM

possible trend reversal this weekend?

Upward?

It hasn't gone down or up... It's stalemate.

The fork talk isn't over but that isn't happening any time soon.

Price has gotta go somewhere. What reason for it to go down after this brief recess?

I just sold so I assume that means it will go up now. Wink

Considering that both the fork and the halving will happen in the next year, It will go nowhere but down/sideways in 2015-2016. And although the current development discussions/actions are very important and productive for bitcoin while at the same time entertaining for the already established community, the uncertainties that they bring are keeping away the serious investors/big businesses and prevent or slow down the adoption rate considerably.

I for one, thank my, err, YourMother, for some thoughtful and candid remarks lately.

♫"And she's buying a stairway to $200"♪

JayJuanGee

I'm working on a model for the pain threshold of btc investors. What is the point at which you sell everything, and refrain from telling anyone you know that you even flirted with such a thing? I acknowledge that either of these things could happen, but what is the price point that both do?

Kind Regards,

Quote from: Alley on June 14, 2015, 06:07:13 PM

Dumps are fine. It redistributes wealth.

For the last 18 months, dumps have been redistributing wealth from the buyers to the dumpers.

I've been offline for a few days, surprised to come back and see such a pile of bids on finex. Painting the order book to look bullish (or bearish) usually means trying to support (or suppress) current price without the conviction to pull the trigger. Looks like a lot of the last $6 of gains was bought with borrowed money. I hope they're pretty tolerant and solvent. I guess we'll find out.

Did the winkies announce anything, 2 weeks�?

A few dollars up and down isn't even a move, it's just noise. This stability is doing strange things to bitcoin traders, has them making mountains out of every little mole hill.

Chart Buddy Chartblock

400 coin flag planted on $234 finex.

Whoosh!

Lol, party's over, whale flipped the manip switch.

Quote from: tarmi on April 27, 2015, 06:03:53 PM

double digits soon!

you can quote me.

If anybody had any doubt before the last few days shenanigans. This market is manipulated like almost no other asset on the planet.

Tarmi I'm giving you a hard time. Similar to how you rightly rattle the bull's pen on downturns. No doubt your shorts at near 300 have paid for your mistakes at 235.

Quote from: ssmc2 on June 19, 2015, 06:53:27 PM

Quote from: Fakhoury on June 19, 2015, 06:39:43 PM

Quote from: Natalia_AnatolioPAMM on June 19, 2015, 06:34:13 PM

Quote from: saturn643 on June 19, 2015, 05:28:33 PM

Will it go up from this price on Saturday/Sunday or down? If you look at the wider picture over the last few days it's still rising

I guess it will definitely go up anyway ,maybe monday even

Why "definitely" bro ?

Definitely maybe

Price can increase sunday afternoon, or definitely decrease. It maybe even next tuesday will arise, or absolutely fall. After this rise price looks to reach 300 for sure, also looks to decrease to 220.

For more stunning analysis: Consider signing up for my newsletter.

Quote from: Torque on June 19, 2015, 11:54:43 PM

Quote from: derpinheimer on June 19, 2015, 11:36:06 PM

Quote from: gotmilk_ on June 19, 2015, 11:34:35 PM

Quote from: derpinheimer on June 19, 2015, 11:13:23 PM

Ask wall accumulating rapidly on BFX... whale friend having fun again.

It looks like he is playing with himself. Not much volume after those two sells.

Yeah it appears whatever was sold into the bidwalls were quickly placed for sale...
Either selling to himself or just an unattended bot.

I guess no one here would consider that this entire pump n' play was orchestrated by a single whale or maybe two, because no other whales are currently in this market and they can play with free abandon and with little downside risk?

This is the fun you get when one or a few whales splash around in a dead market.

Seems the whole move was orchestrated by the one whale and his magical shape shifting walls. Traders have become somewhat immune to the fear of missing the train.

Will the walls stay in place and be eaten by profit takers? The "benevolent bull whale" scenario. Or will support get pulled right when things get ugly? Fueled by a not so benevolent whale going hard short and reaping the gains of panic selling?

In either case, I'm less scared of a rapid push to 280 than a regression to the 220's. Probably just going to be a flat weekend with a struggle around 240.

Greek millionaires are as likely to plow their cash into rare pokemon cards as they are into bitcoin.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on June 20, 2015, 12:21:47 AM

Quote from: Torque on June 19, 2015, 11:54:43 PM

Quote from: derpinheimer on June 19, 2015, 11:36:06 PM

Quote from: gotmilk_ on June 19, 2015, 11:34:35 PM

Quote from: derpinheimer on June 19, 2015, 11:13:23 PM

Ask wall accumulating rapidly on BFX... whale friend having fun again.

It looks like he is playing with himself. Not much volume after those two sells.

Yeah it appears whatever was sold into the bidwalls were quickly placed for sale...
Either selling to himself or just an unattended bot.

There's been hundreds of millions of usd invested in bitcoin startups. I sometimes wonder if even one or two of these entities or their investors are using a few mil to stave off further declines. Not trying to run a rally all by themselves, but putting a floor, and at least sow some doubt in the minds of weak handed hodlers and shotrers.

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on June 20, 2015, 02:32:29 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on June 20, 2015, 01:22:19 AM

There's been hundreds of millions of usd invested in bitcoin startups. I sometimes wonder if even one or two of these entities or their investors are using a few mil to stave off further declines. Not trying to run a rally all by themselves, but putting a floor, and at least sow some doubt in the minds of weak handed hodlers and shotrers.

Charles Lee (Litecoin's mommy, now at Coinbase) was once asked that in a reddit AMA. He explained that Coinbase cannot use any of their VC capital for that purpose.

I am not sure, but there may even be laws in the US that prohibit a startup from using its VC capital for speculation or to invest in other things. Perhaps because of tax reasons.

It also does not make sense for VC investors to give several million of their money to some computer nerds for them to play the market. If the VC investor wanted to speculate with his money, he would do it himself, or hire experienced traders.

However a company that wants to start a bitcoin fund may legitimately buy bitcoins. IIRC, when Tim Draper bought the first batch of USMS bitcoins, he said that they would provide liquidity for a company called Vaurum (that Nick Szabo worked for, BTW) and now has some other name.

My speculation leaned towards the high net worth individuals who owned stakes in these firms, pushed the investments in bitcoin companies, and shouldn't be legally required to report their activities when using personal funds.

Edit: redundancy and first 400 coin miniwall at 241.5 (eaten)

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on June 21, 2015, 11:04:12 PM

There are already threads that discuss and keep track of those instruments, but they may not be be updated regularly:

KncMiner XBT: 3175 BTC traded at 248$ !

$GBTC Speculation, Information, and Cogitation

For XBT Tracker One, my USD prices are different from those reported in that thread because I use the approximate SEC/USD exchange rate of the day, whereas that thread may be using the nominal value posted by KnC. There are also service fees that may not be properly accounted for.

Thanks Stolfi

The knc ETN appears to be a pretty good interface between miners and conventional asset markets, with improving volume.

GBTC is a sort of curiosity, at least it exists I guess.

Quote from: ikal on June 22, 2015, 02:12:37 AM

breakout up or down Huh

Sideways, and it will last you the rest of your life.

Quote from: noobtrader on June 22, 2015, 04:25:26 AM

Quote from: camolist on June 22, 2015, 01:55:23 AM

lowest USD rate on bitfinex 54% yearly

at this rate it's tempting to cash out bitcoin and lend the USD

lending btc on poloniex also about 50%-60% yearly... with your logic ppl should be tempted to borrow fiat from the bank then buy btc and profit from poloniex Huh

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on June 27, 2015, 01:30:35 AM

Quote from: Morecoin Freeman on June 27, 2015, 01:12:33 AM

Quote from: NewLiberty on June 27, 2015, 12:50:06 AM

!
The classic pterodactyl pattern.
JOUST TIME

Boss Battle. Over or under?

Nah, just the classic body positive yoga formation on the 3.3 day.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on June 28, 2015, 07:27:39 PM

Quote from: rememberme on June 28, 2015, 06:05:10 PM

Yea its going down too bounce 230

Yes..... maybe we need a new poll to attempt to capture this sentiment....

Even though it seems as if polls, within this thread seem to tend towards the polar ends rather than towards reason.

My sense at the moment is that prices are going to bounce off of $240 rather than bouncing off of $230... but what the fuck do I know? In about the past 18 months, I have gotten quite a bit wrong in bitcoin related to short term BTC prices, and I would have thought that the $200s was just NOT sustainable for such an extended period as we have experienced for more than 6 months now... , and based on the totality of circumstances, I would have surmised that current btc prices would have been floating around in the $600 to $1000 arena.... etc etc etc...

Actually, I am kind of of the theory that the recent and prolonged good run of the dollar has contributed to causing BTC prices to remain somewhat suppressed in its current price doldrums.

It's actually pretty encouraging we are building a base around the level of the previous ATH. Massive 5k coin dumps have basically ended, maxblocksize debate has the potential to give some long term clarity and capacity, halving is on the way, the sovereign debt bubble is showing signs of strain. Looks like the shorts realize this, being down 30+% from recent levels. Long term BTC trading strategy: buy the panics, sell the euphoria, easier said than done though.

Quote from: shmadz on June 29, 2015, 02:15:44 AM

This subconsciously puts the blame on the ones trying to retrieve their money rather than the bank that doesn't have their money.

Very well put.

Psychological warfare.

Checks wisdom...

Mother of...

Not a bad day gentlemen.

Thrusters fully engaged. Prepare for extreme fomo.

Quote from: Ezmoneyezlife on June 30, 2015, 06:14:27 AM

Whoever that steer who gently allowed me to short from 268$ - thank you! Cee ya at 255$! Long term correction target has been reached (61.8% fib retrace) massive dumps incoming to low 250$ or even 240$. Greece hype has been used as a formal reson for that quick candle. I would die of laugh if major of greeks voted for staying in EU which is quite possible cos most of people are scared there now and not so many people love their commie government why have no proper plan to escape euro just classics commie promises about bright future without any details.

Not so ez money being a bear when log downtrend breaks eh? You close your shorts at a loss before repeating the same strategy? Cheesy

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on July 04, 2015, 02:33:20 AM

I just did an estimate of the "Bitcoin National Debt" (BND), which is the minimum amount that the bitcoin system "owes" to the people who are holding bitcoins. It is between 483 million and 17.2 billion USD.

For example, someone who bought 10 BTC a year ago must have paid close to 600 $/Ƀ, the market price at that time. Therefore, he must be expecting to get at least 6600 $ if he were to sell or spend those bitcoins -- the 6000 $ that he invested, plus 10%/year of return. By doing that math for every bitcoin and adding the results we would get the BND.

Unfortunately, there is no way of knowing when any given lump of bitcoin was bought by its current owner. The purchase may not even have been recorded in the blockchain (e.g. if it was bought in an exchange and left there). We can only assume that the last purchase of a bitcoin that was mined on day X will (almost) surely have occurred on date X or after that. Therefore, by looking at the minimum and maximum price in that interval, we can get uper and lower bounds to the expectations of its owner.

For example, the 25 bitcoins that were mined on 2014-04-01 (when the price was ~450) may have been bought by their present owner(s) on 2014-06-01 (when the price was at its highest, ~680) or on 2015-01-14 (when the price was at its lowest, ~150). So, the current owners of those bitcoins, even if they are happy with a 10%/year return on investment, now expect to get from them between 25 � 150 $ and 25 � 680 $ plus the 10%/year.

I may post more details later if I get the time.

Too many variables to draw reliable conclusions concerning cause and effect, but could make for interesting data points in themselves.

"National debt" is wrong, even with tongue firmly in cheek, a debt is a promise to repay... which bitcoin doesn't promise. The exchange rate volatility risk is foisted upon current owners and traders (not rights to future labor and income), and rightly so.

Maybe "bagholder pain index" or BPI can be produced, at least partially, with this data.

Quote from: shmadz on July 04, 2015, 02:58:47 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on July 04, 2015, 02:50:02 AM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on July 04, 2015, 02:33:20 AM

What happens to "bagholder pain index" when price exceeds $1200 ? Do we reach negative pain? Just like negative interest rates?

It would go negative after a prolonged ATH, at least with currently held coins. It could also approach infinity with a mass exodus from the asset to better vehicles or in the chance of a protocol failure.

I agree that the built-in 10% ROI is superfluous. It's either -100% or (x)%+ in this game. Best to just stick with the actual values, as expectations will be scattered everywhere.

Meanwhile, the sovereign bond holders, are calculating their similarly devised BPI in the nominal trillions of $ equiv.

Quote from: gijoes on July 04, 2015, 06:55:25 AM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on July 04, 2015, 03:59:16 AM

Remember those valiant new core developers, who were defending bitcoin against the fork that the Evil Lords Gavin and Mike wanted? Seems that they now have a little ittyy bitty forklet of their own happening now...

6-blocks deep invalid chain due to some stupid miners not checking blocks and only using headers? Meh. Could be almost anything, just happened to be BIP-66 specific. Blaming it on core devs is disingenuous. The situation has zero similarity with the pandora's shitbox opened by a bunch of fervent Bitcoin-XT fork promoters.

Those scalists, trying to increase capacity to something on par with a regional renaissance festival. For shame.

Quote from: edgar on July 04, 2015, 07:47:44 AM

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1108304.0;all

Not to ruin the plot... but it's over already. The panic was less than impressive.

Nice to see our little coin reacting (or being made to appear to react) to macroeconomic events. A nice change from a couple years ago when we all react to mtgox's server's net connection. Cheesy

Poor NLC, her enthusiasm seems somewhat diminished after a $50 rise in a month. Undecided

Not even the will to make new pics... Cry

Bulltrap, Beartrap, Bull...

Wheeee!

Quote from: BlackSpidy on July 05, 2015, 11:44:02 PM

Quote from: Alley on July 05, 2015, 11:14:01 PM

They will find out the hard way. Most likely a dump will happen after halving.

Yeah, I've been thinking for a few days "this just has to come down at some point" when looking at the LTC price. I got 2 lucky trades in, getting a minuscule boost to my BTC stash, and I'm waiting to see how far it goes. If I had to guess, I'd say it goes to $5, maybe $6 tops. Then whatever happens after its halving happens. I got 0.06 LTC I'm holding on to just in case. I'm waiting for the LTC price to go to BTC0.02 to trade it in, if it doesnt reach that, I guess I'm letting it ride. We'll see in about 50 days.

Whoa brother, remember, only what you can afford to loose. Cheesy

You can pump LTC 5% with about $60k. Do the same with BTC and no one will notice. Also, you try to cash out huge gains for significant sums, you slip right down.

Fun tool for multiplying(or dividing) nickels and dimes tho.

Quote from: luckyhash on July 06, 2015, 01:09:20 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on July 06, 2015, 12:47:54 AM

You can pump LTC 5% with about $60k. Do the same with BTC and no one will notice. Also, you try to cash out huge gains for significant sums, you slip right down.

Why would you want to cash out of an asset that's preforming as well as LTC (price tripled over the past month)?
I mean, ya, sure, you held BTC while it did the exact opposite (albeit over a year and a half), so points for intrinsic consistency, but still...

You sure it aint just plain old jealousy? Hate to see the other fellow win big while you ...is there a polite word for "opposite of win big"?

Unsurprisingly, there was only one thing to do with GPU rigs when fpga and asic took over. Thus many bitcoiners have also dabbled in litecoins. And there were many levels much higher than $5 to sell your LTC.

As there have been many better times to sell some BTC, and many better times to buy.

Hindsight is fun, but sometimes bereft of absolute utility.

The server has seemed troubled since its last "episode".

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on July 06, 2015, 04:06:36 AM

Quote from: Fakhoury on July 05, 2015, 11:29:48 PM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on July 05, 2015, 11:21:56 PM

Quote from: albert73 on July 05, 2015, 10:04:17 PM

Mr. Gabriel, the German economics minister said �But it must be crystal clear what is being decided. It is, at the core, yes or no to remaining in the eurozone.�

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7a/Groutite-114104.jpg/608px-Groutite-114104.jpg

What you want to say Prof. Stolfi ?

Only that "crystal clear" can be black and opaque as coal. Which is actually what "crystal clear" usually means in politics and economy...

(Uh, ok, and coal can be clear and transparent as diamond, alright.)

If we could only whip up some vice.com articles, in greek, using Stolfi as a primary source. Warning them of the severe hardship they have and will be experiencing if they use bitcoin as an alternative to the completely rational and sustainable operations of the state and union monetary authorities.

We could use simple arithmetic to determine cost per transaction, at a fixed block reward, tx volume, and coin price, to determine the long term viability of a system. And by viability, I mean the proclivity to ease the conscience of those that may shape the world with the stroke of a pen.

Such short memories around here. Everybody forgot how btc-e traded $10 below other exchanges for... oh I don't know, years?

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on July 06, 2015, 11:24:15 PM

I just hope this doesn't end up another Cypress pump Undecided

Yeah, by the looks of this infographic, it could be unpleasant...

Anybody worried about this yet?

Thanks ~~flat earth~~ 1MB maxblocksize aficionados!

Quote from: Sitarow on July 07, 2015, 04:02:46 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on July 07, 2015, 03:39:15 AM

Anybody worried about this yet?

Thanks ~~flat earth~~ 1MB maxblocksize aficionados!

Nah...

A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System*

*A limit of less than three transactions per second occurring on planet earth may apply.

Quote from: rolling on July 07, 2015, 05:23:19 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on July 07, 2015, 05:11:27 AM

Quote from: rolling on July 07, 2015, 04:52:09 AM

Quote from: shmadz on July 07, 2015, 04:34:18 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on July 07, 2015, 04:16:25 AM

Quote from: Sitarow on July 07, 2015, 04:02:46 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on July 07, 2015, 03:39:15 AM

Anybody worried about this yet?

Thanks ~~flat earth~~ 1MB maxblocksize aficionados!

Nah...

A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System*

*A limit of less than three transactions per second occurring on planet earth may apply.

Bitcoin is not here to compete with visa. It's not here to make banking better, it's not about buying coffee or micro payments or any of that crap. It's not about mass adoption.

It's about monetary freedom.

If three transactions per second is not enough, then there will grow an ecosystem of alt coins to pick up the slack. We will see exchanges grow that allow for easy transfer of value from one coin to the next and through this multi-coin environment, we can scale without limit.

There is no solution for one chain to hold all the transactions. Any proposal that suggests compromising the security, integrity, or distributed nature of bitcoin in order to gain some kind of imaginary "adoption" is an attack and should be treated as such.

Can someone please explain this to Gavin and the other "Scientists"?

I have a sense that Gavin and some of the other like minded scientist are attempting to discuss bitcoin by use of less disruptive terms in order that BTC seems less threatening to the status quo.

Not the monetary freedom part but they have to realize that every cup of coffee and micro transaction on the planet can't possibly and shouldn't be kept in the blockchain.

As far as I can tell, no one pays for coffee with bitcoin, and micro transactions are comparatively rare. And yet, here we are with full blocks, and very minimal global adoption.

Consensus from the enlightened seems to be: Buy alts, short btc. (Or wait for our magic sidechain to solve it for you.)

Quote from: tarmi on July 08, 2015, 03:18:53 PM

yeap, kinda sad to watch all those bitcoin trolls waiting for a 10 % rise while litecoin is up like 500 %.

Cheesy

Quote from: tarmi on July 05, 2015, 01:58:58 PM

that's because you arent any different from others bull scam a-holes.

consider me shorting ltc a "voice of reason".

If it's sad being up $50 in a month on btc... what does it make the dude who shorted at $235 and then decided to short the arising chickun?

Quote from: rolling on July 08, 2015, 05:15:29 PM

Quote from: gotmilk_ on July 08, 2015, 05:11:22 PM

Quote from: rolling on July 08, 2015, 04:53:09 PM

Can someone with a US based brokerage account or Chinese brokerage account buy from Nasdaq Stockholm? Doesn't seem likely.

As far as I know, they can.

I really don't think that's true. It would have been huge news. There is very little of the worlds wealth that can trade on Nasdaq Stockholm.

Some can, it's just not typically available in a vanilla US brokerage account.

https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/home.php

Quote from: tonyq on July 08, 2015, 04:31:09 PM

Quote from: aztecminer on July 08, 2015, 03:38:43 PM

Quote from: Dalmar on July 08, 2015, 03:30:32 PM

Quote from: TerraMaster on July 08, 2015, 03:28:16 PM

With Greece broke and no economy, and Chinas stock market crashing... is this all good or bad for bitcoin? so confusing Roll Eyes

Gold and silver are getting dumped. Bond yields are stable, there is no true fear yet.

gold and silver are not being dumped, they are being suppressed/manipulated, there is a difference. rumor i heard is liquidity in bonds is drying up causing bond yields to rise and bond prices to drop .

Absolutely spot on.
People should be jailed for what they are doing to the metals markets right now.

Not exactly. When SHTF in 2008, gold and silver crashed just like every other commodity and stock. People tend to fly to "cash" and bonds when things get dicey. Not saying that's rational, just the way it is, until it isn't.

You are more likely to see flight to t-bills, at least initially, meaning higher prices and lower yields.

Transaction spam continues... And with 1MB blocks, spammers get their fees back as the tx's get booted out of the mempool after 24 hrs. Cost free to continue indefinitely.

I'm sure the curious newcomers will understand all about how BTC was intended only to be a settlement instrument with high fees as their first transactions get "stuck" in a maxed out system.

Careful, boaring can quickly turn into a goring.

Quote from: rolling on July 09, 2015, 03:56:14 AM

Quote from: BlackSpidy on July 09, 2015, 03:20:30 AM

When do you think the transactions are going to clear up?

I think it would be great if they never clear up. Bigger fees only make sense.

The average fee for the 22800 pending transactions is .000128 BTC or 3.4 cents per transaction.

Anyone who wants to get a transaction processed in the next block or two only needs to have a $0.10 (.00037 BTC) fee and it should be just fine. The way I look at it, if you don't think it's worth it to pay 10 cents to process your transaction on the most secure network on the planet, then use a less secure alternative. The higher the average fee goes, the less chance of spam attacks and low value transactions bloating the Blockchain.

Why can't we have both a fee market and higher throughput?

Seems a bit early to say 2.7 tx per second should be set in stone. Shouldn't it be allowed to grow in the early stages? Within reason, wrt current hardware and avg bandwidth capabilities. This still requires adequate time to be studied, and shouldn't be rushed, nor needlessly delayed. Even the bandwidth constrained majority of chinese hash power said they would be open to 8MB.

It seems like a somewhat artificial handicap when btc is competing with an entire universe of alts, many with much higher throughput.

The fee market should grow in proportion to the diminishing of the block reward over time. Early=big inflation/no or tiny fees, Later= exponentially smaller inflation/higher demand for limited blocksize (speed incentivized by non-trivial fees eventually).

Quote from: rolling on July 09, 2015, 04:16:17 AM

I have no issue with the increase to the "maximum" block size as proposed by Gavin. It doesn't mean miners are going to utilize the extra capacity unless they are compensated for it.

Bigger blocks do impact all mining pools (and full nodes in their own way), independent of whether they set their software to make smaller blocks. It comes in the form of validation and hashing the transactions, which takes time, in a game where seconds count. That's why this is important to get right, and I think something crucial in the growth of btc vs plenty of willing competitors.

Quote from: nerioseole on July 09, 2015, 04:38:04 AM

Quote from: rolling on July 09, 2015, 04:32:32 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on July 09, 2015, 04:28:16 AM

Quote from: rolling on July 09, 2015, 04:16:17 AM

I have no issue with the increase to the "maximum" block size as proposed by Gavin. It doesn't mean miners are going to utilize the extra capacity unless they are compensated for it.

True and some independent miner will no doubt build those huge blocks that everyone else has to deal with but the big boys aren't going to do it for free.

Should we invest in larger highways or force people to carpool? It may take some time to resolve...

Nice metaphor, a small village with a single lane toll road is going to have a hard time competing with the town next door with a two lane (miner) subsidized thoroughfare.

And after time and growth. A big city shouldn't/can't use a 30 lane freeway, but can (for a fee) generate a market for limited travel capacity, because the demand to be there exists and that demand is willing to pay (to use the most secure blockchain).

Quote from: Son0fLamb on January 14, 2015, 08:06:06 AM

Gentlemen. Good morning. As delighted as I may be with the way things are going, this is starting to intrude on my beauty rest!
Fix your broken coin, gentlemen Angry

Oh... I can't stay mad at you, you make me so happy! I forgive you!

Hahahahaha!

The price, gentlemen! Can you even believe it?!!

Remember when lamp chop called the bottom?

♫Memories♬

Quote from: Fatman3001 on July 10, 2015, 10:10:38 PM

The whales of today are so boring. For the princely sum of three million USD they have the opportunity to punch a big gaping hole in $300, but nooo. That would be too much fun.

pussies

Screw this! I'm going to bed.

Just in case:

Quote from: Norway on July 10, 2015, 06:34:59 PM

Have your 300-gifs ready...

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on July 10, 2015, 11:34:18 PM

Quote from: bassclef on July 10, 2015, 09:28:57 PM

Quote from: SBear on July 10, 2015, 09:26:51 PM

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on July 10, 2015, 09:24:22 PM

Down to 284 on Stamp, I was hoping for an assault on 300 tonight, looking unlikely now.
Is 280 going to hold?

Depends on how much the LTC ponzi guy sells off in Bitcoin.
+ panic sells.

It's not the ponzi guy controlling LTC, it is a whale, probably a group of them. Doubtful that Mr. Ponzi had such a good pump bot and control over multiple exchanges.

Looks like the LTC selloff is spilling over a bit into BTC. Meanwhile LTC may go to $3 before bouncing.

Idk, LTC hit the 61.8 fib retracement so it could possibly be a bottom at this point. Maybe another runup? Placing bets for tonight on into tomorrow?

Fibonacci analysis on an illiquid pump and dump, what could go wrong?

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on July 10, 2015, 11:47:17 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on July 10, 2015, 11:39:24 PM

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on July 10, 2015, 11:34:18 PM

Quote from: bassclef on July 10, 2015, 09:28:57 PM

Quote from: SBear on July 10, 2015, 09:26:51 PM

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on July 10, 2015, 09:24:22 PM

Down to 284 on Stamp, I was hoping for an assault on 300 tonight, looking unlikely now.
Is 280 going to hold?

Depends on how much the LTC ponzi guy sells off in Bitcoin.
+ panic sells.

Idk, LTC hit the 61.8 fib retracement so it could possibly be a bottom at this point. Maybe another runup? Placing bets for tonight on into tomorrow?

Fibonacci analysis on an illiquid pump and dump, what could go wrong?

Point still remains that this retrace stopped right around the aforementioned level so I imagine some sort of support must be forming again. One of the dudes that called this last ltc rally is back in 100% right now. I'm not that bold but I did add some to my plate.

Correlation != causation. Best of luck to you tho. At least you're buying 50% lower than yesterday.

Regarding bitfinex, kinda sad to see what the real bid side looks like after our benevolent bullwhale took his $millions off the (visible) book.

Pleeeeease...

No more of coil springs and cobras...

And where's mommy, why did she leave after taking a look at the bank paper in the mail?

Body positive yoga formation on the 3m.

Edit:

Thar she blows.

Cheers gentlemen.

I'd like a dump back to $290's so I can get back in on the trading simulator.

Any weak hands wanna help a brother out?

Quote from: Dump3er on July 12, 2015, 07:54:00 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on July 12, 2015, 07:18:39 PM

I'd like a dump back to $290's so I can get back in on the trading simulator.

Any weak hands wanna help a brother out?

Oh shit! The trading simulator! The dump3er forgot the fucking trading simulator for various days while analizing the market development. Now I can�t boast with my gains! Fuck it! Angry

Seems more like the market development was analizing the Dump3er. Angry

That 8hr window is a killer for trying to catch pullbacks on bull runs tho. Playing chicken while trying to scalp a few dollars is better done on the simulator I suppose.

Quote from: lel on July 12, 2015, 09:28:14 PM

Quote from: smith coins on July 12, 2015, 08:42:13 PM

okcoin Regarding the July 10th DDOS attacks
http://blog.okcoin.com/post/123893357479/regarding-july-10th-ddos-attacks-explanation

:username:

They are basically admitting that they earned a lot of money from the ddos attack/lag.

Next question for the thought experiment, gentle investor, what % of the global bitcoin market was mtgox?

It appears that the failure surface has grown somewhat more multifaceted.

Quote from: gentlemand on July 12, 2015, 10:13:21 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on July 12, 2015, 09:32:42 PM

Next question for the thought experiment, gentle investor, what % of the global bitcoin market was mtgox?

It appears that the failure surface has grown somewhat more multifaceted.

If I remember rightly it was somewhere around 13% just as the big bubble kicked off. I'd assume China pushed that down as it ripened.

From August 2013:

Quote from: Erdogan on July 12, 2015, 11:09:02 PM

Quote from: shmadz on July 12, 2015, 08:29:08 PM

Quote from: redsn0w on July 12, 2015, 08:17:44 PM

Now what would you suggest? I have sold few bitcoin at 305 dollars and now I am holding $$.

Code:

If in doubt, please refer to the chart below for all your decision making needs!

Have bitcoin. Don't have bitcoin
|-----------------------------------|-----------------------------------
Bullish. | Hold (patience) | Buy (panic)
----|-----------------------------------|-------------------------------------
Bearish. | Sell (panic) | Wait (patience)

(Note: any decisions made by following the above chart are not endorsed by shmadz.corp and this is not intended as investment advice Grin

I like it. It covers it all

Doesn't help the poor soul who has 0.1 btc and is bullish. Cheesy

Quote from: Erdogan on July 13, 2015, 03:32:10 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on July 12, 2015, 11:19:31 PM

Quote from: Erdogan on July 12, 2015, 11:09:02 PM

Quote from: shmadz on July 12, 2015, 08:29:08 PM

Quote from: redsn0w on July 12, 2015, 08:17:44 PM

Now what would you suggest? I have sold few bitcoin at 305 dollars and now I am holding $$.

Code:

(Note: any decisions made by following the above chart are not endorsed by shmadz.corp and this is not intended as investment advice Grin

I like it. It covers it all

Doesn't help the poor soul who has 0.1 btc and is bullish. Cheesy

Follow the instructions: Panic buy.

1900 coins protecting the magic 300 on finex.

Interesting that finex USD swaps are lower than they were at the start of the June rally. About $26mil, shedding about $3mil in the last couple days.

After smashing into and through that little ledge so many times, Wile E. is bound to erode the geological integrity of the obstacle, one of these years...

Let's just hope his credit account with ~~okcoin~~ ACME Co doesn't get called.

Quote from: misterycoins on July 18, 2015, 01:15:49 AM

this low is temporary, looks more like a panic sell to me. I'd be more worried about continuous sliding if we breach 270, that was the price when we started this last bull run.

Holding 270 would be nice, 252 and 219 weren't all that far back in the rear view mirror tho. The key right now is to withstand the few thousand coins liable to be dumped by the impatient. It will rise naturally if/when profit taking is absorbed.

Volume-less stability is an integral preparatory step in a recipe calling for angus and pepper.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on July 23, 2015, 01:10:15 AM

Quote from: Elwar on July 22, 2015, 08:26:46 PM

Quote from: dreamspark on July 22, 2015, 07:38:58 PM

Well yeah the 2020 halving is also 'priced in'. Everyone knows the economy behind Bitcoin production and inflation. Knowing from the start when halvings in production are taking place and having a cap on the total money supply is why many people are here and why many speculators forsee an increase in price over time as long as new money >= coins wishing to be sold.

Yes, nothing happened after the first halving when the price was $9 because it was priced in. Nothing happened soon after that. Can't fight science.

Within 6 months after the last halving bitcoin went up 10 fold, within 12 months it went up 100 fold. Nothing is priced in since monetary good pricing is subject to a huge amount of inertia (stock-to-flow ratio very high) but when that inertia is overcome by pricing at the margin (true demand/supply) the new level can be very much higher and fueled by pricing perceptions and a large amount of speculative psychology.

Good point. We all have an idea of what the halving means, and some will even adjust our perceptions ahead of time. The actual balance of supply and demand is a completely different animal. Will we see 100x again shortly after the next halving? As much as it would please me... no.

Something like 10 million coins aren't traded at all every month, meaning there are lots of parachute strings to be pulled in the happy circumstance of a precipitous rise resulting from demand outstripping supply.

Quote from: rjclarke2000 on July 24, 2015, 09:54:36 PM

Quote from: The KGB on July 24, 2015, 09:39:26 PM

Quote from: rjclarke2000 on July 24, 2015, 09:24:42 PM

Can I ask what is so good about Gemini?

Aren't there already exchanges? Why expect a upward movement in price?

Just wondering.

Thanks

Gemini will be a "fully regulated, fully compliant" exchange with major fiat backing (Winklevoss twins) They also have a major stake in Bitcoin with a reported 1-2 percent of there assets in BTC.

The Twins seem serious and motivated to "Make Bitcoin bigger then Facebook".

If sombody will make BTC "Mainstream" it will be them.

Yeah but is this just a U.S thing only? Most exchanges are awful with Euro, pound sterling etc.

Apart from in the U.S. it's pretty shitty for the average person to buy bitcoins.

This has most likely been mentioned 100s of times but if the winkles have that much what's to stop them dumping on Gemini?

Not trolling, just asking.

Gemini by itself is pretty much non-news. ItBit beat them for "fully regulated NY bitcoin exchange" by going down the banking trust route, which they are now copying. As you can see, ItBit isn't exactly experiencing market moving volume:

https://tradeblock.com/markets/itbt/xbt-usd/15m/

I think people get hopeful that the COIN ETF may be held back only by Gemini not existing. I'm not so sure, but I'm open to being pleasantly surprised.

I think the action today was much more related to LTC pumping and OKC settlement day.

Quote from: ImI on July 25, 2015, 12:27:54 AM

Quote from: poncho32 on July 25, 2015, 12:20:20 AM

What if the Wink's Bitcoins get stolen? Does insurance cover the loss, and is there no way an insurance company could possibly wriggle off the hook of paying? I know it's not likely but nothing's impossible, no matter how good the Wink's security is there is always a risk of theft.

Good question. I am sure the SEC asked that question also. Its basically the same as the Gold ETF. Gold could get stolen also so there should be an insurance also, right?

It's all detailed quite explicitly in the ETF application. The risk exists that the ETF goes to zero and is delisted in the event of compromised holdings.

Unless I'm mistaken, the cost of insuring the entire reserve would be too expensive to be workable.

Quote

�Although the Trust�s transfers of bitcoins will regularly be made to or from the Authorized Participant Custody Accounts, and to the Sponsor Custody Account and the Trust Expense Account (each of which are custodied and administered by the Custodian), it is possible that, through computer or human error, or through theft or criminal action, the Trust�s bitcoins could be transferred from the Trust Custody Account in incorrect amounts or to unauthorized third parties. To the extent that the Trust is unable to seek a corrective transaction with such third party or is incapable of identifying the third party which has received the Trust�s bitcoins through error or theft, the Trust will be unable to revert or otherwise recover incorrectly transferred Trust bitcoins. To the extent that the Trust is unable to seek redress for such error or theft, such loss could adversely affect an investment in the Shares.�

Quote from: edgar on July 25, 2015, 01:08:18 AM

Quote from: findftp on July 24, 2015, 07:16:00 PM

Quote from: JimboToronto on July 24, 2015, 04:09:30 PM

Well good morning Bitcoinland.

You know there are things like timezones right?

he seems not to - but posting the exact same phrase day after day has led me to thinking he may be a bot or one of those weird wannabe-borg types.

good morning bitcoinland

seems we're still at x.xx again. sideways is good...

bla bla bla todays price, bla bla bla yesterdays & future price again.

something something, other people suck.

my lifes perfect & coffee. yawn/yum

(check his endless boring posts, its more robotic than binary)

Quote from: ImI on July 25, 2015, 01:31:35 AM

Yes. But there are obv problems also imo. Adoption isnt going forward as smooth and fast as expected. Bitcoin seems to be at this moment more a tool of speculation than a real life device.

I wonder what could be keeping potential investors and large scale users from seeing its global potential?

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on July 07, 2015, 04:16:25 AM

A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System*

*A limit of less than three transactions per second occurring on planet earth may apply.

Quote from: aztecminer on July 25, 2015, 04:24:06 AM

soon 1 oz of silver will be worth 320+ bitcoins ..

Do you use escrow?

Quote from: aztecminer on July 25, 2015, 05:08:48 AM

Quote from: hendra147 on July 25, 2015, 04:56:24 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on July 25, 2015, 04:40:25 AM

Quote from: aztecminer on July 25, 2015, 04:24:06 AM

soon 1 oz of silver will be worth 320+ bitcoins ..

your a fucking MORON

but you realy knew that so good night bitch.

and 1 bitcoin can buy your brains Roll Eyes

problems with bitcoins:

A. "dumb people" are going to lose bitcoins if and when more people use them.

B. "dumb people" are going to lose bitcoins through malware hacks.. security for bitcoins is gimped for newbs .

C. eventually bitcoins will be forced to 'create out of thin air' more bitcoins. and bitcoins is not being straight forward about this thus it is being a scheme.

D. when more users do adopt bitcoin pc's will require a hard drive just to hold the blockchain, and everytime that hard drive fails will be forced to download the entire bloack chain again.

E. security has been gimped with bitcoin at exchanges.. and just about every single time a bitcoin exchange is hacked the perputators never get caught .. the coins are just gone.. noone ever gets busted ..

F. every single transaction is recorded in the blockchain.. no privacy at all... none zero.

G. we got people talking about "soft forks" to make new units of currency.. it might not be talked about but it sounds possible entire wallets being forked right out of the blockchain.

it is very doubtful all the problems with bitcoin can be resolved in time to become the replacement currency you all wish and hope for .. its going to be gold and silver.. they are going to surprise you and everyone holding bitcoins is going to take a massive haircut.

shiny metal investment butthurt detected:

A: Same as always
B: Same as always
C: Same as always, no
D: Same as always: You care? run a node. You don't? use a SPV client.
E: Same as always
F: Same as always
G: Same as always, wat?

http://www.miketysonbitcoin.com/

Brought to you by a pink sheet company with a $23,000 market cap? Undecided

Quote from: WhatsBitcoin on July 27, 2015, 12:35:33 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on July 27, 2015, 12:02:14 AM

http://www.miketysonbitcoin.com/

Brought to you by a pink sheet company with a $23,000 market cap? Undecided

r/Buttcoin must be all over this one Roll Eyes

They're hot on the case. A particularly rich vein in the comedy gold mine.

Wasn't our last celebrity endorsement this guy?

Or was it Puff Daddy?

Quote from: chmod755 on July 27, 2015, 01:26:15 AM

Quote from: GaliX on July 27, 2015, 01:09:54 AM

Seems like there is nothing else going on currently...

You forgot the update on the Gemini exchange.

Update: They are even further behind on the launch than we expected.

Respectable little dump on finex, to reject and go higher would be quite bullish.

Absent that, very little supporting $290.

Quote from: JimboToronto on July 27, 2015, 02:43:34 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on July 27, 2015, 02:25:57 AM

Respectable little dump on finex, to reject and go higher would be quite bullish.

Absent that, very little supporting $290.

No big deal. Ho hum.

It'll take more than some klutz with less than 2k and a fat finger.

To break and hold $300 decisively? You're absolutely right. Wink

Quote from: inca on July 29, 2015, 11:50:50 PM

Quote from: Karpeles on July 29, 2015, 11:47:35 PM

290 not holding anymore, be ready for the dump, cut your looooses while you can

The book talking from you and galix is transparent. At least dress it up with some wall observation or something.

Play nice friends, perhaps build a bridge from the middle of the river. And think of it... you all now share the auspicious flair of obnoxious signature ads to pad your considerable stashes.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on July 30, 2015, 12:10:11 AM

Every time the big block, big brother, panopticoin bitcoiners come out in full force the price dumps ... any wonder?

The market is just coiling like a spring, ready to explode once all participants realize a maximum of 3 tx per second, forever, is CRITICAL for bitcoin's success (as neckbeard pokemon cards).

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on July 30, 2015, 12:32:53 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on July 30, 2015, 12:20:09 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on July 30, 2015, 12:10:11 AM

Every time the big block, big brother, panopticoin bitcoiners come out in full force the price dumps ... any wonder?

The market is just coiling like a spring, ready to explode once all participants realize a maximum of 3 tx per second, forever, is CRITICAL for bitcoin's success

300,000 tx per day is actually not bad for a settlement rail. Growing within upload bandwidth limits puts us at 1.2 million tx per day currently and doubling roughly every 4 years.

No need to hand over all our financial histories to the PanoptiCoin mike H. and his Googley-eyed buddies at the NSA.

Your complete financial history has been on the public blockchain from the first transaction you made. I don't see how 2MB blocks would change this.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on July 30, 2015, 12:56:36 AM

Only the biggest corporations (and TLAs) who can run PanoptiCoin nodes will have privacy ... and an asymetric information advantage over the plebes.

Those that are committed enough to run a full node handling 1MB blocks, will likely retain the same commitment with 2MB blocks. I'm not buying the argument that any increase in throughput automatically leaves us with a handful of nodes run by corporations and governments.

I am in favor a small increase, like Jeff's 2MB. Mainly to break the ice that has formed over this polarizing debate and to measure and study the impact in preparation for more long term scaling solutions.

Quote from: inca on August 01, 2015, 01:20:09 AM

Karpeles arrested..

Good.

He's criminally implicated.

Or criminally negligent on a real rosy day.

But hey, the $1000 days were fun amirite?

Somebody needs to dump enough to test those big walls. Say 5k? 1k isn't going to cut it.

Quote from: criptix on August 03, 2015, 02:09:49 AM

On a serious side note, if mark gets jailed in japan... well even he doesnt deserve that...

Lying while poofing near half a billion $ and he doesn't deserve a stint in a 1st world prison system? Some countries execute people for simply possessing a certain chemical compound.

Quote from: criptix on August 03, 2015, 02:48:13 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on August 03, 2015, 02:26:07 AM

Quote from: criptix on August 03, 2015, 02:09:49 AM

On a serious side note, if mark gets jailed in japan... well even he doesnt deserve that...

Lying while poofing near half a billion $ and he doesn't deserve a stint in a 1st world prison system? Some countries execute people for simply possessing a certain chemical compound.

read up about the japanese prison system.

you will retract your comment after that

more like african, me, dprk, guantanamo bay prison style

This isn't summer camp, and I doubt he'll be flayed.

Quote from: Jdj1727 on August 03, 2015, 03:07:37 AM

BTC to $275?

Sure. $270 is the number to watch.

Quote from: Jdj1727 on August 03, 2015, 03:22:14 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on August 03, 2015, 03:10:50 AM

Quote from: Jdj1727 on August 03, 2015, 03:07:37 AM

BTC to $275?

Sure. $270 is the number to watch.

Why $270?

To see if benevolent bullwhale's wall is real on finex, or just manipulation.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on August 05, 2015, 04:05:53 AM

Quote from: Richy_T on August 04, 2015, 03:26:15 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on August 04, 2015, 12:23:29 PM

I did attempt to clarify for him, but he kept saying that he does NOT understand, and that he is NOT going to invest into anything that he does NOT understand.

People who do not understand something should not invest in it. But they should also STFU.

When talking to people like this, sometimes I get the sense that I am receiving a live troll job, because they get you to go through a detailed, specific and extensive explanation, and then afterwards they act as if they did NOT understand a damn thing that was said (even though you know that they are smarter than that).

A real troll job would have been if they asked you your unrealized gain/loss on being so smart.

Edit: Sorry JJG, I admire your principled stance. Like a monkey... I sometimes grab the low hanging fruit.

Come back blindmayorbitcorn, don't think for a second your flirting with that redditrollop has gone unnoticed...

Quote from: biggus dickus on August 09, 2015, 11:48:15 PM

Quote from: samson on August 09, 2015, 11:05:52 PM

I see Kraken are blacklisting NY due to their crazy new BTC regulations.

This is most definitely 'bad news' for all things Bitcoin Roll Eyes

It must be a nightmare for bitcoiners living in New York now. The only way I imagine they can do business with exchanges that have blacklisted New York is through a VPN. I have never tried accessing an exchange through a VPN but I wonder if the exchanges have also blacklisted any IP addresses they detect as VPN IP addresses.

Further, when submitting their KYC documents New York residents have also probably had to tell the exchanges they are from New York. Perhaps students with bank account addresses at their non-New York parents might be OK.

Whew, dodged a bullet there.

Quote from: derpinheimer on August 10, 2015, 03:22:11 AM

Quote from: cryptasm on August 09, 2015, 10:09:13 PM

I dont even understand how ppl keep saying its the end of btc while its being more and more used

Honestly I found this chart very underwhelming.
https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions-excluding-chains-longer-than-100?timespan=2year&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

And this one
https://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume-usd?timespan=2year&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

Definitely premature to be cryptasming all over the joint.

Quote from: CEG5952 on August 10, 2015, 04:09:19 AM

So the $300 dream is good as dead now? But the $500 dream still intact in my brain. I don't know why. Maybe because of the incoming halving?

$300 dream ded, confirmed. And your brain is the only brain aware that such halving is inbound.

Maybe after 200k worth of goxcoins get distributed, 70k US and AU govcoins to be sold, a maxblocksize argument that seems to have donned cement shoes is resolved... maybe.

The max_blocksize debate takes a big step forward. All the major chinese pools voting for 8MB blocks by stamping the blocks they are mining. This plus chinese devaluation = UP.

Quote from: dreamspark on August 12, 2015, 02:46:56 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on August 12, 2015, 02:42:37 AM

The max_blocksize debate takes a big step forward. All the major chinese pools voting for 8MB blocks by stamping the blocks they are mining. This plus chinese devaluation = UP.

The big miners are always going to want 8mb blocks, they have the economic incentive to as they can punish the smaller miners by not relaying their solved blocks to them and with the added bandwith needed to relay the larger blocks the big miners only relaying their blocks to the big miners
reduces competition and centralizes even more.

Are there really small miners anymore? Even the small guys point at big pools. If anything, the remote mines in china may be at a disadvantage compared to locations with better bandwidth.

The concern with big blocks isn't the mining nodes, it's just the regular nodes. People worry about a percentage of them shutting down after balking at increased network costs leading to more centralization on a relaying node (vs mining node) level.

It's definitely not resolved yet, but progress is good, markets hate uncertainty.

Quote from: ejinte on August 13, 2015, 03:03:12 AM

If billyjoeallen says we're going to $230 I'm highly considering selling and making a nice profit.

Battered bull syndrome.

The bid tsunami on finex seems to have been gotten slightly shorter, 21k to ~18k protecting mid 240's. Ho-hum as jimbo would say, let's see if the weekend brings some volume.

Remember bitcoiners:
"There is neither happiness nor misery in the world; there is only the comparison of one state with another, nothing more. He who has felt the deepest grief is best able to experience supreme happiness."

See... dramatic unrealized losses are the key to true success! Chin up!

Quote from: dreamspark on August 15, 2015, 02:33:10 AM

Quote from: becoin on August 14, 2015, 06:00:19 PM

I want to see the entire order book only of the exchange I'm trading with! Where did I say that I want to see the order book of all the other hundreds of bitcoin exchanges simultaneously?

Then trade on a platform that allows that. As said not every stock/forex broker allows you to see their order books.

Quote from: dreamspark on August 14, 2015, 04:59:19 PM

Your argument doesn't make sense

Quote from: becoin on August 14, 2015, 06:00:19 PM

No, your argument doesn't make sense. What you're basically saying is - blind people are more difficult to manipulate than people capable of seeing every activity around? Is that really what you're trying to convince me?

If the whole order book is hidden then there is no way at all to manipulate anybody just by using the order books. If you are able to see the entire books then there is the ability to manipulate people using the order books with fake orders that the owners have no intentions of being filled. Is this incorrect?

Quote from: AlexGR on August 16, 2015, 04:22:56 PM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on August 16, 2015, 02:48:46 PM

Quote from: AlexGR on August 16, 2015, 01:34:15 PM

Can somebody explain this to me like I'm a 5 year old:

XT is supposed to make bitcoin futureproof, but how is it going to achieve that, when it can be spammed up to ~1.15gb / day, meaning that it'll take just 100 days for a determined attacker to increase the blockchain to +115gb, and around a year to take it up half a terabyte.

Terabyte hard drives are standard now. A year from now 5 TB drives will be standard. That's a worst case scenario and could still be easily handled.

The worst case scenario is that someone starts spamming the blockchain with the 8mb blocks. Then, next thing you know, people will say "ohh these 8mb blocks are full, we need bigger blocks". Then you get 20mb blocks and ~3gb/day of bloat / >1 tb per year. And who is to stop them spamming the 20mb blocks and getting them full too? What's next? We'll be asking for 100mb blocks? This is madness.

Personally I don't believe that even the 750k/1mb blocks are full by legitimate transactions and not bogus transactions. I believe these bogus transactions are created to stir a "debate" about "ohh we need bigger blocks" and stuff so that we can then go on and shoot ourselves in the foot by "accepting" larger blocks as the "natural evolution".

We have to deal with a reality here: Big banks, credit cards, swift etc, don't want BTC to succeed. Bloating it is a very cheap way they can use to kill it. It's much cheaper than a 51% and cheaper than manipulating the BTC market. And it will be FAAAAAAAAAR cheaper to enable that attack vector with 8mb or 20mb blocks.

1MB blocks actually incentivize a spammer, as we saw during the tx spam exercises of the last weeks. Reason: it's much cheaper to do. Spammers get their transactions (and attached fees) kicked out of the mempool after not getting into maxed out blocks. This allows them to just do it over and over again, much more cheaply than if those tx were actually included in a block with their fees collected by the miners. The scenario you propose would be much more expensive to sustain with larger blocks, with that increased expense going to the miners.

Node concentration is a concern with more demanding requirements for running a full node, and should not be ignored, but staying at 2.7 tx per second to infinity is potentially much more damaging to this grand experiment. We'll never know how it might impact node count and concentration unless we do a modest increase and measure the result.

The intransigence and vitriol coming from MP, the PR gal, and his toadies is a sign of the weakness inherent in their position. Rather than appeal to reasoned judgement, it devolves into name calling and fear mongering in a grand ego stroking exercise. There will be no larger blocks unless 75% of solved blocks are made by nodes supporting >1MB, this means consensus will have already happened, and the orphaned chain will die quickly as <25% of hashing power will face an impossible difficulty. My prediction is that the 25% will quickly upgrade so they are mining the chain that will actually be worth something.

There's no question this debate and stalemate has been impacting confidence in the exchange rate, and rightly so. On a positive note, once this is settled and Bitcoin has a tx throughput that isn't laughable for a global p2p digital cash system... the fear dissolves and we can dust off those old moon boots.

Quote from: shmadz on August 16, 2015, 07:48:01 PM

Quote from: cyclotronmajesty on August 16, 2015, 10:53:44 AM

Quote from: becoin on August 16, 2015, 09:51:46 AM

Quote from: cyclotronmajesty on August 16, 2015, 08:10:09 AM

So is everyone supposed to sell their coins and then repurchase them on Bitcoin XT?
And where do you go to buy Bitcoin XT coins?

Just on the contrary! If you buy bitcoins now will give the opportunity to spend same coins twice both on Bitcoin and XT networks in future if there is a split at all. So, if you buy 1 bitcoin now you actually buy 2 bitcoins if XT altcoin succeeds in being true alternative to bitcoin!

I don't think this is correct.

If curious, this is an example of what will actually happen once bitcoin forks:

http://qntra.net/2015/01/the-hard-fork-missile-crisis/

There is no fork, until 75% of mining power is making blocks using software that supports more than 2.7tps. Once the fork does happen, Mircea better have some idle petahashes ready to fire up to mine at a (extremely high for <25% hashing power) difficulty. The fork will be quick, and brutal, for those who choose pride over logic.

Not surprising that his ego is telling him he can bend the entire network to his will by selling off his coins tho.

Quote from: BitofaN1 on August 17, 2015, 03:03:41 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on August 17, 2015, 12:51:02 AM

So somebody dumped 10,000 coins and the price moved ~ six bucks down, bounced back up five and is now holding steady half way up (or down depending on your point of view). Put together with last weekend's more successful dump, that's 50,000 coins to move the price down ~$25 or 2k coins per dollar lower value. And there seems to be diminishing returns.

He should write a book called "How to lose your ass attempting to manipulate the bitcoin market".

my guess is he borrowed those coins from some early adopter off exchange and now he is looking to trying to buy them back without moving the market up so much that he loses money. Good luck with that.

Got to give him credit for his timing though..He probably thought dumping 10k coins among forking/censorship controversy would trigger a cascade of closing longs.Too bad that finex wall ate his coins without flinching.Sometimes walls are real, kids.Don't run head first into them.

Yeah, that's twice now. The bidwall is damn real kids. Either the guy runs out of money, or he is laughing as you come to his prices. Errybody's got a limit tho... and why buy here when they'll sell to you even lower? Seems the max_blocksize controversy may have better gifts to give.

Wonder where we'd be without the benevolent bullwhale(s) support around $250.

I don't see XT as likely to result in a mass migration to XT and the death of Core, but it is a non-trivial way to vote for the direction you would like Bitcoin to develop. Hopefully it lights a fire under the core devs to come up with their own solution. Once core has some kind of scaling solution (not in 2020) I could see a majority of XT nodes switching back.

The "moderation" going on is frankly disgusting. How the hell can any compromise happen if you use force to make the opposing side of the debate just shut up?

Meni Rosenfeld has been added to Jeff Garzik in the Voice of Reason camp.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3h9cq4/its_time_for_a_break_about_the_recent_mess/cu6udfe

Quote from: derpinheimer on August 18, 2015, 09:11:10 PM

Wow $2m in longs closed and nearly 10k in shorts opened...

Yep, that entire drama candle could almost be chalked up to longs closing and shorts adding, for a about a $3 drop.

Not saying that was the bottom, we are far from seeing a conclusion on the max_blocksize argument, but longs adding while shorts closed would have been a much uglier scenario.

Twas a margin call whale ballet like I've never seen on finex today... hory shet. Has all the other exchanges scared shitless too, and why not... scary fork happenings, over-levered bulls, the bitcoin fora becoming like north korea... Perfect. Looks like a classic capitulation, except the volume was not anything like January, not good. Either you're getting a sale right now, or this is the preview for the double digit extravaganza sale. Shows it never hurts to have some lowball bids sitting on the books. Wish I knew. But then I wouldn't tell you.

I am seeing some despair-ish comments around. That's usually not a bad time to pad a stash. As ever, there are some pros in this market with the funds to make it happen. I wonder what his shorts executed at on the exit, he definitely didn't get much in the 160's Shocked

while covering. I'm sure they're not complaining. What a day... being long I took a nice hit, but I have cold stuff I'll hodl to the very end, there isn't another market like it.

New Poll Request: Was the Bitfinex flash crash the bottom? Yes, No

Quote from: adamstgBit on August 19, 2015, 03:41:02 AM

i'm starting to think we might just quickly recover from this flash crash, sure some dumb shit sold us down to 166 but 234 is still pretty much 3 month low, a fucking good price if you ask me, when i saw this starting to slip i thought 240 would prove to be support but the dumbbear whale just fucking blew his load too fast. fuck

Dumb? They're farting through silk atm.

Bitfinex CEO. Talk of that which should not be named at 0:34:15.

https://soundcloud.com/whaleclub-bitcoin/bitfinex-ceo-recording-after-18082015-flash-crash

Voice of Reason.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on August 19, 2015, 04:45:26 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on August 19, 2015, 04:23:04 AM

If bitcoin gets backed by the NSA is this bullish?

it's probably CIA.

more bullish is if the Hearn-Andresen PanoptiCoin social attack gets rekt. and btc earns extra kudos as independent money.

Is that with a compromise to 2-4MB blocks in core to measure effects? or 1MB4EVA or bust?

Quote from: brg444 on August 20, 2015, 02:43:05 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on August 20, 2015, 02:34:40 AM

Quote from: AlexGR on August 20, 2015, 02:03:04 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on August 20, 2015, 01:40:58 AM

This is an attempted coup alright, but it's from idiot miners who want a bigger slice of a smaller pie. If we cave on this, they will never allow our network to become competitive enough to disrupt the banksters.

Bloating the blockchain to DOA levels will disrupt bitcoin, not the banksters.

Besides, 8mb blocks, or even 80mb blocks, aren't enough to scale to such levels. You'd need enormous storage (and bandwidth) per day to compete with the volume of banks and credit cards.

so which is it, the increase is too big and too small at the same time? We don't need to go head to head with VISA right now. We need grown up core devs who don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Why do you need bigger blocks right now?

Stop promoting this false dilemma. It's not XT or nothing.

I'm totally on board with the guy who doesn't know how to spell brakes. Obviously a Top Mind�.

Quote from: micky123 on August 20, 2015, 02:54:51 AM

It is interesting to watch the poll results, until yesterday people were ready to go all in if the CIA took charge of bitcoin. Today , i see a drastic movement from the other side. Even though the number of votes are extremely low and may not reflect the opinion of the masses, i feel the masses would vote to go all in if the CIA took charge of Bitcoin. The only issue really, is that this was not the principle of Bitcoin when it was launched, it was supposed to be free of any government control or in fact any central authority. The fact that people are ready to go all in if the CIA takes over is interesting, because people feel that essentially it is a government nod for the use of Bitcoin. Bitcoin is supposed to be the currency of the free though, so its quite interesting to see how it has evolved over the years. If you put up this poll at the start of the Bitcoin lifecycle, i am sure 95% would have said "GTFO".

Pretty sure it was a joke dude. Playing off the brilliant argument that Gavin and Hearn's move to go past 2.7tps surely means they're agents.

The CIA probably burns bitcoin's market cap every other day... So, ain't nobody got time for that, besides... we're keeping all the data distributed and safe for them for free.

How does it not surprise me that gmaxwell resorts to exaggeration and hyperbole, to support the Blockstream agenda?

Quote from: micky123 on August 20, 2015, 03:12:56 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on August 20, 2015, 03:02:09 AM

Quote from: micky123 on August 20, 2015, 02:54:51 AM

Well... even it was a joke, most of the un-informed would not even be aware of what you just said. So going by that yardstick, people are of the mindset that government backing is somehow good for Bitcoin. To an extent you cannot disagree with them. If the government had an agenda and some interest in promoting the use of bitcoin, they would go all out and ensure the bitcoin boat would be steadied and the volatility would not be present. I don't see that happening any time soon either, but people are living with a false sense of security that if the government backs something, it must be good.

Bitcoin was invented, partly, to disabuse them of this notion.

Quote

Adam Back: The worry with extremely large blocks is that they can be used to exacerbate a selfish mining attack. If you�ve got a large miner or a couple of large miners, they can create very large blocks and other people won�t be able to receive them or process them in time. So, they will gain an advantage in mining.

Bitcoin chose its parameters to make the advantage minimal so that it�s a level playing field between small miners and large miners. Right now, the interval between Bitcoin blocks is ten minutes. And the approximate time it takes to propagate, or send a block after it�s found, across the peer-to-peer network is about 10 or 15 seconds. You want the ratio between the propagation time and the block interval to be high enough, because, as a miner, while you�re waiting to receive a block, or while you�re processing a block to check it�s valid, you�re unable to mine. So, you lose money.

By having larger blocks, it�s going to take a longer time to process them. So, it�s going to favor miners with higher bandwidth or who are more centrally connected via high speed links to other miners. It gives them an advantage.

How about access to heavily state subsidized electricity rates? Miners more centrally located to hydroelectric plants? Are these not advantages to be gained in the mining market? Why do the reticent devs arrogate themselves the power to centrally plan advantage, or disadvantage, as it relates to bandwidth speeds? (And would they have a conceivable side interest in desiring such control?)

Quote

If you increase the block size rapidly, the level playing field is eroded. If it gets eroded too much, once miners are able to create blocks that only they and a couple of other big miners can mine, they can exclude everybody else because [other miners] can�t keep up.

Let's be honest, there are well less than 20 individual pools/nodes that really comprise the vast majority mining power, are these pools not already incentivized and funded enough to secure the absolute best possible connectivity in their locale? Again, why play favorites here?

Quote

The block size is there to put a check on these economies of scale and level the playing field.

The economies of scale generally relate to power rates, and housing. Why not quality of network connectivity? Well, because of full node distribution, which may very well fall in the case of a precipitous blocksize increase. Seems like he's barking up the wrong tree in focusing on mining vs full node decentralization?

I said, weeks ago, before this strange schism erupted in the community that I would be perfectly happy even with Jeff's BIP 102. The timing is not absolutely critical yet, and if it suddenly was, we would have 100% more headroom. Sad to see everything sort of devolve into a shitstorm, but I really am hopeful that a more conservative increase (even one time) option emerges from core. Followed by a mass exodus from XT when they see that there is another more equitable and certainly less contentious outcome.

I think the core team is technically brilliant, yes even gmaxwell. But some of these questions are more than technical, they're somewhat political, and people's disparate interests get all wrapped up in it.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on August 20, 2015, 04:25:16 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on August 20, 2015, 03:54:21 AM

You can run a node for next to nothing!! Hell I could do it myself on a $400 desktop PC and an extra $20/month in to increase my bandwidth. This extra cost is trivial. Yes, some will shut down at the margins, but many more will start up as adoption increases. How low does the node/wallet ratio have to drop before it becomes a problem? a factor of ten or greater. A worry about a marginal decrease is simple fearmongering.

You're again making the perfect the enemy of the good. Grow the fuck up. It's like doctors at at operating table arguing about what pattern of sutures they're going to stitch the patient up with. Meanwhile, the patient is losing blood.

Scale or die.

You missed the part where I am firmly for increasing the max block size? Making the perfect the enemy of the good is the most apt metaphor out at the moment.

I also think that Hearn was correct that the threat of a fork had become necessary to move forward in the debate. (Adding some of his other pet projects with the release was a mistake.)

"Grow the fuck up?" uh? We have enough hyperbole flying around at the moment. What we really need to do is come together and sort this shit out with a compromise. A small increase that gives us all kinds of interesting data to plan for the next, possibly permanent solution.

Quote from: AlexGR on August 20, 2015, 04:31:57 AM

Speaking of gold: Gold has been demonetized (ie, there are no gold coins in circulation as national currencies), so it's not like millions of gold transactions are happening every day. In terms of transactions per second, it's not very unlike Bitcoin. Yet, the ~5.8bn ounces / ~180 kilotons of gold have a marketcap of 6.5 trillion USD.

You make the case about as well as it can be made. But there's a few problems. The raw amount of transactions in gold is necessarily small. After all, to really transact in metals at a distance you have to pack a lump of metal in some packaging and mail it. Bitcoin is greatly advantaged in this respect. But it is not advantaged with the blessing of the periodic table, people laugh at altcoins, but they really are the competition. They do what bitcoin does, just with less liquidity. To just wave your hands and say "Network Effect" is not sufficient to equate it with a rare, dense, non-corrosive, and shiny when polished metal.

hilarious how the devalued chineeeese currency has not led them pumping ~~bitcoin~~ rare pokemon cards a bit.

Quote from: BlackSpidy on August 22, 2015, 12:46:22 AM

Quote from: BitWisperer on August 21, 2015, 09:55:34 PM

Cant think of a better way to represent bitcoin, a weeping angel. The Doctor Who fans in this thread know exactly what happens when you blink and a weeping angel is out to get you. You simply cannot declare bitcoin dead, you cannot take your eyes away from it, you cant blink.

Bitcoin has the phone box. It's a creature from another world. It's static only when you see it... the lonely assassin, they used to call it...
Dont turn around, dont look away and dont blink.

Any updates to report? Re: Lucrative $2 dollar loan principles repaid in full... with interest?

Quoting the subversive lamb is liable to land you on a list 'round here. Fully frowned upon by the other investment professionals. In fact... forget I said anything... first they got the intellectuals over on the "thinky thread", no reason we couldn't be next. Shhhhh

keep strong, and "just say NO" to bigger blocks.

Quote from: marcotheminer on August 22, 2015, 07:49:16 AM

Quote from: marcotheminer on August 22, 2015, 01:01:54 AM

New, cleaner thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1158938.0

Current price movement discussion only

'Cause as we've discovered. Moderation by a single empowered individual is sublime...

(Checks price, yep, still low $230's)

edit: Should I use Bit-X as a Professional Crypto and GHash Exchange? All signs point to... YES!

I see you chartbuddy kill streak... and raise you:

Quote from: marcotheminer on August 20, 2015, 06:04:03 AM

Around 10 days left of 0% trading!

Quote from: BIT-X.com on June 01, 2015, 08:40:55 PM

https://bit-x.com/blog/trade-free-on-bit-x-until-september

https://bit-x.com

No trading commission (0% on all trades) on Bit-X starting today!

Somebody is launching a shitload of XT nodes all on VPS hosting, the next step in the saga. Surprised it hasn't happened sooner. Are they the dreaded masquerading XT nodes beginning a false flag attack?

Never a dull moment.

https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/nodes/?page=1&q=/Bitcoin%20XT:0.11.0/

Well, I guess there are some dull moments, but still...

Quote from: Peter R on August 23, 2015, 02:22:45 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on August 23, 2015, 01:55:24 AM

Somebody is launching a shitload of XT nodes all on VPS hosting, the next step in the saga.

What makes you believe it is one person? What makes you believe they are using VPS hosting?

Could it not be people waiting till the weekend to have the time to make the switch?

Did you look at the list? Big blocks of nodes coming on from digital ocean and serverstack. The list looked much more organic before this started, I guess around 940 or so.

Quote from: hdbuck on August 23, 2015, 01:53:16 PM

Two known CIA/NSA assets infiltrated in the Bitcoin community - Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn - have joined forces to push a hastily concocted privacy nightmare/scamcoin, which they call Bitcoin-XT.

It is currently completely irrelevant, owing to an absolute lack of financial, economical, technical or social support.

Stop trying to act like MP. It's obvious you don't have the capacity to do so, and in (ineptly) trying, you hurt his cause more than you help it. Wait a minute... what am I saying? Keep it up tiger!

Mining pools may vote with the software they use to make blocks. Smaller miners can delegate their influence to the pool (i.e. their representative).

Mining pools are highly incentivized to come to a consensus on what a valid block is, and what the longest chain is/will be. It is in the pool's best interest to please as many of their customers (buyers and users of bitcoin) as possible.

This whole XT drama has shown us that Bitcoin isn't ruled by the Core devs, in fact, there is a free market for bitcoin software. I think economic incentives influencing individual actors trying to act rationally will rule the day. Either by continuing to use software from the Core group, or using other software if the Core group isn't developing in line with what the market wants.

What could possibly fill the heart shaped void in your chest if we disappeared lambie? Soldering up valve amps? Wrenching on classic cars? Trolling the stackers of zerohedge would be such a poor substitute.

As Voltaire (might have said Undecided

), The great consolation in life is to say what one thinks.

All to the better, if it's also humorous. Being short or long adds a whole 'nother dimension.

For a dash of on-topic: $1.5 million or so protecting $200 on bitfinex, borrowed USD (likely with btc collateral) is at $26 mil, down from near $36 million before the flash crash margin wipeout. Borrowed btc is up about $1 mil from its lows in july.

It looks ugly, but if you haven't learned yet, that's occasionally an inverse indicator.

Quote from: Fakhoury on August 24, 2015, 01:57:13 AM

The pegasus? Monero isn't going to pump itself. Amirite?

Quote from: YourMother on August 24, 2015, 02:26:43 AM

Moderator bans me for 2 months+ trying to teach me a lesson, but instead he learns a lesson. To not ever ban a well-reasoned bear that's contributing at making a less pretentious and less circle-jerking bull-infested swamp-like thread.

It was truly atrocious to see so many bitcoin bulls going full retard during the Grexit speculation.

Anyways,

Unless the TwinklePimple brothers release some sort of a countdown for their over-hyped Gemini exchange, BTC will have nothing to cling on while on its way to sub-100$.

Viva la Bitcoin-XT!

Ahahahaha

Quote from: billyjoeallen on August 24, 2015, 03:45:14 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on August 24, 2015, 03:19:39 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on August 24, 2015, 02:24:06 AM

I wonder how much money and time it would take to add enough XT hashing power to trigger the switch assuming no more existing nodes defected. I'm guessing it could easily be done for less than $500M. The problem is that the cripplecoiners would only need to add one Terahash/second for every 3 Terahashes/sec new nodes to prevent it from happening.

I'm pretty sure 21.co's chips will be mining XT. Microtransactions will not be practical once the network approaches capacity. At capacity, they won't even be possible.

Cripplecoiners consider small transactions "spam", but microtransactions will prevent spam if, for example, email requires 0.1 milibit postage. or even 0.01 mBit. A lightning network adds a layer of complexity to a system that is already too complex for mainstream use. Trusted third parties may make it simple and easy, but that defeats the whole purpose of a peer to peer network.

i think you should try squeezing in more "cripplecoiners" slurs into your rants to be more believable ... or it's simply a rant and ineffective

I call our side "scaleforkers", because I try to be an equal opportunity offender. Anyhowz, if the slur fits...

There's no reason for there to be any block size limit for the same reason there is no reason to fear selfish miners witholding blocks to get a head start on the next one. If your block is too big, someone else's block will propagate faster and you'll miss out on the block reward.

You gotta decide if you want a small slice of a big pie or a huge slice of a tiny one. intentionally throttling the network to collect more fees is like strangling the golden goose to get more eggs.

Or like jumping out of a certain wooden sculpture when the walls of Troy first come into view?

Poe's law folks...

(I was agreeing with you, to an extent.)

Let's hope Core doesn't wait until the depths of winter, the grove is cold that time of year, to provide a road map.

Quote from: shmadz on August 24, 2015, 04:39:10 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on August 24, 2015, 03:50:41 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on August 24, 2015, 03:45:14 AM

intentionally throttling the network to collect more fees is like strangling the golden goose to get more eggs.

Or like jumping out of a certain wooden sculpture when the walls of Troy first come into view?

Or like trying to charge money for an infinite resource?

Bip 101 timescale:

Year. Size. Reward. blockchain size (rough estimate)
2016 8MB. 12.5. 40GB
2020 32MB 6.25. 3.4TB
2024. 128MB 3.125. 16.8TB
2028. 512MB 1.5625. 70.56TB
2032 2048MB 0.78125. 285.6TB
2036 8192MB 0.390625. 1145TB

How many individuals do you think will be incentivized to store more than a petabyte of data with no compensation? The good news is that Gavin's plan is preposterous and will never gain traction, so fortunately there's nothing to worry about. Cool

Good thing I don't have to store or maintain today's blockchain with the computers and networks of 20 years ago...

Edit: Pg 13333, Meet on the Level, Part Upon the Square, amirite?

Here we go Gentlemen!

Quote from: andyatcrux on August 25, 2015, 06:03:06 AM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on August 25, 2015, 05:58:54 AM

WHAT THE FUCK AND FUCK ME WITH THE WHAT?

XT 46.43% Huh

https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/nodes/?page=1&q=/Bitcoin%20XT:0.11.0/

Guys, nodes don't make a consensus. Besides that, they are fake. The thing that counts is the blocks mined. Which is next to nothing at this point.

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3iao3i/how_to_run_3000_completely_legit_full_nodes_aka/

http://xtnodes.com/

Edit: I should add that I could be completely wrong> Tongue

Edit: Nope, I'm not. Cheesy

All explained a few posts ^

He's switched them all to Core now.

Solution to bitfinex volatility: Just turn off the exchange... Undecided

3 times in 2 days, they're losing customers over this.

Quote from: Proxiebuier on August 29, 2015, 02:42:06 AM

Quote from: noobtrader on August 29, 2015, 02:11:11 AM

anyone notice that in 30 minute bitfinex chart there is inverted head and shoulder, target price is 268 Huh

where you know the target price is 26*$ ?
can you give me source about it ?

hint: Begins with "a". Ends with "s".

Quote from: bad trader on August 29, 2015, 02:56:32 AM

The recent shorts were wiped out on Bitfinex yesterday.

I wouldn't call stopping out 20+% of shorts with a 5% price increase all that encouraging. If they were adding... that would be very bullish.

Quote from: Xiaoxiao on August 29, 2015, 03:06:36 AM

Who is the owner of Chart Buddy?

Richy_T

XT as a threat, a manifestation of the frustration with perceived/real intransigence on the maxblocksize question from core devs, has done what it was intended to do... 1MB crowd got rekt, along with 20MB dreamers, and a compromise appears to be cresting the horizon. Jeff Garzik was right all along, sad it took a bunch of drama to get here. It was also a demonstration that the choice lies with the miners, which it absolutely does.

Quote from: HostFat on August 29, 2015, 03:34:40 AM

Thoughts from Russia on the block size situation and Blockstream
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1164828.0

It simply delegates control to the admin of the pool node, where it has always been. XT (and diverting hashes towards your interest), has shown that a chance to exit does exist. I assume that miners and yes, even "gasp", blockstream, does want increased usage in general. You either think that our interests will eventually align, or you don't, and you sell nao. Time to rally behind a solution that actually does increase the maxblocksize. (And yes it is in the miners' best interests (now) to grow the number of transactions while a subsidy exists to facilitate it.)

Quote from: billyjoeallen on August 29, 2015, 03:56:42 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on August 29, 2015, 03:24:00 AM

It's not over and the choice doesn't lay with the miners. It lays with the market, with the people who decide to invest in this project or not. Nobody is going to dump a billion dollars into bitcoin currency and infrastructure knowing they can be held hostage by miners at any time. BIP100 does not do enough to allay those fears.

Miners need to be fucking broken to get it into their fat heads that we don't want to buy cripplecoins. I'm selling any pump and not buying back until they grok the situation.

You don't like mining without fees? Try mining $100 coins. Who run Bartertown? I run Bartertown.

You and the 13% of nodes that XT topped out at? Time to make a compromise, or sell, I'm pretty sure the market can stand your frustration dumpage. The argument and subsequent arrival of XT showed the core devs they don't live in a vacuum, and you should be happy about it.

Edit: Very poor decision by Hearn to include anything else in XT, gasoline to a(n) (imaginary) fire that already existed about his real motives.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on August 29, 2015, 04:25:17 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on August 29, 2015, 04:07:24 AM

You think XT has topped out already? What happens when the group hug in Canada produces no results as they explicitly said there won't be proposals even discussed much less decided on. How many XT nodes then? Then What if Honk Kong produces no results? You still think XT will have topped out at 13%?

8MB IS the compromise. I already explained why we don't need a software limit at all because miners are already incentivized to keep blocks small enough to propagate. I also do not accept that a one time increase helps in the long term. Markets do not like uncertainty.

How many nodes will be running XT when we hit the 7tx/sec limit? What about a day after that? As I've said all along, if you don't like XT, fine. Give us something that scales or I will find a better cryptocoin to invest in.

The cripplecoiners are ceding ground as we speak... Don't let the perfect become the enemy of the good. I'm not willing to trust the future of bitcoin to Mike Hearn, same as I don't trust it to Blockstream, the market (in all its facets) can and will make the decision.

Quote from: podyx on August 30, 2015, 11:24:48 PM

Quote from: gentlemand on August 30, 2015, 10:33:41 PM

Another mention of the Barclays tale.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3216246/Barclays-UK-high-street-bank-accept-bitcoin.html

This site is the queen of mindless comments. I enjoy getting banned on there regularly.

And here they are on a website... writing comments that "don't exist" under their definition.

These people can't be trusted to not lose the key to their bike lock, let alone private keys. They may use it from a front end someday.

Quote from: oxiyusuf on August 31, 2015, 03:57:54 AM

Quote from: ingiltere on August 31, 2015, 12:20:47 AM

Quote from: coinableS on August 31, 2015, 12:03:23 AM

9 up votes on such an idiotic comment that makes no sense.

This is internet. Trolls are new rising stars in this decade.

Bitcoin price is stuck at 225$, I think it goes down to 190-200$ again this week.

If the market indeed see bitcoin prices will stuck or down.
because the issue of Bitcoin XT is still quite influential

Don't worry, the evil XT node IP's are under UDP flood ddos attack. Should quiet those wascally wabbits down so moon launch can commence.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10140981

(Kicks away a tumbleweed.)

Looks like stress test has begun?

Edit: Looks like 1.8 KB transactions with 0.0008 fees

Quote from: shmadz on September 02, 2015, 02:47:45 AM

Someone many pages back linked the Gavin interview, https://youtu.be/B8l11q9hsJM

Pay special attention at roughly 1:14:40 , the first and maybe only interesting question, let me paraphrase:

Brian: "so, if this fork succeeds, how will decisions be made in the future?"

Gavin: "Mike Hearn will be the benevolent dictator, he will be the ultimate decision maker."

...

He goes on to explain how he does not want to be in complete control, nor do any of the devs that currently have commit ability, but he is completely happy and ok with Mike as the sole controller and decider. He even goes in to mention that future changes will be much easier and will happen much more quickly once this change is made.

I know XT is already dead, but I just wanted to point out to anyone that was still unconvinced that Gavin has been compromised... He is either completely brain dead, or he is deliberately trying to end bitcoin's function as a permissionless, censorship-proof means of storing and transmitting value.

This is silly. What makes you think that people couldn't just as easily fork away from Hearn's XT?

The Core/XT devs are not the Federal Reserve Board, they serve at the behest of the miners and the community. Forking or threatening to fork is the only relief valve on their power.

BTW I agree that 75% of the network moving to BIP101 seems very unlikely now, but my above point remains.

Quote from: shmadz on September 02, 2015, 03:25:15 AM

"The path of lost freedom is a gradual, slippery slope; whilst the recovery of such is a brutal hill to climb."

�The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you (while hopping on a Blockstream� Sidechain) will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.�

Quote from: billyjoeallen on September 02, 2015, 04:24:00 AM

At the very least, we should implement Garzik's kick-the-can BIP102 until it becomes obvious to anyone still not paying attention that we need a PREDICTABLE block size increase schedule or the new investments aren't going to come. Markets hate uncertainty.

Agreed.

A one time fork to 2MB then reassess would be miles better than a constantly shifting or constantly stagnant limit dictated by a 21% player.

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on September 02, 2015, 05:34:10 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on September 02, 2015, 03:39:14 AM

It seems that a major concern for BIP100 supporters is that miners with slow internet connections are disadvantaged by larger blocks. Assuming for the sake of argument that this is true, why should the rest of us subsidize these slow miners? They are mostly in China

Except that the Chinese miners were the first to declare, with signatures and stamps, that they would be OK with a block size LIMIT of 8 MB.

The support for BIP100 seems to be mostly (a) miners who like the idea of deciding things on their own, (b) nerds who like the proposal because it is a nerdish solution, and (c) Blockstream supporters who are pushing BIP100 as a "divide and conquer" strategy against Bitcoin[REDACTED].

By the way, BTC Drak, a co-founder of Viacoin and apparent friend of Blockstream, has just proposed BIP105, another dynamic block size limit adjustment proposal.

And did I mention my own BIP99�?

(I honestly and modestly think that it is the best max block size increase proposal. I posted it in order to make sure that bitcoiners will not implement it. Grin

That would spoil the fun by ending the size war and giving us another 3-4 years of the same boring agony. Don't tell that to the bitcoiners.)

Stolfi is a bitcoiner. He just predicts a spectacular implosion that will provide him Cheap Coinz� at some opportune time in the future... Wink

Quote from: aminorex on September 02, 2015, 05:47:24 AM

If someone had told me two years ago that Blythe Masters would be pitching the blockchain on the cover of Bloomberg Markets, and the price would be below 250 USD, I would have recommended an antipsychotic.

Give them (not Blythe, she gets it) a little time to understand the difference between a permissioned database and the blockchain, in fact, it's nice that we can take off the 1MB training wheels (or "breaks" if you prefer) beforehand.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on September 03, 2015, 01:29:07 AM

40 days and 40 nights among the subreddits. And I'm back. So anything new? Something something about a larger spoon? What are you fellas on about now?

Hey: 230. That's something...

Cripplecoiners vs CIA Blacklisters

Much hand wringing.

Price like the topography of Kansas.
A portly asian man repeatedly imploring us to notice his cocktail weenie.

Quote from: shmadz on September 03, 2015, 02:01:17 AM

Welcome back! Heh, yeah, 230 ain't bad. Much closer to equilibrium than say, 1000 or 100.

Speaking of equilibrium, I think cost of mining is still around 165 from my own experiential calculations.

If the price were truly too low, we should see it reflected in a falling hashrate. When the price is too high, the hashrate will increase until the expense of securing the Blockchain roughly equals the economic benefit.

Mmmm that maybe wasn't quite so clear, let me demonstrate with pictures...

As you can see, hashrate and price are somewhat correlated. You can see the stagnation in 2012, the big run up in 2013, and now in later 2014 and 2015, the price declines to seek equilibrium with cost. I expect the hashrate should stay relatively flat until some major change in the dynamic (reward halving, block size resolution, BIS confirming that bitcoin will replace the SDR)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is anyone out there capable of overlaying a time-equivalent price chart on top of that hashrate chart?

I think it might look interesting.

My personal impression is that hash rate is dictated by price and (more importantly?) technology, with rate reacting to price and not the inverse. The two big ramps were directly related to a paradigm shift in mining tech, CPU to GPU, and GPU to ASIC. With ASIC gear becoming increasingly efficient we will probably see a rise in hashrate even in the face of a flat or modestly declining price. The upcoming halving should be pretty interesting for those watching this relationship.

Quote from: shmadz on September 03, 2015, 02:52:42 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 03, 2015, 02:24:27 AM

Agreed. Hashrate should follow price, but it seems like during those two massive increases it was the price chasing the hashrate.... Huh

Someone better suited to scientific analysis of data sets would do a better job of analyzing this relationship ( hint, hint, Professor Stolfi ) Wink

Anyways, I don't expect any further large expansions in mining technology or efficiency, certainly nothing on the scale of cpu>gpu>asic.

Many people mocked me many pages ago for my concern that the block size could not simply scale exponentially for the next 20 years, but I still believe we are reaching the limits of physics and any further significant exponential type gains in computing power beyond asic will likely take us beyond the singularity. I just hope our new synthetic overlords accept bitcoin. (Ok, yes, I've been watching too much humans (tv show))

The big difference this time around... We have our own little OPEC (OCDM organization of chip designing miners), with apparently only bitmain selling next gen hardware to the small fish. Small fish are more likely to mine and hoard, using it almost as a form of indirect purchase. The current dynamic makes me think that as a percentage, more coins are being mined and sold than in days of yore. The days of mining at a loss with your gaming rig in 2012 are surely over.

Quote from: brg444 on September 03, 2015, 04:10:54 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 03, 2015, 04:08:04 AM

Quote from: shmadz on September 03, 2015, 02:52:42 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 03, 2015, 02:24:27 AM

Agreed. Hashrate should follow price, but it seems like during those two massive increases it was the price chasing the hashrate.... Huh

Someone better suited to scientific analysis of data sets would do a better job of analyzing this relationship ( hint, hint, Professor Stolfi ) Wink

Contrary to popular opinion I am confident that a considerable (it may be a majority) part of newly minted bitcoins are being held.

Meaning their profit margin may be > 50% of their revenue? Grin

Quote from: brg444 on September 03, 2015, 04:24:54 AM

Consider that some of these mining firms have other revenue streams. You cite BitMain and it is an absolutely perfect example. Considering the amount of money and profit they make selling mining gear. Do you actually believe that they need to sell any % of the bitcoins they mine to cover expenses?

Selling mining gear is a welcome addition to mining yourself (unless it dilutes you too much via difficulty, an OCDM would likely frown on selling to the public), Bitmain's prices seem to track what the device might return before it becomes inefficient. It's almost like selling a bond to another bond investor.

Quote from: brg444 on September 03, 2015, 04:24:54 AM

Another example is BitFury which is getting fed by VC money at record rates and have also, in the past, had their fair share of surely spectacular revenues and profit selling their mining gears. Now we don't actually have to speculate about them since they have made it clear in interviews they are absolutely not considering selling any of the bitcoins they mine.

These together amount to nearly 25% of the network. Would you like to suggest they are the exception?

VC funded mining operations as the new 2012 guy with GPU's mining at a loss... I like it.

For everyone else, profit vs loss is a more tenuous balance, and as a whole, I think the industry sells more as a % vs the hobbyist days.

Quote from: brg444 on September 03, 2015, 04:59:54 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 03, 2015, 04:50:06 AM

Quote from: brg444 on September 03, 2015, 04:24:54 AM

Did you not read what I wrote? I won't bother hunting down the source because you are apparently too obtuse to change your mind about it but a BitFury is not alone in publicly stating they are not selling their bitcoins.

Selling mining gear is by all account a ridiculously profitable business because if it weren't they wouldn't bother with it and just use the gear to mine themselves as you've stated. It is quite likely the profit they derive from it is well enought to cover a large portion of their expenses.

If you bothered to read, I agree with you about bitfury, bitmain, knc, 21. I was hoping you would see they aren't yet 100% of the mining industry. Drop the confrontation tone, it's tiresome.

Quote from: brg444 on September 03, 2015, 05:11:10 AM

Go back to your homeworks. First assignement:

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-May/007880.html

Code:

To elaborate, in my view there is a at least a two fold concern on this
particular ("Long term Mining incentives") front:

One is that the long-held argument is that security of the Bitcoin system
in the long term depends on fee income funding autonomous, anonymous,
decentralized miners profitably applying enough hash-power to make
reorganizations infeasible.

For fees to achieve this purpose, there seemingly must be an effective
scarcity of capacity. The fact that verifying and transmitting
transactions has a cost isn't enough, because all the funds go to pay
that cost and none to the POW "artificial" cost; e.g., if verification
costs 1 then the market price for fees should converge to 1, and POW
cost will converge towards zero because they adapt to whatever is
being applied. Moreover, the transmission and verification costs can
be perfectly amortized by using large centralized pools (and efficient
differential block transmission like the "O(1)" idea) as you can verify
one time instead of N times, so to the extent that verification/bandwidth
is a non-negligible cost to miners at all, it's a strong pressure to
centralize. You can understand this intuitively: think for example of
carbon credit cap-and-trade: the trade part doesn't work without an
actual cap; if everyone was born with a 1000 petaton carbon balance,
the market price for credits would be zero and the program couldn't hope
to share behavior. In the case of mining, we're trying to optimize the
social good of POW security. (But the analogy applies in other ways too:
increases to the chain side are largely an externality; miners enjoy the
benefits, everyone else takes the costs--either in reduced security or
higher node operating else.)

This area has been subject to a small amount of academic research
(e.g. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2400519). But
there is still much that is unclear.

The second is that when subsidy has fallen well below fees, the incentive
to move the blockchain forward goes away. An optimal rational miner
would be best off forking off the current best block in order to capture
its fees, rather than moving the blockchain forward, until they hit
the maximum. That's where the "backlog" comment comes from, since when
there is a sufficient backlog it's better to go forward. I'm not aware
of specific research into this subquestion; it's somewhat fuzzy because
of uncertainty about the security model. If we try to say that Bitcoin
should work even in the face of most miners being profit-maximizing
instead of altruistically-honest, we must assume the chain will not
more forward so long as a block isn't full. In reality there is more
altruism than zero; there are public pressures; there is laziness, etc.

I thought billyjoe was being silly and hyperbolic about the fight being over tor mining... Damn Huh

Oh yeah, and we need to focus on building a fee market at the 25 per block level...

Quote from: brg444 on September 03, 2015, 05:27:15 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 03, 2015, 05:23:58 AM

I thought billyjoe was being silly and hyperbolic about the fight being over tor mining... Damn Huh

Oh yeah, and we need to focus on building a fee market at the 25 per block level...

When do you propose we focus on this? When they disappear? Raising the block size is basically a subsidy. If you insist on constantly subsidizing transactions cost people will begin expecting it and it will be considerably more difficult to say no in the future. That is the slippery slope of raising the block size.

Miners are being subsidized in these early stages precisely because we want the security of the network to be greater than what would be provided using only the current fee income. This is part of BTC's competitive advantage. While this subsidy exists, the transaction cost should be as close to zero as possible to capture market share from other value transfer and storage systems. Growing now is what allows survival later.

Of course there are limits and dangers, I haven't been convinced that removing the limit entirely is safe or wise. I most identify with Jeff Garzik's approach to this debate (maybe not in bip100's proposed mechanism), and hope we find some common ground.

Quote from: brg444 on September 03, 2015, 05:49:07 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 03, 2015, 05:41:58 AM

Quote from: brg444 on September 03, 2015, 05:27:15 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 03, 2015, 05:23:58 AM

I thought billyjoe was being silly and hyperbolic about the fight being over tor mining... Damn Huh

Oh yeah, and we need to focus on building a fee market at the 25 per block level...

Miners are being subsidized in these early stages precisely because we want the security of the network to be greater than what would be provided using only the current fee income. This is part of BTC's competitive advantage. While this subsidy exists, the transaction cost should be as close to zero as possible to capture market share from other value transfer and storage systems. Growing now is what allows survival later.

Of course there are limits and dangers, I haven't been convinced that removing the limit entirely is safe or wise. I most identify with Jeff Garzik's approach to this debate (maybe not in bip100's proposed mechanism), and hope we find some common ground.

As I have just explained I think this is a dangerous road to follow as it amounts to selling people onto Bitcoin using features which are not inherent or guaranteed given its design. We should absolutely avoid the danger of instilling into Bitcoin users some kind of belief that they have a right to free transactions. Nothing in life is free and the costs of security & decentralization cannot forever be externalized to nodes & miners.

In that sense it is perfectly reasonable to suggest we should strive to keep block size limit as close as possible to actual network demand. Flex cap proposals are interesting in this aspect.

It's important to consider those who forgo investing in utilizing the system because it is currently capped at 2.7 effective tps.

If you put the actual cost (without block reward) of processing a bitcoin transaction on the user, bitcoin would die tomorrow. Maybe not completely, but it would be like pokemon cards for the "old money" hodlers.

You may think that permissioned sidechains will deliver us from not having the throughput to survive on fees alone, but I think that's an even bigger gamble.

It sounds corny, I agree, but billyjoe's Scale or Die has some truth to it.

I think a fee market that is relative to demand for blockspace is perfectly reasonable... but not today. We're too small to sustain the demand in the face of countless competitors. Bitcoin doesn't have the benefit of the periodic table, if we don't capture share while miners are subsidized and incentivized to secure and process transactions... it becomes like rpietila's castle game, with you and a few thousand others trading pogs back and forth. (A scenario in which a 1MB block limit will be generously sized.)

Quote from: brg444 on September 03, 2015, 06:30:18 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 03, 2015, 06:24:05 AM

Again you seem to confuse what it is you'd like to or perceive Bitcoin should compete with and what Bitcoin's unique value and properties are.

If we can't agree on this I guess we can never agree on the rest but my opinion is we want Bitcoin to compete with gold, offshore saving accounts, safe havens of all sort , therein lies the value (and the "moon" valuations), not competing with VISA/Mastercard or Square.

I didn't reply with a hope to change your mind. But I do hope we can build a bridge from the middle of the river Wink

Quote from: brg444 on September 03, 2015, 06:38:18 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 03, 2015, 06:31:42 AM

Quote from: brg444 on September 03, 2015, 06:30:18 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 03, 2015, 06:24:05 AM

I didn't reply with a hope to change your mind. But I do hope we can build a bridge from the middle of the river Wink

I'm just thinking you are hoping to sell 1. the wrong people onto Bitcoin using 2. the wrong "features" of Bitcoin. This necessarily creates a steep obstacle to the "adoption" you are wishing for.

To be quite honest I have been guilty of this in the past and have long maintained this delusion that Bitcoin was somehow this fantastic payment network that would replace credit cards, etc etc. Until I finally came to sense and understood what the true value of it was. Note that you shouldn't forego your dreams of moon because of this. The markets I am suggesting we target are enormously more valuable than replacing simple payment processors!

Peer to Peer Electronic Cash System
vs
Peer to Peer Electronic Wealth Storage System

I think we've distilled it down. I also think it can be both, but the former facilitates the latter.

Quote from: rjclarke2000 on September 03, 2015, 07:04:45 AM

Every thread seems to be a mixed topic thread recently

A $5 variation in price for days on end will do that.

Quote from: rjclarke2000 on September 04, 2015, 10:20:42 PM

I swear this thread is getting worse. Who left the loony farm door open.

You're noticing this now?

The 200k found gox coins are a much bigger dagger hanging over the market in my mind than the final 40k usgov coins (Aussies still have 20k to dump?)

Time for a real marxist Revolution! Dat "hope n change" turned out to be an elaborate ruse to continue the status quo.

A new flower of rationality and government kindness is about to bloom:

Can I count on your vote lambie?

On Topic: Yep, still $230.

Quote from: awaik! on September 04, 2015, 11:04:34 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 04, 2015, 10:51:25 PM

Time for a real marxist Revolution! ... Can I count on your vote lambie?

I think real ones involve guns and ...stuff, but what do I know? Can't even spell my own name right.
Are you thinking "election," by any chance?

US citizens are way too dependent on government to try such radical things anymore. We just elect people who fight revolutions elsewhere, involving guns, brown people, and (usually) sandy locales. Anywho... back to you selflessly saving vulnerable rubes from being scammed out of their allowance and such...

Quote from: keewee on September 06, 2015, 07:18:05 PM

Has the next Coinwallet attack on the network started? The last 5 blocks look pretty full

Mempool is pretty empty. Looks like we are just filling up blocks more regularly. Tick tock small block fetishists...

Quote from: keewee on September 06, 2015, 08:37:51 PM

Quote from: celebreze32 on September 06, 2015, 07:36:09 PM

Quote from: keewee on September 06, 2015, 07:18:05 PM

Has the next Coinwallet attack on the network started? The last 5 blocks look pretty full

They have been doing pre-tests on the network.

The official full stress test is supposed to start on Thursday, September 10 at 10 a.m. GMT.

They were late starting one of their first official stress tests, but it was because they lacked experience. Now they have some experience I think they will start the latest test on time. I'm making sure I pay a high fee for anything I send on Thursday or afterwards,

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/21842/coinwallet-begins-pre-test-bitcoin-network-schedules-largest-stress-test-begin-september-10/

Quote

The Bitcoin network took a hit yesterday as CoinWallet ran its �stress pre-test� for about thirty minutes resulting in a �2-day delay and a 50 MB backlog� according to CoinWallet CCO James Wilson.

Reports are still coming in but it seems like most bitcoin exchanges and wallet companies were able to take the test in its stride.

Wilson also told Bitcoin Magazine today that the company will be running a major stress test on the Bitcoin network on Thursday, September 10 starting at 10 a.m. GMT.

From that article they state "The purpose of these stress tests [sic] is to see if the Bitcoin network can handle a barrage of very small transactions that will act like a DDOS attack" which is ridiculous because it IS a DDOS attack. It makes no sense to call it a "stress test" when in fact it is simply an attack on the main network where the effects could be easily demonstrated on the test network. It's pretty obvious they have an agenda, at the expense of the normal users of the network

Their test was 4 days ago and took about 2 days to chew through. The full blocks today looked unrelated to me.

Call it an attack if you want, but the fact is, 1MB max blocks make this form of "attack" much cheaper to execute as their old transactions get booted out of the mempool and they get the fees back to issue more transactions. Raise the limit and make them pay up.

Quote from: keewee on September 06, 2015, 08:53:35 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 06, 2015, 08:49:39 PM

Quote from: keewee on September 06, 2015, 08:37:51 PM

Quote from: celebreze32 on September 06, 2015, 07:36:09 PM

Quote from: keewee on September 06, 2015, 07:18:05 PM

Has the next Coinwallet attack on the network started? The last 5 blocks look pretty full

Quote

I completely agree, I'm all for bigger blocks too. But I just find it really annoying the way they're describing these DDOS attacks as "stress tests"

IDK, they are testing how the network responds to a stressful condition of large numbers of transactions, playing by the rules of the protocol and making valid transactions. This seems different from an actual DDoS like the one that focused on actually flooding and crippling any IP identifying itself as an XT node, and the DDoS that took Slush's Mining pool completely down until he gave in and disallowed people from voting for BIP101 blocks with their hashes.

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on September 06, 2015, 09:11:17 PM

Gentlemen - Slightly off topic but I bring you good news. NotLambChop's life will pretty much be in ruins now Grin

Quote from: theymos on September 06, 2015, 08:35:15 PM

Due to abuse, newbie-posted embedded images are now disabled on these pages:
- Topic display
- Recent posts / patrol
- Previews
They're not currently hidden in PMs or on some other pages (like a user's "show posts" page), though I might change that later if it seems necessary.

Disabled images get transformed into links automatically. When the poster becomes a Jr member, the images that he tried to post previously will automatically be re-enabled (though there might be a few minutes of delay).

This extends to all past posts as well as future ones.

Thread confirming this - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1172918.0

The forum (especially speculation) is now a better place.

Nice. Though I wouldn't put it past lambie to have a whole slew of accounts being farmed up above newbie status.

Quote from: Gyrsur on September 06, 2015, 10:37:49 PM

Quote from: Monopoly on September 06, 2015, 10:30:16 PM

I have a story ......

After big crashing some whales fear of destroying of Btc ,,,,,,,,,, so they decided to push price up ...... this is temporary ... we will see price $180 very sooon

what if the chinese miner syndicate decided to push the price a bit up for selling there overpriced new miner generation to the stupid crowd?

The btc price of bitmain's S7 floats with the exchange rate, so... And no one else is selling their next gen hardware to the teeming unwashed masses.

I think the recent little push up is just people who dumped us down from $300 buying back in and shorts covering.

Quote from: Gyrsur on September 06, 2015, 11:20:07 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 06, 2015, 11:11:59 PM

Quote from: Gyrsur on September 06, 2015, 10:37:49 PM

Quote from: Monopoly on September 06, 2015, 10:30:16 PM

I have a story ......

After big crashing some whales fear of destroying of Btc ,,,,,,,,,, so they decided to push price up ...... this is temporary ... we will see price $180 very sooon

what if the chinese miner syndicate decided to push the price a bit up for selling there overpriced new miner generation to the stupid crowd?

The btc price of bitmain's S7 floats with the exchange rate, so... And no one else is selling their next gen hardware to the teeming unwashed masses.

trust me no one of the retail miners will buy a miner if the price is below 200 and the momentum tends to further short.

Did you just argue against yourself? Lower prices, flat or lower difficulty, more coins for the big established players.

Quote from: Gyrsur on September 06, 2015, 11:31:34 PM

there was no flat or lower diff since some weeks. diff jumps to higher highs even with this strong hash rate.

https://bitcoinwisdom.com/bitcoin/difficulty

And it will continue higher, even with falling prices, as hardware that does 1TH for 250w or less is rolled out against 1TH 500w gear.

Quote from: Fatman3001 on September 06, 2015, 11:52:56 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 06, 2015, 11:42:57 PM

Quote from: Gyrsur on September 06, 2015, 11:31:34 PM

there was no flat or lower diff since some weeks. diff jumps to higher highs even with this strong hash rate.

https://bitcoinwisdom.com/bitcoin/difficulty

And it will continue higher, even with falling prices, as hardware that does 1TH for 250w or less is rolled out against 1TH 500w gear.

Only problem now is that it would take 250 million USD of machines to double the hashrate of the network. And at current prices that's 10 months of mining for the entire network. To ROI we're looking at years.

Absolutely, which is why I measure my mining "profitability" against the cost of fossil fuel heat, and sell everything in the spring. At a hashrate that is a drop in the ocean.

Quote from: Gyrsur on September 06, 2015, 11:55:02 PM

indeed but miner producers need retail miners money to develop the 1TH for 175w and with low prices it won't work anymore. that is what i trying to tell but anyway.

They don't need retail miners, bitmain is the exception to the rest of OCDM (organization of chip designing miners).

And how does 2.7 tx per second factor in ^.

Quote from: Norway on September 07, 2015, 01:13:54 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 07, 2015, 12:47:34 AM

And how does 2.7 tx per second factor in ^.

Are you worried BTC can't scale, Cconvert? It's actually easy. And it will be like this:

MINERS SHARE THE CONFIRMATION WORK.

This means that not every f**king mining computer (or pool) have to verify every f**king coffee transaction!

It has to be many confirmations, and by a very distributed network. But not EVERY F**KING computer in the p2p network!!!

The concept is very easy, but the implication is more difficult. (But really not THAT hard if you ask me.)

I wondered if I should step up as a developer regarding this, but I read somewhere that Gavin talked about "random" confirmations, and someone also work at Tree Chains (I think it's about the same).

Anyway, I think very clever people work at the practical solution to this problem (at MIT?). And we don't really need Lightning or Sidechains to make onchain coffee cup trades.

Have you posted this to the dev mailing list?

PS: It's puff puff, pass.

Quote from: Norway on September 07, 2015, 01:44:31 AM

I have not done anything regarding this. I told you the two reasons for this in my previous post. (The post you are responding to.)

1: Gavin have talked about statistical distribution of confirmations before.
2: Somebody are working on tree chains, which I think is related to the same, but I'm not sure.

The ideas are out there. I think Core devs Gavin & Jeff are capable of handling this shit, but Core boss Wladimir is just too scared to make any decitions or point in any direction.

If I don't see any development in this area in 6 months, I will probably contact Gavin to propose a deterministic distribution of transaction confirmations. But I do think fresher brains than mine are woring at it now. So I don't worry too much about bitcoin scaling.

I don't understand what you mean by your puff and pass remark. Probably a language thing, as I am from Norway. Wink

Sorry for being glib. It's more a product of my own frustration with the progress (or lack thereof).

You may be thinking of IBLT?

Probably don't need to remind Gavin, he made a nice gist about it.
https://gist.github.com/gavinandresen/e20c3b5a1d4b97f79ac2

I gotcha Wink

Quote from: brg444 on September 07, 2015, 04:01:52 AM

I'm sorry but you might as well drink more so that tomorrow you have forgotten all about the idea.

The problem of scaling is indeed not technically difficult at all. The problem resides in messing with Bitcoin's carefully incentives. It is not enough to enable miners to process more transactions, we have to consider what the costs are on the whole network.

Bitcoin's carefully incentives have already resulted in a handful of industrial mining operations. It's somewhat silly to wring your hands about the relaying nodes (occasionally) having slightly higher demands placed on them, while the (de)centralized mining cartel has the power to disrupt things a bit more, how do I say... dramatically.

I'm not a camp follower, if miners voting to increase results in greater capacity, fantastic. Capital inflow is being deterred by the intransigence towards scaling above 2.7tps.

Re: Subtly Padding Volume: Try harder Huobi.

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 10, 2015, 01:41:42 AM

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3k8uez/youth_are_the_killer_app_of_bitcoin/

Quote from: coinpr0n on September 10, 2015, 09:08:17 AM

So... CoinWallet.eu stress test "cancelled"? Actually, they're just shifting the blame on to the community by giving away "free money": https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1175321

Stress test is a go.

Bonus points for Antpool mining every single block in the last hour.

Quote from: ElectricMucus on September 10, 2015, 09:39:24 PM

As somebody who is too late to even get cosbycoin you are kind of cheeky.

Nevar Forgive. Nevar Forget.

Quote from: Fatman3001 on September 11, 2015, 06:34:55 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 03:24:39 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on September 11, 2015, 01:54:16 AM

Not as effective without jumping ponies. But the subtle lack of suprise porn is nice. I'd say this thread is finally SFW again. FWIW Tongue

Edit: I guess I asked for it. Somehow.. Angry

newbies cant post pic anymore but that wont stop ~~them~~ him!

If you want SFW you might wanna put meyer lansky on ignore. He/she/it is about to turn into a beautiful butterfly.

You surely meant to say beautiful botfly? Grin

Quote from: Fakhoury on September 11, 2015, 07:35:27 PM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on September 11, 2015, 07:04:57 PM

Quote from: EsBitcoin.org on September 11, 2015, 06:55:25 PM

Core still winning:

Quote

Poll
Question:   Core Vs XT
XT   - 124 (29.5%)
Core   - 209 (49.8%)
IDK   - 87 (20.7%)

This is what matters: http://xtnodes.com/

Look at the pie at the bottom right.

Agree, XT is going nowhere except down until it's doomed.

It moved the debate from "Bitcoin can't/won't scale... LN, Blockstream Sidechains are the solution." to "Max blocksize will increase soon, just not so dramatically." It also showed the Core project that their control is not divinely sanctioned and inalterable.

For those two reasons I would call it successful.

Saying that those who would prefer to see an increase in max_block_size are just consumers clamoring for VISA levels of throughput is a weak strawman argument. Obviously, jumping from 2.7 tps to 50,000 tps is completely out of the question, but if you can paint your opponent as being in favor of something ridiculous, you win... (or look like a disingenuous douche).

Adam Back's proposed doubling every two years... 2MB in 2016, 4 in 2018, 8 in 2020 seems reasonable. A somewhat more forceful can kick of Jeff's BIP102.

One thing is becoming abundantly clear: Those who want the 1MB blocks to be as sacrosanct as the 21mil emission limit... the MP toadies who brought you the lovely and productive captions generously posted here by hdbuck... are about to get unceremoniously REKT.

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on September 12, 2015, 12:57:33 AM

Actually inflation *can* be introduced into bitcoin in a number of ways, at nearly zero cost. The supply cap or 21 million BTC is not "guaranteed by math"; it is decided by humans who choose which software to run. Paraphrasing the old proverb, "no protocol change is prohibited if the right 20 business men decide to implement it".

"Zero cost"... Aside from the cost of nearly every major hodler of bitcoin dumping them instantaneously if the 21 mil cap is put in serious jeopardy. "Killing the golden egg laying goose." "Mutually Assured Destruction." The miners are perhaps the most incentivized to stick to this rule in the entire ecosystem, after all, they can't dump coins today that they will be mining tomorrow.

The rest of your points seem pretty salient and generate no argument from me.

Here comes 10,000,000 views! Congrats adamstgBit!

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on September 12, 2015, 03:10:49 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 12, 2015, 01:37:07 AM

"Zero cost"... Aside from the cost of nearly every major hodler of bitcoin dumping them instantaneously if the 21 mil cap is put in serious jeopardy.

That is not "cost". Even if bitcoins lose all their value, no resources or concrete assets will be destroyed. The world will not become any poorer. Only, a few hundred thousand people who expected to get hold one day of mansions and Lamborghinis will see those hopes vaporize, and those assets go to other people instead.

I don't think however that the introduction of extra inflation into bitcoin -- say, 1% per year, beyond the block rewards -- would necessarily induce all holders to dump, and the price to crash.

In late 2013, when I first learned about bitcon, the Gospel of Antonopoulos was that bitcoins would become extremely valuable because they would replace credit cards and other traditional digital payments, and then demand for that use would drive the price up, according to the money velocity equation. Moreover, that would happen very soon, because the price had been growing 1000% per year, and no one could look at that straight line on the log plot and doubt that it would continue.

Well, 1% of inflation per year would not destroy that argument; at most, it would delay the growth a little. After all, that growth of 1000% per year happened while the miners were creating an inflation of more than 10% per year.

But the Gospel has changed several times since then. Mircea, for example, wants us to believe that the "Moon" will come just because the supply is fixed. Even if it were true -- again, 1% of inflation per year, even extended for 20 years, could not possibly prevent the price from rising 1000% in that interval.

Blockstream, on the other hand, wants us to believe that bitcoin will go to the Moon because not only the supply will be capped by 21 million, but the transactions will be capped to 150'000--180'000 per day, and somehw that will induce some companies to pay more for bitcoins. Whatever. Again, 1% inflation per year cannot possibly spoil such a powerful "whatever".

But, on the other hand, I agree with one thing: it is very unlikely that those "20 businessmen" who will decide the future of bitcoin will ever agree to putting any sort of inflation or demurrage in it. That was not a prediction that I was making. My point was only that the 21 million cap is not "guaranteed by math", but only by people.

I still believe that bitcon's price will go to zero in a few years; but almost certainly not by that route...

I appreciate the effort in your response. Can you imagine a design of cryptocurrency that would be to your liking, or is the concept as a whole damned to failure in your mind?

If miners decide that increasing the money supply algorithm is in their interests, I guess they'll find out. I would be running for the exits tho, flawed as such exits may be ...

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on September 12, 2015, 05:06:54 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 12, 2015, 04:40:33 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on September 12, 2015, 04:09:11 AM

Any substantive discussion on scaling will have to wait until the Hong Kong portion of the show. https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/642397611178217472

there no need for a conference i've solved the scaling problem already.

proof:

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 11, 2015, 07:56:00 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 11, 2015, 07:18:09 PM

What would we do without your genius Huh

Scrap this weekend's Scaling Bitcoin conference you solved it all for us!!

your welcome.

Theymos solved it before you did! https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3kl09r/pastebin_by_theymos_possible_method_of_compromise/

Wholly shit. He confirms it with a defense? [cheesy redaction]

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on May 07, 2015, 07:28:59 PM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on May 07, 2015, 07:17:24 PM

He be chillin. Waiting to short from $3500.

Ah, a man of leisure. A day on the water is a day well spent. Bulls of 2014 can do it too.

~ Signal crackles with analog distortion. ~

Today, intrepid young capitalists discuss the merits of depreciating assets, boats and bitcoin... Here's Tom with the weather...

Quote from: Ibian on September 13, 2015, 08:42:36 PM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on September 13, 2015, 08:05:44 PM

I don't know enough about Keynes (or Economics) to tell whether I am a Keynesian. But I certainly do not "hate people saving their money", quite the opposite: I wish people (and my compatriots especially) would consume less and invest more. But I would like to see them choose productive investments; and hoarding currency (or gold) is not productive.

Hoarding currency is bad for the individual, because all currency will lose value eventually. (As you well know, I am sure that will happen to bitcoin, too, even if there may be another bubble or two.) Hoarding currency is also bad for society because it harms the currency, by destabilizing its value.

Let me reming people that this discussion started when someone asked for my idea of a good cryptocurrency. Well, among other things, a good cryptocurrency should be designed so that no one will be tempted to hoard it.

Screw you bitch. Having enough savings that I don't have to work for the rest of my life gives me options and freedom that most people can't even dream of. Spending most of your life working for others merely for food and a shelter is the life of a slave.

It's really annoying to see people freak out about Stolfi. He's pretty straightforward about why he's here: Bitcoin is a fucking interesting experiment, in computer science, cryptography, economics, psychology, politics...

You can vehemently disagree with someone without throwing little tantrums about it. (Which btw... makes him seem like the reasonable and thoughtful side of the debate to curious spectators.)

As to his "ideal coin" it would be nice if it was coded up and competing in the marketplace. The fixed emission schedule is so important and central to satoshi's code. I highly doubt it was an afterthought or mistake. I think it was intended as a bootstrapping method... encouraging adoption and attracting value while starting out. Hopefully the last 18 months have demonstrated that btc hoarding is not the easy way to realize massive gains. It also demonstrates that people should invest their savings through the careful consideration of the opportunity cost of not investing in other things.

The genesis block gives a clue that Bitcoin is more than just a fancy way to move Keynesian directed fiat around the internet. It is the Austrian School's view towards an ideal currency coded together and launched. Success is by no means guaranteed, but it should be quite interesting to see how it all plays out.

Give me Stolfi posts any day in lieu of "when is we arising?" "see you on the Moon!" posts. I disagree with him on many things, agree on some... One thing should be clear by now, an echochamber of agreement and back patting is dangerous and annoying.

Quote from: Ibian on September 13, 2015, 09:20:03 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 13, 2015, 09:17:58 PM

-snip-

Curious spectators who can't see through polite-trolling are worthless anyway. The guy is here to argue, not to debate. He is not being honest.

Debate: contention in argument; strife, dissension, quarrelling, controversy; especially a formal discussion of subjects before a public assembly or legislature, in Parliament or in any deliberative assembly.

You prefer more impolite-trolling? Seems there is a very dedicated individual to provide you with that...

Where exactly is he being dishonest? He's just stating his personal opinion, which may be proven to be correct or incorrect.

Ugggghhhh.

This is going to be like Hong Kong water torture waiting for the high priests to meet up again in December to talk about... you know... actually doing something about Bitcoin scaling.

Oh it's open alright, but there's something gently bobbing on the surface... cleaning is scheduled for 2016.

Quote from: ChartBuddy on September 15, 2015, 02:02:03 AM

Coin

Explanation

Quote from: sAt0sHiFanClub on September 16, 2015, 11:13:36 PM

Quote from: brg444 on September 16, 2015, 09:46:10 PM

Quote from: sAt0sHiFanClub on September 16, 2015, 02:19:04 PM

Quote from: dragonseer on September 16, 2015, 02:09:05 PM

I don't think you're being fair. Yes you are doing something by putting a little money into Bitcoin here and there. You are supporting Bitcoin because you want a better monetary system that isn't based on debt, and isn't confined by borders. When times are lean then it makes sense to stash something valuable away, until it becomes worth more. When the value appreciates again, Bitcoin holders can use their increased purchasing power to support businesses that embrace crypto, rather than cash out. That's what 'many around here' are waiting to do I'm sure.

Buying a bitcoin and doing absolutely nothing with it for 10 years is about as useless to the bitcoin ecosystem as completely ignoring it.

You dont support bitcoin by wanting a "monetary system that isn't based on debt, and isn't confined by borders" .. thats called dreaming. You can support bitcoin by actively seeking out ways that you can integrate bitcoin in your daily life, and maybe provide services to others using bitcoin.

Quite a twisted and erroneous view of economics.

Holders are the ones giving value to the coins.

Its whether or not the next person wants to buy your coin, and for how much, is what gives them value. Not the holder.
If there is no utility, no infrastructure and no potential then there is no market.

Very nice ownage/character count density on that rebuttal.

BitPay's CFO got phished for 5000 btc in Dec of 14. Oops.

http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2015/09/16/atlantas-bitpay-got-hacked-for-1-8-million-in.html

Economic darwinism. Why protest that which gives you so much joy?

So uh...

Bitfinex having to unwind everything would be kinda ugly right?

http://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/pr7231-15

Quote from: LMGTFY on September 17, 2015, 07:57:47 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 17, 2015, 07:48:57 PM

So uh...

Bitfinex having to unwind everything would be kinda ugly right?

http://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/pr7231-15

Coinflip is incorporated in the US; Bitfinex in Hong Kong. I'm not sure we need to worry too much just yet, unless the HK government (or Beijing, applying pressure on HK SAR) adopt the same line as the CFTC.

I guess it comes down to what % of the swaps market is made up of customers in the US.

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on September 18, 2015, 04:17:15 AM

I happened to notice a single 12'000 BTC trade on OKCoin. And the price dropped by 0.10 yuan. Weird.

For posterity.

Similar thing on Huobi a few hours before, but that's "normal" for them.

Quote from: ChartBuddy on September 18, 2015, 11:02:35 PM

Coin

Explanation

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on September 19, 2015, 05:26:48 AM

Just summoning the honey badger at this point. Save the pics, we need and want the real thing at this point. Seems like the badger does care at this barfable time, so he/she stays out of sight during these times. Time to go down and then an epic upward trajectory in a fashion never before seen. Get your bull on and buy like a frenzy situation later next week. If you're a single parent, just keep the gub checks to stay above water as you're not ready for the rise when your stake is poop... That's right I said it! Let the chumps fart and the responsible shall survive and thrive w/ their excess money at this majik moment,while making untold fortunes as time goes forward and the volatility roars.

Quote

Then we both agreed that if it's literally just miners vs. users then miners stand no chance.

Quote

I agree that if CartelCoin is rejected by practically all users (including new future ones who would buy their first bitcoins after the fork), then it will be worthless. Of course. If the whole world reject gold and prefers copper, then gold will be worthless and copper will get gold's market cap.

What I don't agree, at all, is that such situation will occur automatically if the Cartel tries to push for a change, and the Core devs then post an update that renders all ASICs useless. No, I do not believe that the vast majority of the users will automatically follow the devs and reject the Cartel.

It would have to be a really stupid change to cause such total rejection (like, say, confiscate all existing bitcoins and give them to the Cartel). Obviously the cartel will not push for such changes. The change that I gave as an example -- postpone the next halving by 2 years, then speed up the following ones -- is the sort of thing that they could try. Or they could simply set a minimu fee of 0.20 USD/tx + 0.5% of the output value (they would not even have to do a fork for that).
My point is that most users and businesses will not consider such a change reason enough to dump or forget their CartelCoins and switch to RebelCoin. CartelCoin differs from the old Bitcoin by a minor invisible change; RebelCoin is drastic change, that includes loss of the mining infrastructure. Try explaining to the press and Wall Street that RebelCoin, not CartelCoin, is the true bitcoin.

For one thing, the miners obviously wil not switch to RebelCoin, and will do whatever they can to kill it. The Swedish ETN, fed by KnC, will not switch; the Chinese exchanges, who own the largest miners, will not switch (but may let their clients dump or withdraw the RebelCoins, crashing their price in China). Those already are enough to support a nonzero value to the CartelCoin. So, at best, only part of the bitcoin user and business base will see RebelCoin as the true and only bitcoin.
This belief of mine is not based on science or math, but just on my experience of how people react to such situations. If you don't see that, I don't know how I could convince you.

It's puff, puff, pass stolfi. Cool

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on September 19, 2015, 09:56:01 PM

Quote from: cbeast on September 19, 2015, 04:06:19 PM

It looks like this forum is dead. Reddit is also dead. Where did everyone go?

To a place where you gormless Gavinistas are not welcome and cannot follow us... Cool

So... kill the only thread in this section worth reading, declare victory, and then scoot over to MP's chatroom to discuss bitcoin "assets" and kiss his ass. Sweet, sweet success.

Quote from: RenegadeMan on September 20, 2015, 10:18:47 PM

Quote from: ChartBuddy on September 20, 2015, 10:02:36 PM

Coin

Explanation

^---------< Seems to be a very large build-up of bids on Finex. A lot of people are waiting for the inevitable drop that may turn out to be 'uninevitable'.

Also it's interesting that for the past 12 or so hours BTC-e has often been higher than Bitstamp. That doesn't happen much and I wonder if it's indicating anything (either that everything's just gone dead & will stay that way for a while or it's some sort of rubber band being pulled that's about to snap

Don't let the finex bidwall get you too confident. Think about it, if you were trying to accumulate coins... would you telegraph this information to the sellers so you could pay more?

Last time we had a benevolent bull whale stacking walls they got eaten and then we got a margin call cascade on the longs down to $162.

Pretty surprising seeing 4x the volume of finex happening on bitstamp. Oh how the tables have turned...

Still 200+ dollar (actual money) magic beans.

Glad to see you've recovered from the loss of image privileges.

Quote from: brg444 on September 21, 2015, 11:46:15 PM

It's quite simple: it enables true micropayments on the Bitcoin blockchain by making access to mining ubiquitous.

Eventually their chips will be integrated into PCs. As the person you quoted above mentioned, this is the pilot version.

The amount of coins mined is negligible from a financial standpoint but not if someone is concerned with interoperable communication by devices using the Bitcoin protocol.

I thought the Bitcoin protocol was off-limits for the free shit army and their coffee/micro-transactions?

Seems the devices aren't intended to be using the Bitcoin protocol... besides just trading hashes for proprietary credits from 21 co.? Eventually settled to the blockchain by some gateway?

I hope these guys are successful but it's looking like a long shot at this point. $400 for a 100GH device is pretty laughable. Joe Blow public can't be arsed to even figure out that bitcoin didn't die with mt gox, yet they'll be super interested in expensive high power consumption devices for... free articles on the web? I wish them luck, and it seems they'll need it in addition to 9 figures of VC money and some smart people.

Wake me up when the 30TH electric furnace/water heater comes out. Cheesy

Quote from: adamstgBit on September 22, 2015, 03:28:50 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on September 22, 2015, 03:04:02 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on September 22, 2015, 02:40:58 AM

Is this company just an elaborate troll? Srs question Undecided

What's even dumber is that this product is built specifically for developers. Developers know you could build one of these easily for $100- unless this is some miracle terahash chip, that is.

well it comes with 128GB which alone cost ~100$
then the mining chip
and stuff
i guess 400$ is a "fair price"
i mean it's like a fancy Hardware wallet you can program, plus it a full node, plus it to makes some Bitcents constantly.
I don't hate it.

$70 for a 128GB SD.

Maybe you're thinking in loonies... Grin

The mining chip is better than bitmain s5, worse than bitmain s7, but still so tiny as to be pretty inconsequential.

I certainly hope they, (or whomever might buy these things) devise some kind of compelling use case. I sincerely hope that happens. I'm underwhelmed so far... Not even a fancy industrial design vanity case?

All this IoT hype seems less likely to happen vs companies who want to use the blockchain now (and pay fees), cough, fidelity, but can't/won't due to lack of clarity on the move past 2.7tps.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on September 22, 2015, 04:40:39 AM

if 21 is successful in building this premium internet, the blockchain is going to bloat massively. A blockchain transaction for every pageview. Even BIP101 wouldn't keep up. Perhaps that's why they support BIP100. They want to increase the blocksize limit FASTER with miner voting.

and the plot thickens...

Premium internet (wth is that)? For a few cents a day? A majority of mining pools want to scale faster than BIP 101?

Why you always make a few good points and then torpedo them with nonsense? Wink

You want a prediction about the weather? You're asking the wrong Phil. I'll give you a winter prediction... It's gonna be (volume-less) cold, it's gonna be grey (boring), and it's gonna last you for the rest of your (1MB) life.

Quote from: mladen00 on September 24, 2015, 06:07:33 AM

this time next year we'll be millionaires

~Number plate on mechanical/digital clock ticks over...~

♫"And put your... little hand in mine... there ain't no river or mountain we can't climb...♬

Now get up slap that hog out there, it's (chorus) Groundhog Day. And don't forget your booties 'cause it's cold out there... brrrrrr... it's cold out there every day... What is this? Mi-ami Beach? Not hardly.

Quote from: Fatman3001 on September 24, 2015, 06:39:33 AM

Good news everyone!!!

BitPay is attacking Bitcoins USP.

We're all gonna die!!!

http://www.coindesk.com/bitpay-cut-free-unlimited-processing-merchants/

Profitability... the bane of all startups. Seeking a profit before IPO, thrice as dire.

Quote from: Norway on September 25, 2015, 09:40:46 PM

Vegas, baby!

Bitpay Collapsing... Mike Tyson Endorsed Overpriced Vending Machine, UP!

BULLISH, baby.

Cut the guy some slack, he has a soft spot for the smaller, gentler, creatures on this planet... like pigeons... and bitcoiners.

On a serious note... where is this bitstamp volume coming from? All wash trading, migrated finex traders?

Pigeons, almost too delicious.

http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4498529/hillary-delicious

Quote from: JayJuanGee on September 26, 2015, 04:04:00 AM

Quote from: Norway on September 26, 2015, 03:51:48 AM

Sometimes, I get the imrpession that some people in this forum wants the transactions/seconds to be as small as possible.
BOMB: New code incomming! Blocksize is just a temporary fix! Bitcoin will scale. By sharing the work. Like the VISA thieves do today. Not hard to do theoretically! Ha ha ha, we will see who's surviving!

From the whole scaling debate, I thought that generally people were o.k. with the idea of increasing the blocksize etc; however, the issue is having a new system imposed that is NOT thoroughly vetted and seems to have the potential to take away decentralization.

I believe overall there is consensus that transactions/second have to increase; it is just a question regarding the extent to which what appeared to be a minority was going to be imposing such a hard fork and new direction.. along with questionable centralization baggage.

Scaling past 1MB is necessarily going to be a hard fork, 75% is not a minority. And I'm thankful that Gavin and Mike were willing to stick their necks out to press the issue. I do think a significant amount of investment and use is being deterred by the limit.

On the other hand, it's important to show the outside world that major changes to Bitcoin don't happen on a whim, so the careful debate and vetting of ideas is important. It was a major mistake to include anything other than BIP101 to XT (though I disagree with the accusations levied at the additions.) It's going to be a slow drip to the conference in Dec. Until then, I'll stockpile memes and get ready to ride the pump when an agreement is in view.

My personal opinion agrees with Peter R, miners are economically incentivized to choose an appropriate max_block_size. Control at the protocol level is illusory, and inappropriate. Given enough time, I think we'll see this happen, but not without much hand wringing and gnashing of teeth.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on September 28, 2015, 01:14:48 AM

Quote from: ElectricMucus on September 28, 2015, 12:49:21 AM

Quote from: chmod755 on September 27, 2015, 10:57:48 PM

Someone just sold 100+ BTC on a market with low liquidity. Here's the chart.

Why would someone do this? It temporarily brought down the price by 33%.

Somebody wants to top off their paypal account and doesn't give a shit about slippage because gains are still astronomical for some people.

In case you don't know selling Bitcoins for Linden Dollars and then buying Dollars is the one true way of doing that, unless you are willing to risk total loss by some shady exchange service. Ironically the only way to get money on a Bitcoin exchange onto a paypal account without that or slippage is to buy something with bitpay, return it and get a refund, but that only works for small amounts, since the merchant won't willingly participate in this.

Are there really that many people still desperate to get their value out of Bitcoin? I thought maybe naively that that stage was behind us...

This really hinges on the distinction between desperation and ambivalence.

So we're supposed to believe okcoin just had 80k btc in volume in the range of a few yuan? This is pretty ridiculous.

I'm not buying the validity of this rally so far. Seems like everyone other than bitfinex (maybe coinbase exchange?) has plenty of wash "trading" going on.

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on September 29, 2015, 05:50:30 AM

Indeed. Did those events start recently, or have they always happened, and I just did not notice them?

Could they be some money laundering trick? (One would expect money launderers to be smarter at hiding their doings...)

Perhaps the Chinese exchanges read about Tera's wash trades, and thought "bummer, those guys cannot do that because they are regulated, but we are not -- why aren't we doing wash trades ourselves?"

I've noticed it happening on Huobi for a long time (forever?) but usually 5-10k btc candles. The level of ridiculous okcoin candles is somewhat new though, the last couple days? With 0 fee trading you always expect some of this going on. Bitstamp has had some strange action in the last week or so, thousands of btc trading in the range of a couple dollars, you didn't usually see this on bitstamp before. People on reddit and here have talked about the 47, 99, 197 bots etc.

It wouldn't be of any benefit in laundering money in the traditional sense. Passing through a chinese crypto exchange doesn't make illegally obtained funds somehow legitimate when they come out the other end.

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on September 29, 2015, 05:50:30 AM

I have read rumors that China is about to devalue the yuan. Traders who had yuan in their accounts may be buying BTC as a way to ride over the devaluation with a profit. In other words, the price in China ir not really higher than in the US: it merely has the expected devaluation of the yuan already priced in. Maybe?

If that is the reason, the rise in price in China may be limited to the expected devaluation of the Yuan. That is, if they expect a 10% devaluation of they yuan, and expect the USD price to remain about the same, the price in Chine should not rise by more than 10%.

An interesting thesis, and it may be happening to some extent, but I don't see the scenario as sufficient to explain the level of volume compared to the relative lack of price change. If it really were a panic to get out of yuan and get into btc, I would expect volatility to increase in line with the volume.

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on September 30, 2015, 04:06:54 AM

Quote from: Norway on September 29, 2015, 09:22:43 PM

That's it. I'm switching from this forum to:
https://bitco.in/forum/
They even have a new Wall Observer thread there.
There is too much shit from the Theymos shills here.

AFAIK that forum is owned and run by Roger Ver.
Frankly, ...

that's incorrect, and if you were wondering where most of the discussion from the gold thread went...

Quote from: Searing on October 03, 2015, 02:35:13 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on October 03, 2015, 02:25:43 AM

Quote from: gizmoh on October 02, 2015, 09:31:26 PM

For those who are bored on this forum, there's r/BitcoinMarkets daily discussion.

Friday's discussion is quite interesting:

https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/3n6vl6/daily_discussion_friday_october_02_2015/

Reddt's always good for drama if you want it.

Mike Hearn accidentally reveals that he is Satoshi Nakamoto. Shocked butters take refuge in irrational denial.
submitted 1 day ago by jstolfi

If Mike Hearn is Satoshi after eating my 'shoe' I will move all BTC to LTC or probably cash ....I mean ...it is like finding out one morning Trump is President ..(scared self in 2 real world camps)

man what a dump of BTC to USD that would be imho

So... btc to USD, then wager it all on a luckyflop bet, using cryptoVPN.me... thanks (Obama) hearn!

Quote from: Fiat_Hodler on October 08, 2015, 05:00:59 PM

all these people crying about gemini... give it a few weeks/months to actually get online properly... rome wasnt built in a day...

twasn't... it was burned in 9 tho...

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on October 08, 2015, 06:42:16 PM

-snip-
FUD reached a peak on that day, when Satoshi Himself suddenly appeared and declared Galvin and Hearn's putsch attempt a "very disappointing" development.
-snip-

"Monero" : { Untraceable - Anonymous - Fungible - Trustless - Adaptive Blocksize - 100% PoW & FOSS - No ASIC or Premine - Wallets - Podcats - Roadmap - XMR.to }

A crippled Bitcoin surely would be advantageous to Monero? I seem to remember your compatriot AmericanPegasus asking something similar.

In any event, keep up His work in keeping the free shit army (and their dangerous opinions) out of mah P2P electronic ~~cash~~ neckbeard reserve system. It's mine (and yours) to HAVE.

Quote from: Fatov on October 08, 2015, 07:24:11 PM

The price was up before he and his friends wanted. They invented the debate and dump thousands of bitoin to lower the price

Feeling left out? Fine...

Quote from: mymenace on October 10, 2015, 01:49:27 AM

recent news from an experienced trader i follow

...."observing an increased volume activity among all the biggest bitcoin exchanges, this let me think that bitcoin is probably accumulating to later break the trading range and move above $250."....
https://btctrading.wordpress.com/2015/10/06/long-term-update-again-on-volatility/

hope it helps anyone

Looks like they're not seeing the mystery candles for 10-80k coins happening in china with clockwork regularity, nor the repeating orders on bitstamp that barely move the price, nor the complete dearth of action in the intervening periods.

To use raw volume numbers reported by the unregulated exchanges as the sole basis for a trade sounds to be something other than "experienced".

Quote from: ChartBuddy on October 10, 2015, 04:01:41 AM

Coin

Explanation

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 10, 2015, 02:11:48 AM

Exhibit H:

I'm sure closed source, pay Blockstream per month, federated chains, using multi sig secured collateral have a place in the ecosystem. I welcome them and applaud the effort in their creation.

However, there is a real concern regarding the motivations of veto wielding devs. Are they making decisions that would be best for Bitcoin, or decisions that might mold Bitcoin towards an environment that benefits Blockstream software products?

Quote from: gentlemand on October 13, 2015, 08:02:58 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 13, 2015, 07:52:24 PM

However, there is a real concern regarding the motivations of veto wielding devs. Are they making decisions that would be best for Bitcoin, or decisions that might mold Bitcoin towards an environment that benefits Blockstream software products?

There must be no shortage of people waiting to spot one undeniable example of that bias. It'll be interesting to see whether they've got the balls to address it.

I can think of 21 million reasons for them to not state that bias explicitly and publicly, we do have that whole actions/words clich� tho.

Quote from: brg444 on October 13, 2015, 08:15:11 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 13, 2015, 07:52:24 PM

Their Bitcoin-related solutions surely would benefit from what is best for Bitcoin, wouldn't you think?

Their Bitcoin-related solutions might benefit from what artificially handicaps (without killing) Bitcoin. No need to distill it any further. I know you are fully aware of, and have summarily dismissed this possibility, but others are less trusting.

I have no issues with Blockstream itself, nor their work, but I tend to squirm when I see a glaring conflict of interest that not only can, but potentially has already directly affected the development of Bitcoin itself.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on October 14, 2015, 02:05:35 AM

At least that upside-down Ripple shill is long gone. Remember that guy? Tongue

Extra points if you remember the "not upside down" one too.

Quote from: SnokkomBTC on October 14, 2015, 05:34:26 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on October 14, 2015, 04:27:53 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 14, 2015, 03:40:25 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on October 14, 2015, 02:05:35 AM

At least that upside-down Ripple shill is long gone. Remember that guy? Tongue

Extra points if you remember the "not upside down" one too.

You mean Mah87 ?

Walsoraj

The oft forgotten and misunderstood Jaroslaw.

China up... the rest, again?

Quote from: hdbuck on October 15, 2015, 07:12:37 AM

ps: meanwhile in altcoinland vitalik butterhurt herd be like..

well, butthurt. Grin

Looks like the cutting edge ETH investors are bleeding wealth even faster than the poor XMR ~~sufferers~~ early adopters.

Quote from: hdbuck on October 15, 2015, 03:17:07 PM

Quote from: Fakhoury on October 15, 2015, 03:15:02 PM

$260 tonight ?!

strap on!

Oh the hilarity of one poorly (or deftly) chosen letter.

The same govt that "misplaces" pallets of $100 bills in sandy locales goes all cloak and dagger to gain an extra $1mil or two in an auction... even bitcoiners can't suspend disbelief that hard.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on October 17, 2015, 02:08:51 AM

Quote from: E on October 17, 2015, 01:11:06 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on October 16, 2015, 10:33:59 PM

green candles seven out of the last three weeks.

http://digitalpolyphony.webs.com/normal_PDVD_125.jpg

Whoa, three aces!

Shit. Fixed. But you gotta admit seven out of eight days and weeks is extremely rare occurrence. Even bitcoin doesn't go straight up forever.

T'salright. A man is allowed to buy some booze with the proceeds of 50 coins he dumped on our heads in the 260's.

Talk about being lifted higher with an atomic wedgie, hoo-o-boy $281.

Fake volume or not, these guys put on a show.

Surreptitiously eyeing seats as the music plays.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on October 17, 2015, 03:58:50 AM

$267.49 again. You gotta be fuckin kidding me. Bulls so scared of a 14 coin "wall"??

Filled, u happy now?

Refreshing to see the bitfinex order book look normal again.

Quote from: tarmi on October 16, 2015, 04:11:19 PM

securing profits. also 266+ for shorting is a no brainer.

He's not wrong, you know, just a little early.

nailed it, lol

edit: chiners say not yet, yeah no

So $18 spread from hoo-oh-boy to bitfinex? Something is off here.

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on October 17, 2015, 03:14:42 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on October 16, 2015, 10:43:33 PM

I read something about a vast Russian MMM ponzi currently operating in South Africa buying up Bitcoins. Any news?

Quote

Bobby Lee, CEO of Chinese exchange BTCC, told CoinDesk his platform has seen a significant volume increase, though he dismissed much of his competitors' volume as "artificial".

Those behind the volume, he said, are not traders but consumers sucked into a Russian ponzi scheme, MMM.

"We have posted warnings on our site and on our social media to warn users to be careful, but they have been coming to our exchange and buying out like crazy," he said, adding:

"This time it's not speculative trading but based on them getting sucked into this ecosystem."

https://twitter.com/YourBTCC/status/654273706013798401?lang=en

"South Africa" must include a many of the poorest and least educated people there.

Ah, bitcoin -- bringing First World financial ruin to the unbanked in the Third World...

May you all go broke, and burn in hell...

How often do they adjust your salary?

serious question

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 03:10:16 AM

-snip
There will be a gang of persons willing to pay 5$, 10$, hell 50$ for complete monetary sovereignty.

These people are presently paying orders of magnitude more to move their money around the world unnoticed.

With a market cap supported by hundreds of people lining up to buy popescu pesos... 1MB blocks will be plenty, believe me.

I'm pretty far from a socialist and a "rich-shamer". I see this as more of a pragmatic question. The number of transactions needs to be allowed to grow now, while the block subsidy is comparatively huge, vs later, when another implementation has eaten our first mover lunch.

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 03:55:47 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on October 19, 2015, 03:51:23 AM

Dash? Monero? (less traceable) Bitshares? (much much larger transaction capacity, built in smart contracts, etc) Should I go on? Network effect didn't save MySpace.

So a pre-mined POS & a ripple rip-off are going to steal Bitcoin's lunch money? Please... Cheesy

Comparing Bitcoin network effect to Myspace confirms my suspicions: you are beyond retarded.

Monero feels left out? Your Stannis smashing compatriot seems to be rather enthusiastic about its prospects.

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 04:27:05 AM

Why not move to BitSharesforum then and give us a break? By the sounds of it it's better right? I mean... it can scale to trillions of transactions, what else could you possibly want.

By "us" you mean you and iCE? oh, I almost forgot the cuddly but distinctly more inept hdbuck.

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 04:37:33 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 19, 2015, 04:34:53 AM

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 04:27:05 AM

Why not move to BitSharesforum then and give us a break? By the sounds of it it's better right? I mean... it can scale to trillions of transactions, what else could you possibly want.

By "us" you mean you and iCE? oh, I almost forgot the cuddly but distinctly more inept hdbuck.

You couldn't possibly be taking sides with a guy who believe you can buy block space on the blockchain, are you?

Using an admittedly shitty analogy doesn't automatically mean everything he subsequently says is invalid.

I similarly don't write off all of your opinions, despite your recent statement that people might pay $5, 10, 50 to make an entry on your easily replicated, 5 mining pool run, settlement layer.

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 04:46:10 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 19, 2015, 04:44:04 AM

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 04:37:33 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 19, 2015, 04:34:53 AM

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 04:27:05 AM

Why not move to BitSharesforum then and give us a break? By the sounds of it it's better right? I mean... it can scale to trillions of transactions, what else could you possibly want.

By "us" you mean you and iCE? oh, I almost forgot the cuddly but distinctly more inept hdbuck.

You couldn't possibly be taking sides with a guy who believe you can buy block space on the blockchain, are you?

Using an admittedly shitty analogy doesn't automatically mean everything he subsequently says is invalid.

I similarly don't write off all of your opinions, despite your recent statement that people might pay $5, 10, 50 to make an entry on your easily replicated, 5 mining pool run, settlement layer.

Good luck easily replicating 500,000,000 GH/s Cheesy

People invest in mining coin because of what it can be. Not for what it is today. More fees spread over more transactions is definitely in their interest. If core devs insist on keeping this veneer of control, they would be wise to compromise for 4MB in 2016, and doubling at the halvings.

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 04:59:06 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 19, 2015, 04:51:03 AM

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 04:46:10 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 19, 2015, 04:44:04 AM

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 04:37:33 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 19, 2015, 04:34:53 AM

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 04:27:05 AM

Why not move to BitSharesforum then and give us a break? By the sounds of it it's better right? I mean... it can scale to trillions of transactions, what else could you possibly want.

By "us" you mean you and iCE? oh, I almost forgot the cuddly but distinctly more inept hdbuck.

You couldn't possibly be taking sides with a guy who believe you can buy block space on the blockchain, are you?

Using an admittedly shitty analogy doesn't automatically mean everything he subsequently says is invalid.

I similarly don't write off all of your opinions, despite your recent statement that people might pay $5, 10, 50 to make an entry on your easily replicated, 5 mining pool run, settlement layer.

Good luck easily replicating 500,000,000 GH/s Cheesy

That's actually not how it works.

People invest in mining coins to make a profit. That's it. They do so by mining the chain that holds the most value, value that is entrusted to it by investors.

Don't believe for a second that miners decide what chain to follow or that rules should be set according to what is "in their interest".

I'm not going to go digging, but you recently were arguing in this thread that bitfury doesn't sell their coins, they're banking on the future, being positive on today's income sheet is secondary. They are using big venture capital money to basically buy huge amounts of coin without pushing the secondary market. This is absolutely forward looking, not investing in today's system that costs $7 or whatever per tx in inflation costs.

Your final statement should stand alone as it succinctly shows your complete misunderstanding of how, and why(!), this whole thing even works.

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 05:15:40 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 19, 2015, 05:07:22 AM

Hmm wait a minute. Who ever mentioned fiat profit?

Profit, in this case, is denominated in Bitcoin. Bitfury mines the Bitcoin blockchain simply because it is the most valuable coin. The value is not in the future but now. The fact that it fluctuates is irrelevant.

As for your last comment, what is it you don't agree with? Do you propose miners are origins of Bitcoin value? Or that we should set the rules of the protocol so as to maximize their profits regardless of the costs externalized to other participants?

I know you're quite enamored with bitcoin, I am too, but the real world (power companies, sellers/renters of real estate) tend to still be using that whole silly fiat thing. Haven't quite listed themselves on MPEx with the other titans of industry, as it were. The world isn't our own personal castle game... yet.

Miners incentives are the variable that counts. And it isn't gmaxwell in a cape that is keeping them in line and holding their arm back from slaughtering the golden goose. Why? Because satoshi designed the entire system so that their interests were sufficiently aligned with those that they service.

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 05:33:42 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 19, 2015, 05:30:22 AM

Yes, I agree he was very wise in retrospect to set the block size cap.

In fact I will suggest he did not even fully understand the importance and critical importance of this decision for the long term success of Bitcoin. Absent of a cap the incentives you refer to become completely skewed in favor of the miners at great cost for the security & decentralization of the network.

Don't get me wrong, we shall increase the block size eventually, "just not tonight, dear".

Ah, the old, "if satoshi had more foresight he would agree with me" argument.

As for what he actually said:

Quote from: satoshi on October 04, 2010, 07:48:40 PM

It can be phased in, like:

if (blocknumber > 115000)
maxblocksize = largerlimit

It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.

When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.

You still completely miss that miners actually do determine what happens to the network, and that's ok, because our interests align. Making blocks so big as to destroy the node network is bad, yes, for them as well as the users. (Not even considering the orphan costs.) I am increasingly astonished that people who gravitated to bitcoin for its free market incentives and function, are simultaneously terrified that without central control over "consensus" it would fall on its face.

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 05:52:26 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 19, 2015, 05:47:52 AM

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 05:33:42 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 19, 2015, 05:30:22 AM

Ah, the old, "if satoshi had more foresight he would agree with me" argument.

As for what he actually said:

Quote from: satoshi on October 04, 2010, 07:48:40 PM

) I am increasingly astonished that people who gravitated to bitcoin for its free market incentives and function, are simultaneously terrified that without central control over "consensus" it would fall on it's face.

Which one is it then? Cap or no cap?

Do you oppose central control or do you not?

Personally, I think that sufficient incentives exist that the network of miners could be self governing wrt max_block_size.

Realistically, I'll take a half measure to help assuage the doubts of the fearful.

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 06:02:05 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 19, 2015, 05:56:14 AM

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 05:52:26 AM

Which one is it then? Cap or no cap?

Do you oppose central control or do you not?

Alright. Let me jump in with my favorite analogy then.

Seeing as we love all things free market then let me ask: are you of the opinion that the network of logging companies & cattle farmers should be left to self-governance in regards to how much of the Amazon rain forest they can cut?

Sounds like we need a strong military with lots of guns to point at them. And maybe Beefstream could get involved with setting production quotas. (While marketing their tasty soy, pea protein, alternative.)

I know it will upset stolfi to hear, he may even tell me to burn in hell, but land owners should be free to destroy/nurture/defile/build and grow/harvest their own property as they choose.

Now returning to your regularly scheduled chartbuddy streak.

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 06:23:39 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 19, 2015, 06:18:03 AM

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 06:02:05 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 19, 2015, 05:56:14 AM

Quote from: brg444 on October 19, 2015, 05:52:26 AM

Which one is it then? Cap or no cap?

Do you oppose central control or do you not?

Land owners? Cheesy

Surely you are not proposing these companies are legitimate owners of all this rain forest they are cutting down.

Anyway, I see you didn't quite get the idea I was attempting to get through to you.

How about big game hunters? No reason we should enforce laws about this right? I'm guessing you are fine with them self-governing the hunting of endangered species?

You've replaced one bad analogy with another. Both reeking of statist sentiment.

Bigger blocks aren't going to destroy the rainforest and kill endangered species, and you should be ashamed for using such comparisons. Mircea would be appalled. The decentralized relay network is an asset to the miners, they would be fools to destroy it.

I mean it this time chartbuddy.

Quote from: Fatman3001 on October 20, 2015, 05:03:46 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on October 20, 2015, 05:02:10 PM

Quote from: noobtrader on October 20, 2015, 04:57:03 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on October 20, 2015, 04:53:02 PM

Quote from: noobtrader on October 20, 2015, 04:44:45 PM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on October 20, 2015, 04:35:21 PM

Don't know if repost.

http://cointelegraph.com/news/115435/china-unofficially-authorizes-bitcoin-price-turns-bullish

ok guys.... this change everything, i see 10000 next year or even 100.000 that is after China officially give green light to bitcoin. Wink

hahahahahahahahahaha

You going to take back your previous comment regarding "stagnant through December" ?

sure if this is true and the news is real, dammnn China has what ? like 1/4 of world population ? and they sure love to gamble/invest/moving money...

but... sometimes they post wrong article u know... Tongue

Yes, it is good for you to qualify your assertion - especially since in the BTC space, we have experienced quite a few ambiguities regarding translations and culture, etc etc. when it comes to China news.

I don't really trust cointelegraph, so I thought I'd drop it in here and hear what you people had to say.

They basically just stole this article: http://shitco.in/2015/10/19/china-unbans-bitcoin/

If it makes you feel any better...

Quote from: ssmc2 on October 20, 2015, 06:34:24 PM

What are you gonna do when we break 273 tarmi? Grin

lol,

INB4 Tarmi covered his short at 262.35 and went long.

I was wondering why Gemini wasn't open to traders in all 50 US states, while itBit was, both operating as a NY banking trust.

Seems at least a couple state regulators are miffed about itBit's boldness.

Bloomberg article behind paywall, pastebin from a redditor:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3pin8s/bloomberg_nychartered_bitcoin_firms_business/

Quote from: Blazin8888 on October 21, 2015, 06:37:21 PM

The train is going to leave the station soon people!

Crypto is becoming mainstream! The ENTIRE ALT game and crypto game in general is changing.

If I was you I would stock up on as much BTC as you possibly can now!

I have this strong and inexplicable urge to plow my nest egg into Digibytes tho.

Quote from: tarmi on October 21, 2015, 06:46:11 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 21, 2015, 06:43:20 PM

Quote from: Blazin8888 on October 21, 2015, 06:37:21 PM

I have this strong and inexplicable urge to plow my nest egg into Digibytes tho.

Did you buy bitshares?

Naw, I lost what was going to be the bitshares allocation at the Evolution Casino.

Thanks for the honest sentiment Holliday.

My main quibble is that an increase doesn't automatically mean max blocks forever. If we went to a 4MB max tomorrow, chances are the avg blocksize would stay on the same trajectory. Bigger blocks are actually a deterrent to large scale spam attacks imo because it means more of their fees will be collected vs dropped from mempool with the potential to be recycled.

Limiting the number of peers you will allow to your node in line with your bandwidth and data cap limitations seems a reasonable response vs halting the capacity growth of the entire network. Miners also have limits as to what makes sense for them, too big of a block means an undue orphan risk... a free market check on blocksize growth.

It really comes down to whether you think the fee market should be forced into existence now, around the halving to 12.5 block reward, or whether it should develop more asymptotically to the decreasing block reward. I've heard all about the bitcoin as gold argument, where you can just stash some keys away and change the world... but as an open source protocol you need a bit more in addition to being first... you need to be the best. We don't have the benefit of the periodic table in this sphere.

Full nodes are pretty easy to fake by calling home to an actual node. There's a reason this direction hasn't been taken.

Quote from: tarmi on October 22, 2015, 08:13:19 PM

don't be so superficial and uneducated.

stalinism does not mean socialism, but - stalinism. there are many forms of socialism, yes. think of those various types of it as implementations of communist ideas in a certain area/state. in the authoritarian east you get stalin, yes, but he does not equal socialism.

also, there is no such thing in the world as a "catholic country", except for vatican city state. also, majority in greece is orthodox.

about christian ethics read niche.

Bonus points if you read how his name is spelled on the cover of said tome.

Quote from: yolalanda on October 22, 2015, 12:36:16 PM

Would it be wrong to post this now?

Go Wile E. Go

945 ask wall at $280 finex

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on October 23, 2015, 10:47:31 PM

Quote from: r0ach on October 23, 2015, 05:07:07 PM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on October 23, 2015, 03:52:33 PM

Then what is your explanation for that rise?

Pretty god damn obvious, at least 500 billion dollars attempting to leave China, some of which is going into Bitcoin, and the halving is just beginning to start to have an initial price effect. Negative interests rates gaining steam + more China fever + halving all at the same time = the perfect storm beginning.
http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/38474

I wonder if anyone would see bitcoin as a good way to protect one's money from a 3% devaluation of the Yuan...

Quote from: Tzupy on October 23, 2015, 06:42:08 PM

But the huge buys in China are probably related to this, interpreted as bullish news (authorities friendly towards bitcoin):
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/chinas-cyberspace-administration-acknowledges-bitcoin/
But the CAC is NOT the PBoC, so it was kind of "buy the rumor" thing. I expect sometime in the next weeks an official statement of the PBoC on this. Wink

That report may have had more impact in the West than in China. Back in mid-2014, some PBoC official was quoted as saying that the bank had no objection to bitcoin ownership and trading, and compared it to trading rare stamps. I can't see in the CAC report (through Google translate) a more positive attitude. I don't see it as signalling a relaxation of the current restrictions (e.g. as suggesting that financial institutions could start investing in it). Instead, I read the report as saying "bitcoin is connected to illegal activities, more regulation may be needed".

I wish that there was a real translation by someone fluent in Chinese.

Hard to think it was coincidence. The day the report came out, prices on chinese exchanges started their march to way above the USD EUR rates and had all the non-chinese traders wondering WTH was going on.

Tim Draper is ready. Are you?

Quote from: !! pop on October 24, 2015, 01:31:02 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on October 24, 2015, 01:15:30 AM

Buyers getting exhausted or just taking a pause before resuming the pump?

You know that Wile E. gif floating around? Something always seems to happen around a certain price. Could be different this time tho, gifs are notoriously unreliable. I'm a fan of Elliot Wave Radiation technicals myself, more reliably disruptive than Radium water (cheaper, too).

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on October 24, 2015, 12:31:07 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 24, 2015, 12:19:49 AM

Tim Draper is ready. Are you?

Fine.

it's 11:22am in beijing, do you know where your bitcoiners are?

Quote from: billyjoeallen on October 24, 2015, 02:40:59 AM

Quote from: Dilla on October 24, 2015, 02:16:45 AM

I think we will test 300, who knows how that will go, but I think we will test it either this weekend or beginning of next week. For some reason I think this time will be different than the last two attempts.

~Four punch raiders~ Let's hope we're still near the bottom when the U.S. Marshall's auction happens, just to keep the Gov from getting more of our money. The blocksize controversy should prevent Bitcoin from reaching escape velocity before then.

We're not at the bottom, that's low 200's high 100's.

That chart is somewhat bullish, showing a good chunk of visa's capacity is within our reach. Good chunk meaning a few percent. No choice now but to wait until hong kong and see what color smoke emanates from the chimney.

Leave Jorge alone!

His home currency is doing a disruptive black swan without the help of bit-coin.

The Brazilian Real in Actual Money�.

Quote from: ChartBuddy on October 25, 2015, 03:01:45 AM

Coin

Explanation

Quote from: Fatman3001 on October 25, 2015, 05:30:00 PM

I'm waiting for +50% of the posts to be someone else than me, lambie, stolfi, LFC and BJA.

Then I will go into full retard bull mode.

I usually consider a higher concentration of bubble drunk moon kids to be an inverse indicator. Undecided

Quote from: billyjoeallen on October 25, 2015, 05:35:50 PM

over 3/4 Million new USD longs. Over 2,000 new BTC shorts on BFX. That's very little safety net when this rally stalls out.

~23 Million in margin longs that got to cover on the way up. Only 14,000 in shorts total to cover to halt a crash.

We're going somewhere, either up or down. But hanging out on a cliff edge is not going to last.

That $22-23 million in longs weren't liquidated even in the $160 flash crash, I agree that I would feel better about this rally with shorts hitting new highs rather than floundering about like they are. (Sometimes I shudder to think what BFX actually did that day though, they might have had to flip the breaker before the whole thing unwound... Shocked

)

Quote from: chennan on October 25, 2015, 07:13:30 PM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on October 25, 2015, 07:00:25 PM

Quote from: BitofaN1 on October 25, 2015, 06:55:39 PM

I still think this rally is about market makers getting sure nobody else gets 44k cheap coins at the martial auction, that could threaten their positions.
I expect this to continue for at least 10 more days, with peak around 3-4th of November.

We don't know if the buyers are going to hold or dump. The only thing we do know is that the damn government gets the cash and I hope that amount is as low as possible.

That's actually something I never really thought before... it could very well be possible for someone who has a lot of cash laying around just absolutely hates the government in general are just pumping up the prices just to fuck with them in a way. Lol, I hope this is not the case and is a legitimate growth in bitcoin and not some ruse some troll is doing just for that one specific instance.

Fuck with the government, by helping them maximize their take? Think this through again.

Quote from: peonminer on October 25, 2015, 07:38:34 PM

When are the next big BTC auctions? I can't wait for this crash Tongue

Gonna be lovely. A beautiful disaster. We could see a floor sub $200 again.

This is the last one for the US gov. The Australian gov has 20k something coins to sell though.

The big dagger hanging over our heads is really the 200k gox coins that need to be sold or returned to the victims. I'm sure a percentage of those people will be market selling and dusting their hands of the whole thing.

Quote from: abercrombie on November 24, 2014, 10:33:08 PM

Quote from: Richy_T on November 24, 2014, 10:04:32 PM

Where's Shroomsy? It's just not the same without some despondency...

Quote from: HI-TEC99 on October 25, 2015, 09:01:44 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 25, 2015, 08:53:05 PM

Quote from: abercrombie on November 24, 2014, 10:33:08 PM

Quote from: Richy_T on November 24, 2014, 10:04:32 PM

Where's Shroomsy? It's just not the same without some despondency...

That's a picture of BitPop. Shroomsy started out on bitcointalk by selling mushroom kits for Bitcoins by mail order from Holland. That picture of BitPop doesn't look like someone who's into hallucinogenic mushrooms. Are you saying Shroomsy the bear is BitPop the bull who started off his own BitPop coin?

Nah, just that I miss shroomsie and his cum rag analogies.

Quote from: tarmi on October 25, 2015, 09:42:27 PM

bear raid

Only need a $20 drop from here to stop losing money on your short... Soon.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on October 26, 2015, 12:22:15 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 25, 2015, 07:52:08 PM

Quote from: peonminer on October 25, 2015, 07:38:34 PM

When are the next big BTC auctions? I can't wait for this crash Tongue

Gonna be lovely. A beautiful disaster. We could see a floor sub $200 again.

This is the last one for the US gov. The Australian gov has 20k something coins to sell though.

The big dagger hanging over our heads is really the 200k gox coins that need to be sold or returned to the victims. I'm sure a percentage of those people will be market selling and dusting their hands of the whole thing.

I'm sure, and maybe you are to, that you are speculating beyond any reasonable basis in reality.

It makes little to no sense to assume that once the 200k gox coins are liberated back into the bitcoin space (in other words put back on the btc market in the hands of various individuals that those individuals are going to, enmasse, decide to dump the coins, or a large majority of the coins).

Your prediction makes little to no sense, if it were to employ actual logic and a morsel of thinking. Roll Eyes

Ah, you missed this qualifier. Easy enough to do, I won't hold it against ya.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on October 26, 2015, 12:36:54 AM

Quote from: Fakhoury on October 26, 2015, 12:35:27 AM

Quote from: Blazin8888 on October 26, 2015, 12:32:51 AM

People buying BTC and moving into ETH we will see sharp BTC price action next months!!!

Why ?

Because Biteshares or whatever was last week.

It was digibydashoneroeth.

"Enhanced" volume isn't fully rolled out on the way down for okcoin.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on October 26, 2015, 12:47:39 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on October 26, 2015, 12:22:15 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 25, 2015, 07:52:08 PM

Quote from: peonminer on October 25, 2015, 07:38:34 PM

When are the next big BTC auctions? I can't wait for this crash Tongue

Gonna be lovely. A beautiful disaster. We could see a floor sub $200 again.

Don't you know how bankruptcies work? The lawyers get paid FIRST. There is very little other than those coins to distribute. Creditors and claimants will get almost nothing. Those coins will be SOLD almost entirely to pay the lawyers.

200k btc for some lawyers... Shocked

Have they been selling these along the way or do they get dumped all at once?

Quote from: billyjoeallen on October 26, 2015, 12:55:50 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 26, 2015, 12:50:07 AM

200k btc for some lawyers... Shocked

Have they been selling these along the way or do they get dumped all at once?

There's over $100 Billion in claims against MTGox, most of them bullshit. The suits have to comb through them to figure out which ones are legit. That takes time and lawyers get paid what? $500/HR?

My guess is: at the very least, 80% of the 200k gets distributed.

Eeek, BJA may be right. Undecided

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/judge_approves_record_688m_attorney_fees_in_enron_securities_case/

Quote from: !! pop on October 26, 2015, 01:39:58 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on October 26, 2015, 12:55:50 AM

That takes time and lawyers get paid what? $500/HR?

200k BTC @ $290 = Roughly 15,000 (8hr.) days of $500/hr. lawyer. Or 150 days' worth of a 100-lawyer team.
Though if we delegate some menial work to paralegals (who charge a bit less than $500/hr.), we could probably get a team of 1,000 to work for about a year's worth of 8hr days (before the money's all spent).
!! pop is not a real businessman, lawyer, or mathematician. If he was, he wouldn't be here.
Keep away from small children/open flames.
For educational/recreational use only.
Discard if past due date.
Trust no one.

We might have an issue with the bolded part.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on October 26, 2015, 01:51:02 AM

I will concede that paying of various fees (such as legal fees) could potentially cause scenarios in which the coins could get dumped in fairly large volumes - it is by NO means certain, and at this time, likely there is NO real utility to speculate in grandiose ways regarding what exactly is going to happen to those coins when they are returned to private hands.

Heaven help us if we dare to speculate on things related to the value of bitcoin... in the confines of these fora.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on October 26, 2015, 02:00:11 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 26, 2015, 01:53:31 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on October 26, 2015, 01:51:02 AM

Heaven help us if we dare to speculate on things related to the value of bitcoin... in the confines of these fora.

That's a smart ass response.

Each of us knows that there is nothing wrong with speculation when there is some reasonable basis for the speculation or even if a poster were to describe how s/he arrives at such assertion(s).

I will endeavor NOT to reply in kind to your insult.

You've recently discovered the virtue of brevity, and for that, I'm thankful. That said, are you to decide what is reasonable? No? Could you suggest someone? I'm just speculating, and have had some responses, kinda the goal here.

Quote from: medialab101 on October 26, 2015, 04:25:22 AM

10K coins added to the ask wall on Finex.

A new bearwhale emerges.

Quote from: dropt on October 26, 2015, 04:54:23 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 26, 2015, 04:30:42 AM

Quote from: medialab101 on October 26, 2015, 04:25:22 AM

10K coins added to the ask wall on Finex.

A new bearwhale emerges.

Mr. Accumulator wants your coins, but he wants them for <300. I bet if someone took a run at that ask wall it'd be pulled mighty quickly.

And like a shadow in the night... he's gone.

Quote from: GiGa# on October 26, 2015, 06:34:38 AM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on October 26, 2015, 06:17:32 AM

That's it for me. I sold all with a $5 profit per coin. I'm not going to lose money and I'm not going to sit on them for another year watching the price bounce between $200 and $300. I want to see the price go beyond $350 before I buy again. I have better things to do with my money.

Good to see some speculators leaving the arena. Hope that more of like will follow.

What a retarded statement.

Hopefully you will still drop us some posts even without being "in", QA. You have the best sig campaign on the forum.

So I was initially skeptical about the amount of demand coming from the MMM Global ponzi. Now okcoin is addressing it directly:

https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/3qd7cc/this_week_at_okcoin_china_update_mmm_ponzi/

No idea what % of this chinese led rise is attributable to it, but it is certainly cause for concern.

Quote from: Harpua on October 27, 2015, 02:30:39 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 27, 2015, 02:23:59 AM

So essentially this price rise lately has been due to abunch of very wealthy Chinese ponzi schemers? Also, is the base price of bitcoin usually related to bitstamps prices over anything else? Just curious.

As I understand it, the buying pressure would be from the ponzi ~~users~~ victims funding their accounts with MMM Global using bitcoin as a payment method. They are awarded extra money for spreading the ponzi through social media and referrals. They get big payouts as advertised as long as the ponzi is growing, when it stops growing, their payments halt, or become less reliable. The end game is the whole thing collapses and everybody is left holding the bag... except Mr Mavrodi.

It's certainly not a new phenomena. When I was first getting into bitcoin, there was a guy on these forums going by the name pirateat40. He ran a ponzi he called Bitcoin Savings and Trust. By giving out impossible interest rates at the beginning, he wound up in control of something like 200k+ bitcoins. Inevitably it collapsed and he ended up being identified, charged, and convicted.

The two are quite different in that pirateat40 was an amateur and this Mavrodi is basically the most professional scammer there is.

Many people around here trust the prices on bitstamp because it is quite old and doesn't offer leverage. But as you can see now, China is very important to the way things play out. We're over $300 in yuan equivalent and bitstamp/bitfinex are still hovering at $292.

Quote from: Harpua on October 27, 2015, 02:59:37 AM

Quote from: ImI on October 27, 2015, 02:54:25 AM

as i understand it one new victim buys btc and sends them to MMM which takes some of the BTC and sells them to pay the older victims

so afterall it should lead to revenue but not necessarily buy pressure

Wow, I couldn't really fathom trusting a guy from China who is known for being a scammer... but then again I guess that does make sense, because just recently I got suckered into losing some bitcoin in a ponzi over in the investor games subforum when I first learned about this place... So I can't say that those people are "dumb" necessarily for doing that, but like you said... victims...

It wasn't till after I started reading about scam after scam people do in that subforum, so ever since then I've stayed far away... should've looked more into it. But everyones looking to make a quick and easy buck when the opportunity is presented to them.

He's not chinese, and this new scam is being run simultaneously in a bunch of different countries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Mavrodi

Also as I said before:

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 27, 2015, 02:23:59 AM

So I was initially skeptical about the amount of demand coming from the MMM Global ponzi. Now okcoin is addressing it directly:

https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/3qd7cc/this_week_at_okcoin_china_update_mmm_ponzi/

No idea what % of this chinese led rise is attributable to it, but it is certainly cause for concern.

Quote from: Dilla on October 27, 2015, 05:04:43 AM

Quote from: tarmi on October 27, 2015, 03:36:04 AM

chinese devaluation of yuan is already priced in.

no choo choo for you bulls, unless you are on mETH. Cheesy

Please explain?
How can you price in an undetermined amount of money adding to the market cap?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-25/yuan-bears-forecasting-devaluation-test-offshore-market-nerves

As the price of yuan vs USD changes, so must the relative price in BTC.

You have to admit there's an air of economic darwinism about it.

The government sanctioned versions are licensed and taxed casinos and (often directly state run) lotteries. Games of chance with a built in tendency for the customer to lose, often immediately.

More than three pages added in a day. What do you gentlemen call this again? Wilding?

I'm wondering when the owner of this wall from a couple days ago is going to return:

Quote from: tarmi on October 28, 2015, 03:21:37 AM

I will clear the way till the next hidden wall with small and regular buys. you panic buy.

Speaking in riddles? drunk?

We're here for you Tarmi, bulltards are the yin to your yang.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on October 28, 2015, 04:09:01 AM

-snip-
All of this extra activity related to the Mavrodi pyramid is likely to increase the number of xactions on the network. If this leads to a backlog, no fee xactions will probably never get confirmed and fees will go up for anyone who needs their bitcoin transferred in a timely manner, possibly up substantially.

The power of exponential growth can be truly awesome. possibly faster. A ponzi scheme needs an ever-expanding pool of suckers to continue. A collapse is inevitable regardless of the block size outcome. This pump can last for a long time, but if the goddamn blocksize cap isn't raised (or preferably eliminated entirely), it's going to collapse when the network crashes which may be even before Mavrodi runs out of suckers.

Leveraged shorts are going up substantially on BFX, as well as longs. If I had to guess, there will be a short squeeze before a long squeeze. Liquidity providers have been caught unprepared for the short term demand of the ponzi. It cannot last but can go on for months. When this thing unwinds, we may find ourselves in a new Nash equilibrium below $200. The fallout will damage Bitcoin possibly even worse than Gox. Expect more bans and heavier regulation.

Do you really think MMM victims in china would throw this much money at the exchanges? Is Mr. Mavrodi hodling the coins vs liquidating them as they come in? As they are basically tx's transferring between the off chain chinese exchanges to the off chain MMM database... do you really see an explosion in tx growth?... (not seeing it here https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin/)

Listen, I agree that increasing the max_block_size is getting critical, and we likely couldn't handle the volumes of a repeat of 2013... I'm just trying to avoid getting hyperbolic on both of these issues. Perhaps that's a mistake... but I'm awaiting more evidence.

hdbuck is the Grover Dill of Blockstream�

Nice hat btw.

Quote from: aztecminer on October 28, 2015, 08:22:53 PM

Quote from: criptix on October 28, 2015, 07:31:48 PM

@aztecminer

you went mia for ~~months~~days just to come back super butt hurt when btc broke 300$?

Roll Eyes

problem for me is i have been butthurt for months now... i been talking trash about bitcoin for months now. and i am going to continue to talk trash... when mofos try to get even with me cuz they are mad cuz i will kick their ass for wronging me then we get into a boxing match... this is about being WRONGED. that is why i am being a total biatch and refuse to stop being a total biatch... check this out what i wrote before so far:

Quote from: spooderman on October 29, 2015, 01:03:00 AM

manbearwhale was so weird. what is the overall take on what happened there? someone eating their own coins?

Someone who preferred $9,000,000.

Seemed like a pretty open and fair way to liquidate such a huge number of coins, and the psychology after the action was pretty positive.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on October 29, 2015, 01:14:32 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 29, 2015, 01:09:18 AM

Quote from: spooderman on October 29, 2015, 01:03:00 AM

manbearwhale was so weird. what is the overall take on what happened there? someone eating their own coins?

Someone who preferred $9,000,000.

Seemed like a pretty open and fair way to liquidate such a huge number of coins, and the psychology after the action was pretty positive.

Was this before or after what we now know to have been Ethereum ~~dumping their war-chest~~ funding their project?

The ethereum btc address was known, and it didn't get sold all at once. I would go digging but I don't care that much. They were down to a few thousand coins at last glance. And iirc it was never 30k.

Quote from: SheHadMANHands on October 29, 2015, 01:24:42 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on October 29, 2015, 01:14:32 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 29, 2015, 01:09:18 AM

Quote from: spooderman on October 29, 2015, 01:03:00 AM

manbearwhale was so weird. what is the overall take on what happened there? someone eating their own coins?

Someone who preferred $9,000,000.

Seemed like a pretty open and fair way to liquidate such a huge number of coins, and the psychology after the action was pretty positive.

Was this before or after what we now know to have been Ethereum ~~dumping their war-chest~~ funding their project?

asking who the bearwhale was...

like asking who Satoshi was.

He was the bearwhale.

bitstamp doesn't know the identity of satoshi...

Way out west there was this fella... fella I wanna tell ya about. Fella by the name of [redacted]. At least that was the handle his loving parents gave him, but he never had much use for it himself. [redacted], he called himself "The Bearwhale". Now, "Bearwhale" - that's a name no one would self-apply where I come from. But then there was a lot about the Bearwhale that didn't make a whole lot of sense. And a lot about where he lived, likewise. But then again, maybe that's why I found the place so darned interestin'.

They call Bitstamp the "Stamp of Bits." I didn't find it to be that, exactly. But I'll allow there are some nice folks there. 'Course I can't say I've seen okcoin, and I ain't never been to Bulgaria. And I ain't never seen no Lawsky in his damned undies, so the feller says. But I'll tell you what - after seeing Bitstamp, and this here story I'm about to unfold, well, I guess I seen somethin' every bit as stupefyin' as you'd see in any of them other places. And in Slovenian, too. So I can die with a smile on my face, without feelin' like the good Lord gypped me.

Now this here story I'm about to unfold took place back in the late '2014s - just about the time of our conflict with Putin and the separatists. I only mention it because sometimes there's a man... I won't say a hero, 'cause, what's a hero? But sometimes, there's a man. And I'm talkin' about the Bearwhale here. Sometimes, there's a man, well, he's the man for his time and place. He fits right in there. And that's the Bearwhale, at Bitstamp. And even if he's a lazy man - and the Bearwhale was most certainly that. Quite possibly the laziest in Bitcoinia, which would place him high in the runnin' for laziest worldwide. But sometimes there's a man, sometimes, there's a man. Aw. I lost my train of thought here. But... aw, hell. I've done introduced him enough.

Quote from: aminorex on October 29, 2015, 02:16:02 AM

Quote from: gentlemand on October 29, 2015, 12:35:02 AM

I should've rephrased that as present usage, not theoretical possibilities.

I buy stuff with it. That's what it's for. Private transactions, private holdings. No tracking. If I wanted to buy stuff costing more than a few large, it would not be suitable, but so far my largest purchase was less than 10k US, so no problem. Oh, and it's actually profitable to mine where I live, unlike BTC.

You buy stuff with ether? Or you think we were talking about monero? You buy stuff with monero?

What's your monkey say about the BTC rally?

Quote from: gentlemand on October 29, 2015, 02:37:21 AM

Quote from: poncom on October 29, 2015, 02:29:28 AM

A reddit poster did some research that revealed a possible candidate for the bearwhale. The EU requires Bitstamp to give them a list of users that withdrew over �30k, and the EU makes that list public. The list only had one user that withdrew the amount of money the bearwhale made, so he's either that user, or never withdrew, or brought back in at lower prices and withdrew in Bitcoins.

The bearwhale is probably the VELIKA BRITANIJA BITCOIN SUB-FUND.

Blimey. I never knew any of that. And I cannae believe that the list is made public. Looks like I'll have to cash out my countless millions with several thousand dust coffee shop deals per day instead.

Not on mah digital gold settlement network you won't.

Yeah this ETH spam sure hasn't overstayed its welcome... pump ended 8 hrs ago.

Quote from: solitude on October 29, 2015, 04:17:32 AM

Shorters / Bears are on suicide watch

you greedy kikes thought you'd make a buck shorting bitcoin forever

But now you sold, and the price just keeps rising, and now you hook-nosed kikes got burnt

get rekt you fucking faggots.

Good job contributing to one of the most basic buttcoiner caricatures of us.

Resistance level is now measured in the strength by which you can hold your palsied hand above the red button.

Quote from: petahashminer on October 29, 2015, 07:32:39 PM

guys is there a sub-forum like price movement tracking & discussion for ltc?

if there is, could you pm me

thx.

http://www.chickenforum.com/forum.php

Quote from: adamstgBit on October 29, 2015, 08:11:37 PM

its 4:10 AM in china
T-4 hours till lift off.

Quote from: Fatman3001 on October 29, 2015, 09:58:48 PM

I should frame this:

"I AM HODLING"

Quote from: GameKyuubi on December 18, 2013, 10:03:03 AM

I type d that tyitle twice because I knew it was wrong the first time. Still wrong. w/e. GF's out at a lesbian bar, BTC crashing WHY AM I HOLDING? I'LL TELL YOU WHY. It's because I'm a bad trader and I KNOW I'M A BAD TRADER. Yeah you good traders can spot the highs and the lows pit pat piffy wing wong wang just like that and make a millino bucks sure no problem bro. Likewise the weak hands are like OH NO IT'S GOING DOWN I'M GONNA SELL he he he and then they're like OH GOD MY ASSHOLE when the SMART traders who KNOW WHAT THE FUCK THEY'RE DOING buy back in but you know what? I'm not part of that group. When the traders buy back in I'm already part of the market capital so GUESS WHO YOU'RE CHEATING day traders NOT ME~! Those taunt threads saying "OHH YOU SHOULD HAVE SOLD" YEAH NO SHIT. NO SHIT I SHOULD HAVE SOLD. I SHOULD HAVE SOLD MOMENTS BEFORE EVERY SELL AND BOUGHT MOMENTS BEFORE EVERY BUY BUT YOU KNOW WHAT NOT EVERYBODY IS AS COOL AS YOU. You only sell in a bear market if you are a good day trader or an illusioned noob. The people inbetween hold. In a zero-sum game such as this, traders can only take your money if you sell.

so i've had some whiskey
actually on the bottle it's spelled whisky
w/e
sue me
(but only if it's payable in BTC)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=375643.0

Price at time of quote... $800 Undecided

Adam posts and we go UP. Cheesy

What if it really is different this time?

800 coin wall at 2100 cny Huobi kept a lid on things

hit $340 in chian money

entering full retard euphoria candle zone

Heh, there's a bid for 70 coins at $329.92 at Gemini.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 29, 2015, 10:12:58 PM

Making fun of bears and shotrers isn't even fun anymore. I am honestly starting to worry and feel bad for them.

Quote from: aminorex on October 30, 2015, 04:36:00 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 30, 2015, 04:33:42 AM

Making fun of bears and shotrers isn't even fun anymore. I am honestly starting to worry and feel bad for them.

Wow. That's....refreshing.

I'm sure the condition will subside when we correct. Cheesy

Quote from: Dilla on October 30, 2015, 05:01:02 AM

uh.... guyysss

Finally... it's not healthy to keep going without shaking off some greed.

So the lamb was just sitting there hodling litebutts waiting for a pump?? Been a strange few days...

Quote from: chennan on October 30, 2015, 07:23:34 PM

China is scaring me a little bit as of right now... they currently aren't holding that $30 gap any more between bitstamp prices... What do you guys think? Is this the top?

It's 3:30 am in china. We'll know their mood in a few hours.

Quote from: DieJohnny on October 30, 2015, 11:31:25 PM

Quote from: Fakhoury on October 30, 2015, 11:28:11 PM

Dear God keep me humble as I watch this relentless train bring me all the wealth and power I have ever dreamed of....

Too late.

Quote from: !! pop on October 30, 2015, 11:26:48 PM

F8ck. Another crack hit of healthy, organic growth Sad

Quick to point to split second timing of shitcoin pumps with a supposed ballerina exit, yet treats btc like a gilted lover... such an enigma.

Quote from: mymenace on October 31, 2015, 12:18:02 AM

Quote from: mymenace on October 10, 2015, 04:02:58 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 10, 2015, 02:11:48 AM

Quote from: mymenace on October 10, 2015, 01:49:27 AM

thanks for the tip

seems he did a good pick

https://btctrading.wordpress.com/2015/10/29/long-term-update-at-resistance-2/

Correlation does not quite equal causation. In this case, it does appear they are very related, to what degree and via which vector... well, that remains to be seen.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 10, 2015, 05:37:08 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 10, 2015, 02:11:48 AM

Exhibit H:

There is something unnatural about this picture. Your guru ended up being correct, but they used a somewhat tainted indicator.

Quote from: medialab101 on October 31, 2015, 01:46:51 AM

$20+ spread between western and Chinese exchanges now... why isn't this being arbed?

You got a quick and cheap way to convert CNY to USD?

Quote from: eatmyshorts1 on October 31, 2015, 02:09:28 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 31, 2015, 01:47:53 AM

Quote from: medialab101 on October 31, 2015, 01:46:51 AM

$20+ spread between western and Chinese exchanges now... why isn't this being arbed?

You got a quick and cheap way to convert CNY to USD?

Just sell on the CNY markets and buy in USD. Convert later.

That's almost-arbing while establishing a growing long position in CNY.

Higher lows, lower highs, oh my, something gonna give.

correction time? maybe monday morning in Beijing will be fun.

she's rollin' over gents

Quote from: r0ach on October 31, 2015, 04:35:42 AM

Nasdaq August tweet comes to pass. He made no mention of XT dragging it down, so I guess it's an even safer haven than he imagines heh:

https://twitter.com/NASDAQ/status/629363305598046208

Of course XT was a factor in the drag down. Not because it simply existed, but because it highlighted a major impediment to growing the network. I fully expect core will be compelled to do something in jan 2016, if not, it means they have been captured by (not so hard to discern) external forces.

~Taps lightly on volumizer~

Is this thing on?

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 31, 2015, 06:34:06 AM

~Taps lightly on volumizer~

Is this thing on?

Quote from: tarmi on October 31, 2015, 08:48:44 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on October 31, 2015, 08:35:50 PM

Quote from: tarmi on October 31, 2015, 08:30:12 PM

Quote from: r0ach on October 31, 2015, 08:27:00 PM

Quote from: tarmi on October 31, 2015, 08:20:30 PM

chinaman will pull his gambit tonight or one of these days anyway.

It appears China gives no fucks about Shitstamp bears.

neither do we give a shit about china. hence 30 $ difference. now go back to your shithole in china.

how did your 258 short work out btw?

I sold for 258 and then borrowed that cash, and waited good entry point for shorts. I even bought something after passing 275. if I were for real to open shorts there I would not have worried too much, cause I know that bitcoin makes those crazy p&d swings. we will be back there in no time.

even those positions will be profitable soon.

Gotta love those profitable imaginary positions.

Well, congrats on (totally not imaginarily) going long and making some gains during this rally.

Quote from: adaseb on November 02, 2015, 12:10:54 AM

I highly doubt there will ever be a short squeeze.

The amount of BTC swap is low, and we don't know what price they sold the BTC at? It could of been at $1100 USD.

I also think a large portion of these BTC shorts is simply mining farms trying to get a future price for their mining revenues for the next few months.

Long squeeze is a different story.

We know about 5k were borrowed and (very likely) dumped around 315-320, probably in an effort to trigger a reversal.

Your point about mining farm hedging is a good one, and I agree that $24.5mil in longs dwarfs 20k borrowed btc.

3k coins of "real" volume has an outsize effect.

edit: about $500k in BFX borrowed USD closed around this time

Quote from: notme on November 02, 2015, 02:42:50 AM

Quote from: peonminer on November 02, 2015, 02:38:22 AM

You just lost your connection... refresh the page.

I see data for that period.

Also, putting "width=300" after the "[img" would be a service to us all.

For those wanting a multiview of bitcoinwisdom, you can adjust this to your taste:

Code:

<html>

<head>


<meta charset="UTF-8">

<meta name=%26quot%3Bdescription%26quot%3B content="2x2 Chart Layout" />
<title>BTC CHARTS</title>

<style type="text/css">

body {margin:0px; padding:0px;}

.Table {display: table; width: 100%; height: 100%;}

.Row {display: table-row; width: 100%; height: 50%;}

.Cell {display: table-cell; overflow: hidden;}

.Cell iframe {height:107%; width:118%; border: 0px;}

</style>
</head>

<body>
<div class="Table">
<div class="Row">

<div class="Cell"><iframe src="https://bitcoinwisdom.com/markets/bitfinex/btcusd" seamless></iframe></div>

<div class="Cell"><iframe src="https://bitcoinwisdom.com/markets/bitstamp/btcusd" seamless></iframe></div>

</div>

<div class="Row">

<div class="Cell"><iframe src="https://bitcoinwisdom.com/markets/okcoin/btccny" seamless></iframe></div>

<div class="Cell"><iframe src="https://bitcoinwisdom.com/markets/huobi/btccny" seamless></iframe></div>

</div>

</div>
</body>

</html>

Cut and paste this into a text file, and name with a .html extension

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on November 02, 2015, 06:26:25 AM

Quote from: brg444 on November 02, 2015, 04:00:20 AM

Disappointed, expect a huge pump avec this nice close to the week Sad

Tomorrow's another day, we've done well for a Sunday today. This next week will have some good uptrend for ya. Rome wasn't built overnight.

It was burned over seven nights tho.

U guise!

Our friend and mentor, Professor Stolfi, graciously attempted to get us featured on the front page of r/buttcoin:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/comments/3qy3m7/this_is_it_the_bitcoin_killer_app/

Unfortunately, his efforts resulted in his fellow butters completely ignoring him, leaving him bereft of even a single sympathy comment.

We're here for you, Jorge.

~btw, it may be time for a new chinese slumber analysis~

Quote from: lyth0s on November 02, 2015, 07:36:04 AM

Wow, we've seen this type of volume before

And we see what it is derived from.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 31, 2015, 12:26:00 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 10, 2015, 05:37:08 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 10, 2015, 02:11:48 AM

Exhibit H:

There is something unnatural about this picture. Your guru ended up being correct, but they used a somewhat tainted indicator.

Quote from: lyth0s on November 02, 2015, 07:43:42 AM

It can be derived from whatever it likes. 44% increase in price in just 1 month. I'll take it.

Someone is (buying) a 100 bitcoins here, 100 there and so on and so forth Cheesy

Can I interest you in some Mavros? How's 100% per month sound, will you take that?

Quote from: lyth0s on November 02, 2015, 07:59:23 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 02, 2015, 07:53:44 AM

Quote from: lyth0s on November 02, 2015, 07:43:42 AM

It can be derived from whatever it likes. 44% increase in price in just 1 month. I'll take it.

Someone is (buying) a 100 bitcoins here, 100 there and so on and so forth Cheesy

Can I interest you in some Mavros? How's 100% per month sound, will you take that?

You're trying so hard right now

Hard? You set the ball on the tee and handed me the bat.

Quote from: hdbuck on November 02, 2015, 02:41:43 PM

Quote from: vrzo on November 02, 2015, 12:01:50 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on November 02, 2015, 11:53:02 AM

Prepare to sell Hearn just went nuclear on the XT FUD, Core bashing in extremis ...

https://medium.com/@octskyward/on-block-sizes-e047bc9f830#.366dmgcto

He is right.

lel if anything, he is just a noisy little princess.

core rulez!!1

Thanks for the insight Grover Dill.

Quote from: Patel on November 02, 2015, 02:49:35 PM

I have never seen a post by Mike Hearn where he posts pure technical discussion.

It's always includes insulting sarcasm in it. Typically, people who do this complain a lot.

Manners maketh man.

Luckily the noobs and rubes of r/bitcoin won't have their eyeballs soiled with such "insulting sarcasm". Hearn's ideas have been moderated, for your protection.

Quote from: hdbuck on November 02, 2015, 05:22:18 PM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on November 02, 2015, 05:18:35 PM

This is not a reasoned response. Just one example:

"The Scaling Bitcoins conferences are not specifically about blocksize, but about how to scale bitcoin efficiently and without risk."

ALL change carries a certain amount of risk. To claim that NO risk is the standard, then you are advocating NO CHANGE just as Mike Hearn has claimed.

The relevant issue is whether or not the risk of increasing blocksize outweighs the risk of not doing so. The risk of waiting vs. the risk of acting in a timely manner. You should get the idea.

you know nothing about risk, just the coupla dollars you 'invest' on btc when it was ath.

How 'bout we check the join dates of you both, hmm?

And as the post linking to Mike's article gets poofed for the 3rd? 4th time?...

A new star rises in the east: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3r81is/building_liquid_next_steps_and_more_details_about/

Quote from: Elwar on November 02, 2015, 06:20:01 PM

Heh...looks like some people sold/shorted at this high price and are hoping some block chain panic will send it back down.

I think people got tired of that being in every thread. Not so scary anymore to anyone who's spent 5 minutes looking into it.

Or... some people have been quite long for a long time, and they have real concerns about what happens if we actually receive the adoption we seek.

This comment is like the ones where you get accused of selling or being short for having concerns about this rally being fueled by chinese MMM victims.

Sure, seeing big gains is fun, but it doesn't mean you (should) turn off your brain and start posting girl's bottoms and moon rockets.

Quote from: Richy_T on November 02, 2015, 07:43:24 PM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on November 02, 2015, 07:37:50 PM

Creating a market for transaction fees needs to happen AFTER we reach mainstream adoption or we will never reach it. Yahoo mail, Facebook, Google all knew not to monetize too early. That's why they're still around. I hope we'll be around when billions of cryto microtransactions becomes an issue.

Trying to develop a sane market for transaction fees with the block reward still as high as it is is a fool's errand in any case.

Not so foolish if you're coming to market with tools that will be competitively advantaged in a high fee environment with artificially capped main chain capacity.

On a lighter note....

Mr. Short 5k coins at 320.... RIP

Quote from: yolalanda on November 02, 2015, 12:45:20 PM

I wake up to ...this?!

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 29, 2015, 10:12:58 PM

RIP Fred

Quote from: kromtar on November 03, 2015, 12:27:14 AM

We are back to new floor at 2400? Shocked

6h chart forming a stair to heaven, let us go for it. Grin

The contractor should have his license pulled... no way that top step is to code.

Finex only $8 below Hoo-oh-boy. Looks like the arb game is on.

Quote from: JimboToronto on November 03, 2015, 03:46:09 AM

Quote from: ssmc2 on November 03, 2015, 03:37:01 AM

Feels like we're going to see 400 by morning

Nom nom time for the $377 wall?

Eaten like candy.

$3 ~~$1 left until~~ $400 equiv in yuan... Shocked

The entire exchange landscape is miles ahead of what it was the last time we had mania like this. The rails in and out have been heavily upgraded in the last two years.

Quote from: noobtrader on November 03, 2015, 06:40:27 AM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on November 03, 2015, 05:25:40 AM

Quote from: Karpeles on November 03, 2015, 01:11:06 AM

You say it because you are sad that you got no profit with the recent bull attack because you have no Bitcoins

I bought 0.00000000 BTC when I first learned abot bitcoin -- in nov/2013, when the price was ~1200$. So, even though my investment was fairly modest, and (as you already know) I have been able to double my holdings every day since then, I am still quite disappointed by the loss of almost 70% of the money that I put into this coin.

i think you should try buying 1.0 BTC this time, frankly buying 0.000000000 BTC will surely result in loss and disappointment. you can imagine if you were buying 0.00000000BTC at 200, you would still be disappointed atm.

If I had a satoshi for every time someone tried to push Stolfi to buy "just one coin"... well, I'd have no where near a full bitcoin. Cheesy

Famous last words but... I expected stronger dumpage after that run.

The hodl is strong at the moment.

Small blocks help a determined tx spammer because once the blocks are full, their transactions get dropped from the mempool and their fees can be recycled to continue the attack. Make the attacker pay fees. Make it very expensive to clog the network.

Miners are sufficiently incentivized to choose an appropriate block size. Too big and their chances of being orphaned increase. This is the decentralized solution for a decentralized system.

Core wants training wheels? Fine, do the 2, 4, 8 increase. I liked Garzik's one off "kick the can" 2MB because it would allow us to measure and study the effects on relay nodes.

If this rally turns out to be like 2013, we are going to see big increases in tx's. I'm willing to wait until January to see what comes out of Hong Kong, but if it is more stonewalling... my fears of capture by a for profit entity will be solidified.

We should stop the bi polar battle though. (Of which I'm guilty of participating in too) Our objectives are the same: the success of Bitcoin. We have enough external enemies without tearing ourselves apart with internal bickering. Fears of centralization are real, fear of 3 tps being a huge bottleneck are real.

BJA: Be careful man, nothing wrong with locking in some profits and taking some gambles, but don't lay yourself down on the tracks to make a political point. We need your opinion in the upcoming months.

Quote from: cbeast on November 03, 2015, 09:57:11 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 03, 2015, 09:48:47 PM

Fears of centralization are real, fear of 3 tps being a huge bottleneck are real.

Calling large miners centralized is like saying Kenya rigs the Boston Marathon. Bitcoin needs to be competitive. Should they limit the run to only white middle-class factory workers from Peoria? Watching them drop dead from heart attacks wouldn't be much fun, nor does watching blocks take days to process and get dropped. You can't make rules that exclude people because they are good at what they do.

I was referring to relay node centralization, not mining nodes.

I see Mr. Short 5000 at $320 cut his loose. Grin

Quote from: wearbear on November 03, 2015, 10:06:44 PM

was a good run you bulls, but this pattern is not your friend. this is going back south now, dips will be called spikes and bears going to have the fun ride

Or it could just be the greed valve going psssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhh. This train does make regular stops as the wider distribution of coins marches on.

Quote from: Fatman3001 on November 03, 2015, 10:14:16 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 03, 2015, 09:48:47 PM

Miners are sufficiently incentivized to choose an appropriate block size. Too big and their chances of being orphaned increase. This is the decentralized solution for a decentralized system.

I'm not sure if you're thinking of "no block size limit" or BIP100, I'm guessing the latter. As a miner myself, and from keeping an eye on the mining field, I can tell you that giving miners this kind of power might lead to some very odd behavior. Most of the companies and pools should not be trusted with that kind of power. It's no point with incentives if you don't understand the consequences of your actions. Just look at Ghash.io's 51% attack scare last summer. There's also the fact that we have no idea who the big actors in the field will be in five years time, nor their motives. The devs need to find a clearly defined solution and implement it. Preferably before we hit the wall.

I meant the former. BIP100 adds a convoluted voting mechanism in an effort to mimic what the free market would do on its own. Go ahead and look at the Ghash debacle, it will show you that mining isn't quite as centralized as it appears.

The miners already have the power, it's just that right now Core serves as a veneer of "community" central control. The same factors that prevent malicious mining behavior (killing the golden goose and mutually assured destruction) will work in this case too.

On the "before hitting the wall" vs "after"... wholeheartedly agree.

Quote from: brg444 on November 03, 2015, 10:29:00 PM

What exactly happened? The 2-3 giant mining operations who accounted for a majority of GHash's power dispersed into different mining pools so as to camouflage their actual share of the network and give the appearance of decentralization?

Are you suggesting protocol level changes to combat this? Economies of scale guarantee there will be a relative level of centralization in mining.

Quote from: brg444 on November 03, 2015, 10:43:45 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 03, 2015, 10:33:13 PM

Quote from: brg444 on November 03, 2015, 10:29:00 PM

Are you suggesting protocol level changes to combat this? Economies of scale guarantee there will be a relative level of centralization in mining.

I'm not. Too be fair I'm not too concerned with miners centralization but it's another thing to pretend that things are all jolly and there's no consolidation going on behind the scenes.

I can roll with that perspective.

Also, I will say I've had some good conversations on these issues with you brg444. Both sides can get heated at times but your sentiment comes across as honest. We can't have light without a little heat.

Let's drop the ad homs and enjoy these lofty levels for a moment.

No more dumps here? I'm pretty sure more fiat will be hitting exchanges this week. Grin

Quote from: hdbuck on November 03, 2015, 10:47:35 PM

Quote from: brg444 on November 03, 2015, 10:43:45 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 03, 2015, 10:33:13 PM

Quote from: brg444 on November 03, 2015, 10:29:00 PM

Are you suggesting protocol level changes to combat this? Economies of scale guarantee there will be a relative level of centralization in mining.

I'm not. Too be fair I'm not too concerned with miners centralization but it's another thing to pretend that things are all jolly and there's no consolidation going on behind the scenes.

if the miners go rogue or gets too much power in a disruptive way, trust in the network will dissipate and everybody looses..
and especially them who has spend millions building top notch infrastructures.

You're so close hdbuck Cheesy

Quote from: brg444 on November 03, 2015, 10:58:07 PM

Some of the giant chinese mining pools are currently centralizing the validation of every transactions they mine.

Do you find that to be a concern?

I do. And I recall some of them paid dearly for that recently, so they might be thinking about it too.

Quote from: brg444 on November 03, 2015, 11:02:53 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 03, 2015, 10:59:46 PM

Quote from: brg444 on November 03, 2015, 10:58:07 PM

Some of the giant chinese mining pools are currently centralizing the validation of every transactions they mine.

Do you find that to be a concern?

I do. And I recall some of them paid dearly for that recently, so they might be thinking about it too.

What part of "they're still doing" did you not understand?

You'd think they would've stopped by now if really it wasn't profitable.

But no, we'll just pretend that a couple of dropped blocks undermined weeks and months of cheating the system.

"That'll make em learn"!

Roll Eyes

So we should be really afraid of miners solving blocks that will be rejected by the rest of the network?

You guys have such interesting concerns.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 04, 2015, 12:27:51 AM

Quote from: JimboToronto on November 04, 2015, 12:22:42 AM

Good morning China. Let me pour you a nice cuppa Joe.

We've had a fun day here in the west and now you can join in too. We even got a nice little correction in so you can start out fresh in driving the price to new highs for the year.

Hope you have as much fun as we've had. A bull market is such a jolly thing.

This is my first one. I'm giddy and confused Undecided

You popped your cherry.

Nice, a second chance at actually celebrating it this time...

Quote from: YourMother on November 04, 2015, 01:16:11 AM

Please tell me you've already capitulated. We need you to reopen shorts when it actually does roll over.

Quote from: I_bitcoin on November 04, 2015, 02:02:06 AM

Long time no see...

That tastes kinda like a near beer.

Quote from: YourMother on November 04, 2015, 02:12:56 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 04, 2015, 02:01:39 AM

Please tell me you've already capitulated. We need you to reopen shorts when it actually does roll over.

Unfortunately i'm stuck with an altcoin that keeps devaluing because of this bulltard run and i cannot enjoy profiting from this. Bitcoin doubled from the point where i bought, but my altcoin went down 50 percent. If i sell my altcoin so i can dump Bitcoin, then there's a big possibility of seeing 220$ per BTC in the future (of course, after the ponzi collapses), but my altcoin doubling in price (regaining its former value) in the meantime.

Can't do much

You just call it "my altcoin"?

Quote from: celes8 on November 04, 2015, 02:16:13 AM

Orderbooks everywhere look so thin.

Can anyone who traded in 2013 talk to us about how they looked during the run-up?

I'm sure there are hidden sell and buy orders, but is the velocity of volume comparable to 2013?

2013 was an entirely different world... but I am getting very distinct flashbacks. China leading this hard is new. And that bucketshop being run off mark's laptop is gone now.

The ease and legitimacy of "getting in" is about 10x greater... To be honest, I'm a little scared by the way things are going.

Quote from: spiderbrain on November 04, 2015, 02:37:16 AM

Quote from: celes8 on November 04, 2015, 02:16:13 AM

2013 looked similar. 3500 coins to $1000 Wink

That said we're probably due a little "first sell off" around now.

We had that earlier today with a 10% hit. They just keep getting rejected too fast. It feels like this thing has started feeding on itself... and at that point you just kinda clutch on. When it tops and rolls... you'll know it, it'll fall 40% or something and then you sell the dead cat bounce at 20% below the top.

Quote from: spooderman on November 04, 2015, 03:00:04 AM

Quote from: dropt on November 04, 2015, 02:56:26 AM

Quote from: arklan on November 04, 2015, 02:53:20 AM

*glances at price, eyes bug out* ...wtf happened!?

It's a good ol' Bitcoin Rally!

NLC is going to have to fix her stupid Wile.E.Coyote .gif

i wish i had the tech know how to change that gif myself

maybe NLC will do it themselves when they capitulate in the 600's? Cheesy

Quote from: dropt on November 04, 2015, 03:09:43 AM

Quote from: natewelt on November 04, 2015, 03:02:39 AM

Does anyone here have the balls to hold and not sell a single satoshi until 1k is reached?

Many of us with Legendary status have them.

Quote

I mean no guarantee that happens, but does anyone have any reasonable selling plans or price targets?

Sell 50% at every price doubling.

I bought some really expensive pcie ribbon riser cables once, didn't immediately buy back... the regret...

Quote from: natewelt on November 04, 2015, 03:22:04 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 04, 2015, 03:06:25 AM

Quote from: natewelt on November 04, 2015, 03:02:39 AM

Does anyone here have the balls to hold and not sell a single satoshi until 1k is reached?

I mean no guarantee that happens, but does anyone have any reasonable selling plans or price targets?

I figure once I start to feel shame, maybe? You?

I am considering starting to sell a little now since I'm up a couple thousand fiat. I don't know how greedy I should be?

I also have a more ballsy plan to start selling at 1k and stop around 2k and hold a bunch of coins with the houses money plus already have like 10k in gains locked in. But of course that seems like stretch...for bitcoin though who the hell knows where it's going.

"Never risk more than you can afford (financially and mentally) to loose (sic) completely" seems a good rule.

Any other advice will have you either loving or hating the advisor.

Quote from: Lesbian Cow on November 04, 2015, 03:37:15 AM

Quote from: wutizurkwest on November 04, 2015, 03:21:20 AM

Quote from: natewelt on November 04, 2015, 03:02:39 AM

Does anyone here have the balls to hold and not sell a single satoshi until 1k is reached?

I mean no guarantee that happens, but does anyone have any reasonable selling plans or price targets?

My first sell point is just above 1000. I like the SSS Plan: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=345065.0, it enables profit taking while the remainder continues to increase in value. And it removes emotion from the decision process (which may be the most valuable part of having a plan). If his advice resonates with you, I suggest trying several variations until you find a schedule you're satisfied with. I spent a week tweaking my spreadsheet before I settled on values I'm comfortable with.

My plan is to sell when rpietila announces plans to remodel his castle and Goat buys a new car...

heheh

Quote from: JimboToronto on November 04, 2015, 03:52:42 AM

Quote from: solitude on November 04, 2015, 03:45:49 AM

Bears Blown The Fuck Out!!!

Someone post the suicide hotline # for these faggots.

Please don't insult LGBT by comparing them to bears.

this

Quote from: MadBanker on November 04, 2015, 04:20:58 AM

For the purpose of calculating the value of your stash, which US exchange does the community think shows the most representative value these days, and why? That used to be a non issue when there was only Gox.

For those using on-shore exchanges, coinbase exchange and itbit (maybe gemini if things keep on course). Off-shore bitstamp and bitfinex.

pssssssssh goes the valve

Quote from: JimboToronto on November 04, 2015, 04:35:38 AM

Quote from: Wolf Rainer on November 04, 2015, 04:27:41 AM

Lol that poor try of dumping. Some bears love to lose money.

That's why they're bears. Losing money is their raison d'etre.

Let's be honest. They had a fantastic couple of years. 'Twould be a shame to give it all back.

Quote from: molecular on November 03, 2015, 10:29:37 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on November 03, 2015, 09:23:48 AM

blockchain is the wrapper, bitcoin is the payload.

payload has just been delivered to the heart and minds of the best and brightest inside the global financial system in technically unambiguous terms ... sit back and watch.

Hehe. Quoting for brilliance

QOTD

another shot at 420? jeez.

Quote from: re-actor on November 04, 2015, 08:23:54 AM

Does anyone have a valid explanation as to why BTC-e is lagging so much, up to $50 and at least $30?
Getting fiat in and out of the exchange is mentioned as the problem, but that seems BS to me.

Up is a constant struggle, while down is a dumpfest every single time.
Trying to block upward movement is the name of the game there, it seems.

When's the last time you wired some money to some anonymous doods in bulgaria(?)?

Chinamen is waking to a vely ugry scene.

Quote from: coins101 on November 04, 2015, 11:03:39 PM

Those dumps don't look like the price was being moved by some MMM Ponzi.

China pump groups are back.

China pumps, the west dumps. The great redistribution.

Stamp's depth on both sides is... nonexistent.

Quote from: xxxxxzzzzz on November 04, 2015, 11:14:46 PM

Way to fuck up the markets by force dumping the western exchanges to $70 off from china. The gap was $15 before the vicious dumping forced the western exchanges down. And thanks for the $120 loss off the high point in the last half a day. A retracement into the mid 400's was expected but this is a fucking nightmare scenario seeing it where it is now after the last 2 months of solid gain and last couple days of fantastic gain. Fuck you whoever brutally and without pause for hours slammed the markets into oblivion today. You assholes didn't have to do that. China would have happily stayed above 500 and held the markets up if not for the insane shitstorm that was brought upon on stamp and finex. It's not lack of buying pressure when you intentionally crush the market with 1000s of coins in a minute every ten minutes for hours on end. WTF Angry

Lol, yep, sounds like bitcoin.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 04, 2015, 11:29:04 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 04, 2015, 11:21:15 PM

Quote from: xxxxxzzzzz on November 04, 2015, 11:14:46 PM

Lol, yep, sounds like bitcoin.

If I may summon my inner Shromskits for a moment: That was fucked! Shocked

*Needs more impotent rage.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 17, 2015, 02:14:07 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on October 17, 2015, 02:08:51 AM

Quote from: E on October 17, 2015, 01:11:06 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on October 16, 2015, 10:33:59 PM

green candles seven out of the last three weeks.

http://digitalpolyphony.webs.com/normal_PDVD_125.jpg

Whoa, three aces!

Shit. Fixed. But you gotta admit seven out of eight days and weeks is extremely rare occurrence. Even bitcoin doesn't go straight up forever.

T'salright. A man is allowed to buy some booze with the proceeds of 50 coins he dumped on our heads in the 260's.

Quote from: mixan on November 05, 2015, 02:05:30 AM

Quote from: Omikifuse on November 03, 2015, 10:12:51 PM

I see a dump to 375 followed by a quick recover.

For a moment I thought was game over and and were on top, but this is more solid than I thought

That was close.. thought I lost a lot more. Thanks for a quick recovery or I would be in major trouble with the wife playing with the kids college funds and so close Christmas. Daddy would have to go find a friends house to sleep at tonight if it stayed at $380.

I really hope you're joking.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 05, 2015, 02:02:12 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 05, 2015, 12:41:52 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 04, 2015, 03:18:59 AM

Quote from: monbux on November 04, 2015, 03:15:47 AM

Not sure if it was the best time to buy but I purchased some more bitcoin at $520 CAD. COME ON BITCOIN, FLY FLY FLY!

I imagine people who really have to use BTC (for *ahem* business reasons) are just hoping it doesn't come crashing down over-night. Stability seemed so much more legit. Embarrassed

Right. So, if you happened to need to use Bitcoin today, you got stoned for it. And not in the way you expected. How do the darknet markets thrive with this kind of volitility?

And another question: how does the Bitpay business model account for swings like this? If I buy a gew-gaw from Nick's Knacks at 480 and a minute later we're at 400, somehow Bitpay swallows the loss?

You could have a bot that sells short the amount of the sale, hedging yourself. I somehow doubt bitpay's doing this tho.

Maybe if/when the exchange landscape becomes more legit/secure. (and if bitpay is still in business when that happens)

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 05, 2015, 02:23:27 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 05, 2015, 02:21:06 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 05, 2015, 02:02:12 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 05, 2015, 12:41:52 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 04, 2015, 03:18:59 AM

Quote from: monbux on November 04, 2015, 03:15:47 AM

Not sure if it was the best time to buy but I purchased some more bitcoin at $520 CAD. COME ON BITCOIN, FLY FLY FLY!

I imagine people who really have to use BTC (for *ahem* business reasons) are just hoping it doesn't come crashing down over-night. Stability seemed so much more legit. Embarrassed

Right. So, if you happened to need to use Bitcoin today, you got stoned for it. And not in the way you expected. How do the darknet markets thrive with this kind of volitility?

And another question: how does the Bitpay business model account for swings like this? If I buy a gew-gaw from Nick's Knacks at 480 and a minute later we're at 400, somehow Bitpay swallows the loss?

I guess they try to make/they'd need to make transition to fiats as quickly as possible, so straight to the exchange. Is that how it works now?

I think I read they do some bulk OTC sales of coin, but yes, I'd imagine a good number go right to the exchange.

Quote from: adamstgBit on November 05, 2015, 02:42:40 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on January 25, 2014, 07:17:15 PM

Inspirational Buy All the Bitcoins Speech

We're in hell boys, believe me. Now, we can be greedy and fearful and cash in our bitcoins for fiat, pay our taxes and participate in the up and coming bail-ins.... OR, we can fight our way back, we can buy our way into the light, we can climb out'a hell. I look around and i see newbies everywhere, and i think... I mean... i've made every wrong choice a bitcoiner can make, I fell in every single bears trap in the 20's, I pay 50BTC for mining contracts at 90$. and lately I feel like selling everything.... Newbies talk of bearishness and china being an issue, which reminds me what's at stake here, what we've been fighting for this whole time. and what the bitcoin market really is. the bitcoin market is a promise of freedom and fairness for all. We are a team poeple, fighting for honest money and freedom from the banksters. Either we heal now as a team, or we will die as individuals. We can get screwed by the system one by one, or, we can unite and screw the system AS A TEAM. On this team, we fight for the bitcoins, On this team we tear ourselves to pieces for the bitcoins! BECAUSE WE KNOW, when we add up all those bitcoins thats gonna make the fuck'n difference, between winning and losing, between getting screwed and screwing them. I'll tell you this, in any fight its the guy that's willing to die thats gonna win, and i know if i'm gonna have any life anymore its because i'm still willing to fight and die for the dream, because that's what living is! The dollars we need are everywhere around us, Now I can't make you do it, you have to look at the guy next to you, look at his avatar, I think you'll see a guy who will fight for the bitcoin dream, because when it comes down to it, he needs it as badly as you do.

Now.... what are you gonna do?!

* inspired by http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSDhhZtRwFU *

Just a year early. Wink

420... again... Must be something magnetic.

Quote from: shane on November 05, 2015, 04:20:46 AM

The next target is $600
http://www.coindesk.com/wedbush-revises-12-month-bitcoin-price-target-to-600/

Guy's just guessing like the rest of us.

If it dumps below earlier today's dumpage... gon be bad.

I somewhat doubt it though. That volume was powerful.

get ready to panic

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on November 05, 2015, 05:56:39 AM

Quote from: Mota on November 04, 2015, 09:13:29 PM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on November 04, 2015, 09:01:49 PM

Bitcoin so far has been adopted as a currency only by criminals and scammers. Adoption for legitimate commerce is tiny, and largely to limited to users who want to push bitcoin for other reasons than its qualities as a payment method.

Why was I so sure that this "argument" would be posted today.... You realize that the currency with the most illegal usages like money laundering, drug money, weapons etc. is the US-Dollar? Heck, if you count in the money from black labour (which is also illegal, iirc), pretty much every currency is used far more for illegal activities and scams.

Btw, your pseudo argument was/is also used for the internet... "99% of the internet traffic and 90% of websites are porn sites" In retrospect, this is actually good news! Wink

Can you see the difference between "uses of bitcoin are mostly illegal payments" and "most illegal payments use bitcoin"? One is false, the other is true.

What's the citation on that one professor? Gut feeling? I would say speculation is solidly #1.

A western panic, an eastern panic, about 9 hrs apart.

Quote from: gizmoh on November 05, 2015, 06:28:59 AM

Quote from: medialab101 on November 05, 2015, 06:01:30 AM

Crazy volume on Finex Shocked

Also, the sell wall is peaking 35k coins now (mainly one entity) but still heavy resistance to going any lower.

Entity is selling for real this time.. Hows is he gonna unload 20k in this thin market..

Why would you pile on the visible ask side if your goal was to cash out at the highest price?

Quote from: gizmoh on November 05, 2015, 06:40:56 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 05, 2015, 06:31:39 AM

Quote from: gizmoh on November 05, 2015, 06:28:59 AM

Quote from: medialab101 on November 05, 2015, 06:01:30 AM

Crazy volume on Finex Shocked

Also, the sell wall is peaking 35k coins now (mainly one entity) but still heavy resistance to going any lower.

Entity is selling for real this time.. Hows is he gonna unload 20k in this thin market..

Why would you pile on the visible ask side if your goal was to cash out at the highest price?

He is an avid trader.. Expect cheap coins but wouldn't mind unloading at $400! Some people forget $400 was not seen for a long time..
China Fomo game has ended. Chinese will be scared to fomo buy as this guaranteed up has ended.

If he's an avid trader he shouldn't chase bids away from his asks, but I suspect accumulation. Who knows though, we've had people place a 30k at $300 and just let it get eaten.

Quote from: hdbuck on November 05, 2015, 07:44:28 AM

Quote from: gizmoh on November 05, 2015, 07:42:43 AM

Quote from: ynef on November 05, 2015, 07:10:11 AM

Quote from: gizmoh on November 05, 2015, 06:57:35 AM

Serious investors will reconsider this investment proposition.
Sorry to break the bullishness guys!

It's possible, but don't you think that the hope of another 2013 will keep it going? Not to mention the charts aren't actually showing anything catastrophic at this point.

Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me

The fact that this insane run-up buying is from the same kind of players that accentuated the 2013 bubble, It could only burst. I think we will go sideways/slow bleed and test support 300 at some point, until the next halving bubble !

Still amazed by the euphoria and empty ask at $500 (not achieved for 2 years) , hoping for more..greed at its finest!

this was the fbi pumping it up for their auction today, nothing more.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg12889118#msg12889118

so i fully concur we will go back hovering around 300.

Are you kidding me? The govt that takes in 2.6 trillion $ in taxes goes all cloak and dagger to get a couple million more on a silly property auction?

Quote from: hdbuck on November 05, 2015, 08:00:02 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 05, 2015, 07:54:29 AM

Quote from: hdbuck on November 05, 2015, 07:44:28 AM

this was the fbi pumping it up for their auction today, nothing more.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg12889118#msg12889118

so i fully concur we will go back hovering around 300.

Are you kidding me? The govt that takes in 2.6 trillion $ in taxes goes all cloak and dagger to get a couple million more on a silly property auction?

they doubled it, going from 10 million to 20+ potentially.

if not for the money why make such auctions in the first place?

besides its not 'cloak and dagger', they are just playing the game.

i think some people here over reacted and got burned at 400+, praising for 15k$ btc already. Cheesy

Oh, you're serious. Do you have any idea of how much yuan it took to make that "doubling"?

We did go straight vertical and predictably dumped. Do you have your shorts open at $386?

I've been posting about inflated china volume since early Oct, but you are clueless if you think bitstamp is driving this train.

Quote from: Sturgeon on November 05, 2015, 08:32:45 AM

Risks to this ongoing bitcoin price rebound include the upcoming non-farm payrolls release, which might also have a strong impact on dollar price action. Stronger than expected results could spur another USD rally, effectively dragging BTCUSD lower, while weak data could lead to a dollar selloff and another bitcoin price surge.

Intraday support level � $375

Intraday resistance level � $500

source : http://www.newsbtc.com/2015/11/05/bitcoin-price-technical-analysis-correction-500-called/

$120 up and down in a couple days and we're watching the non-farm payroll number... sure Grin

New lows on everything but finex.

I did all I was willing to, don't burn it down by morning.

"There will be no real-time, non-controlled currency in the world. There is no government that is going to put up with it for long"

"When the Department of Justice calls and says, 'it's an illegal currency and it's against the laws of the land, and if you do it again, we will put you in jail', it's over."

Jamie Dimon

*lambie lets out a little squeak of joy

Quote from: YourMother on November 06, 2015, 01:17:23 AM

Nice one.

What a week... 350 was like a dream on Monday. Now, 350 looks like dog shit. Oh, bitcoin.

Quote from: BitChick on November 06, 2015, 03:18:00 AM

Quote from: snakey on November 06, 2015, 03:14:59 AM

price down before the sell off?

http://www.coindesk.com/us-marshals-final-silk-road-bitcoin-auction/

The sell off was today but they will announce the winners of the auction tomorrow. It could have affected the price perhaps.

They don't announce the winners. A winner may announce themselves, but maybe not. Occasionally someone will say the price of their losing bid. The coins won't move until monday.

I actually think they are pretty unrelated, other than giving some courage to the bears because of the lower numbers of bids and bidders. OKcoin going down was probably a much bigger factor in today's dumpfest.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on November 06, 2015, 05:53:39 AM

There's not much blood on the streets...yet. Sometimes I wonder if smallblockers are intentionally hampering progress so they can buy as many coins as possible on the cheap. Then sometimes I wonder if they just want to destroy bitcoin.

I'm not buying back in until it goes lower than the $260s where I sold most at and I don't care if it NEVER gets there. I still have my cold storage stash. I can lend out my fiat with zero exchange rate risk. I can keep the profits from my short on the MMM pump.

The only other reason I would buy back in is if blocks get larger than 1MB. Then I'm back in 100%, no matter what the price is.

Enjoy watching the value of your portfolios plummet, bulls. If you get wiped out, blame the cripplecoiners.

Tweet from Garzik today:
https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/662283289043030016

Quote from: hdbuck on November 06, 2015, 10:06:05 PM

Quote from: bButtercup on November 06, 2015, 10:04:43 PM

"Plug in your 21 Bitcoin Computer to get a stream of bitcoin on your Mac, Windows, or Linux laptop."

as well as a USG backdoor.. Tongue

I hear there's an entire team of evil doers dedicated to constant monitoring and haxoring of our internet pog activity.

Also... Bitlending!

Panic sellers done dumping to the accumulators?

Quote from: billyjoeallen on November 07, 2015, 12:43:00 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 07, 2015, 12:39:24 AM

Panic sellers done dumping to the accumulators?

The accumulators already bought. Bulls don't have any fiat left to spend.

They have plenty of fiat from dumping the parabola. You think the bears had that many coins?

Quote from: billyjoeallen on November 07, 2015, 12:50:31 AM

I'm not a permabear. I'll switch back as soon as the first block gets mined >1MB.

I understand your sentiment, mine's more like... "I go full bear if we are met with a stonewall in jan 2016".

I could totally see us going down to the lower 300's, even 290's, and testing those levels too.

There was massive dumping at that peak and throughout the 400's, without much rise in shorts. That was hodlers and bullish traders selling, I suspect not all of that is on an outgoing wire at the moment.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 07, 2015, 01:10:20 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 07, 2015, 12:57:22 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on November 07, 2015, 12:50:31 AM

I'm not a permabear. I'll switch back as soon as the first block gets mined >1MB.

The Economist predicts transactions could take over an hour by early next year if there's no change. Are they wrong?

They're not explicitly wrong, but such is life while making guesses based on unpredictable variables. Also, a (premature imo) fee market would allow some user decision on that front.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on September 13, 2015, 07:44:24 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 13, 2015, 07:38:01 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on May 07, 2015, 07:28:59 PM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on May 07, 2015, 07:17:24 PM

He be chillin. Waiting to short from $3500.

Ah, a man of leisure. A day on the water is a day well spent. Bulls of 2014 can do it too.

~ Signal crackles with analog distortion. ~

Today, intrepid young capitalists discuss the merits of depreciating assets, boats and bitcoin... Here's Tom with the weather...

Back in your day we still had water Embarrassed

That time again eh?

Quote from: NSA360 on November 07, 2015, 01:30:15 AM

Quote from: ssmc2 on November 06, 2015, 10:23:49 PM

Any news/tweets from winning bidders?

We deserve to know that Cheesy

Who won? Fontas?

I think it's a fairly good chance we don't hear anything until the coins move on monday.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 07, 2015, 02:19:40 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on November 07, 2015, 02:16:35 AM

we're going to need some big event to justify the rise, blocksize limit / scalability being solved would probably be enough.

You really think we can scale tho? I'm starting to see Bitcoin as a kind of flawed masterpiece. Is it fixable?

I think this is all mostly posturing from two political camps. Neither trying to concede anything in an effort to determine the trajectory of a compromise. Hard to get "consensus" on a fix for something that's not broken, yet.

Quote from: brg444 on November 07, 2015, 02:30:37 AM

What if chinese exchanges are the ones entertaining the MMM red herring to explain the "high activity"?

Dress it with some wash trading to cover up the exact volume and it makes for a nice cover for the actual currency control escape going on.

You can't possibly take Bobby Lee on his word when he pretends there's none of that stuff going on, only an idiot would say otherwise in this position.

It would also make sense to "pause the operations" for awhile to allow things to cool off.

So the MMM demand story, and wash trades, are just trying to cover up massive capital flight? Uber bull thrusters engaged then?

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=%22MMM+pays%22&search_sort=video_date_uploaded

Watch for when these stop. And don an asbestos suit for the Hell that awaits you.

(how's that, stolfi?)

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 07, 2015, 02:43:31 AM

Like that sounds darned urgent, that.

When you see sustained runs approaching 2.7 or so tps, then you have darned urgency.

https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin/

Edit: hopefully we'll coast for a couple months

No benefit of the periodic table, and a mid curve of the distribution scheme compensation. The block reward is what is supposed to fuel the growth that will sustain miners as it approaches 0. 12.5 btc is not 0.

Quote from: hdbuck on November 07, 2015, 03:39:20 AM

let us also put aside once and for all the fallacy of confusing 'effectively' scaling bitcoin with block size.

Let's not, because they're clearly linked. I hope only the pace of growth is disputed at this point. Sidechains will only add to that. 1MB4EVA needs to get rekt on the shores of romania.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on October 24, 2015, 08:00:31 AM

Leave Jorge alone!

His home currency is doing a disruptive black swan without the help of bit-coin.

The Brazilian Real in Actual Money�.

To be fair, it's flat since august ended.

Jorge doesn't "invest" in fiat. Only silly ~~MMM victims~~ poor people would do such a thing. Maybe he will, or already has, "protested" for them.

Quote from: brg444 on November 07, 2015, 04:34:28 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on November 07, 2015, 03:56:21 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on November 07, 2015, 03:46:23 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on November 07, 2015, 03:42:33 AM

Quote from: hdbuck on November 07, 2015, 03:31:54 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on November 07, 2015, 03:26:40 AM

...

That would be an ideal time for someone to launch a competing coin. I figure it would take <$1 Billion to overcome Bitcoin's first mover advantage and then the banksters will just keep running the world as if we never existed.

lmao you really should lay off whatever you are tripping on.

You think it would take less or more? Surely you know that it's possible at some number with the right technical design and promotion. You seem to be not understanding what's at stake here.

it would take broad consensus amongst the community that this altcoin is the new future of money.

i mean they can pump there coin all they want, all they really do is create a very large honey pot no one dare touch.

?? our entire market cap is a fraction of what Facebook paid for Whatsapp. They don't need our community at all. All we're doing is their test marketing and technical research for them. A few tweaks, a few power players (in finance, not crypto) backing, and they capture everyone who wants low cost electronic cash without all the anarcho-capitalist drug market baggage. Oh yeah, and it'll scale.

What type of moron..... I can't...

Image no workey. Can we stop the Grover Dill impression? 2MB, can I get a 2MB?

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 07, 2015, 05:10:31 AM

Isn't calling Lightning like solutions not Bitcoin kind of a stretch?

Isn't calling Lightning like solutions Bitcoin kind of a stretch?

Spot the silly volume here.

Quote from: Holliday on November 07, 2015, 06:45:10 AM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on November 07, 2015, 05:01:51 AM

That is the stated Blocksrteam/small-blockian view: bitcoin should be used only for large-value settlements between institutions, like the Lightning network hubs

As a small-blockian myself, I can say the above is not my view.

Bitcoin should be used primarily for transactions where capital controls or other forms of monetary censorship exist.

The amount of data required to keep the Bitcoin network functioning should remain small enough that it is difficult to censor, especially considering it is needed most in places where censorship exists.

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on November 07, 2015, 05:01:51 AM

-- not for ordinary e-purchases by ordinary citizens.

This, however, is my view. There is simply no reason to use censorship-proof money for ordinary purchases. It's a terrible waste of resources for starters. A decentralized system has no reason to compete with centralized systems. They each do different things well. Using Bitcoin to buy goods from Amazon is like using a chainsaw to mow your lawn. Yeah, a chainsaw will certainly cut grass, but there are much better tools for the job.

All transactions do not need to be censorship-proof in a world where censorship-proof transactions exist. The possibility of censorship-proof transactions by itself will cut down on censorship because it will be seen as futile. So, it's important that any decision to change Bitcoin be considered in this light, and it's imperative not to make changes which move in the opposite direction (such as drastically increasing the amount of data needed to be shared in order to keep the network functioning).

Bitcoin is not blessed with being the only censorship resistant network by virtue of atomic organizaion. The block reward is our manna to consume while eating everyone else's lunch.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on November 07, 2015, 07:20:13 AM

so all the usual trolls and bears have taken to swimming in the swamp of endlessly discussing big block politics (not technicals) now that the price is rising?

Nope, just being realistic about the happy case of us receiving what we wish for.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on November 07, 2015, 07:29:01 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 07, 2015, 07:21:43 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on November 07, 2015, 07:20:13 AM

so all the usual trolls and bears have taken to swimming in the swamp of endlessly discussing big block politics (not technicals) now that the price is rising?

Nope, just being realistic about the happy case of us receiving what we wish for.

reviving the corpse of Hearn's abortion XT for some necrophiliac loving is just sick and embarassing ... but if that is what you wish? Go for it, just do not expect to be taken seriously by the technical knowledgeable people in bitcoin.

I didn't say a word about XT, if you want my opinion, his added "features" and change of leadership killed it upon birth. I'm fine with adam's 2-4-8.

Fact is, 1MB4EVA needs to be rektd on the shores of romania. We need to seize our moment, or perish via paralysis or capture.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on November 07, 2015, 07:44:01 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 07, 2015, 07:33:09 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on November 07, 2015, 07:29:01 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 07, 2015, 07:21:43 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on November 07, 2015, 07:20:13 AM

so all the usual trolls and bears have taken to swimming in the swamp of endlessly discussing big block politics (not technicals) now that the price is rising?

Nope, just being realistic about the happy case of us receiving what we wish for.

1MB4EVA is not being proposed as a serious technical solution. On h/ware improvements alone capacity will grow but how to implement that in a secure algorithm is the challenge, given the myriad of parameters and delicate balance of the existing competing incentive structure.

It would not surprise me that after all the work that is going on now for secure transactions anchored in main chain, but off-chain, that it turns out blocks wont be demanded by the market to be much bigger at all. Highly distributed networks scale securely best self-similarly, not monolithically (simply bigger blocks is a monolithic approach, so likely wrong) and "big" is a temporally-relative term that is near to impossible to encode in network rules that need to persist for decades.

Believe it when I see it. For now, give me 2MB for some coasting and measuring.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on November 07, 2015, 08:03:57 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 07, 2015, 07:47:19 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on November 07, 2015, 07:44:01 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 07, 2015, 07:33:09 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on November 07, 2015, 07:29:01 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 07, 2015, 07:21:43 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on November 07, 2015, 07:20:13 AM

so all the usual trolls and bears have taken to swimming in the swamp of endlessly discussing big block politics (not technicals) now that the price is rising?

Nope, just being realistic about the happy case of us receiving what we wish for.

Believe it when I see it. For now, give me 2MB for some coasting and measuring.

Noone is going to "give you" anything. Run a node, spin up a new client with the rules you want implemented or contribute civilly to a technical group that is producing a client.

Kind of off-putting to see all this "demanding" by the users ... if you want something build it. This is not the customer-supplier relationship that has been sold to you by Gavin, Hearn and the data-mining crowd. They want something from you for providing "convenient solutions, easy answers and goodies", your financial privacy. It is the same thing Google and Facebook and etc did to the web. Provide the goodies for free and meanwhile they pipe your humanity out the back-door.

I'm not "demanding" shit. You can keep it at 1MB censorship safe popescu pogs if you want, I'll spin down my node and sell my coins if you keep towing what's best for Blockstream � well through 2016. That's not a threat, just a statement.

(Lay down an olive branch and get smacked in the face with it.)

Fake bull lambies are the best lambies. Cheesy

whoops

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 09, 2015, 11:32:43 PM

I really hope this is Stofl's campus Cheesy

Brazilian University Accepts Bitcoin, Installs Campus ATM

A "private" University? Pfffft.

BRL derived from taxes tastes so much sweeter.

"And tank it up to here, lol"
[polarbear.jpg]

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 10, 2015, 12:54:22 AM

About the winners:

Quote

Among the companies at the forefront of this move is DRW Holdings LLC, a high-frequency trading firm in Chicago founded by former options-pit trader Donald Wilson in 1992. DRW is a founding investor in a new bitcoin financial-services firm called Digital Asset Holdings that launched last month. Cumberland Mining & Materials LLC, a DRW subsidiary, has �begun to experiment with cryptocurrency trading,� DRW said.

Itbit's OTC desk got a consortium together for 5 blocks as well, min 10k coins.

Quote from: brg444 on November 10, 2015, 03:32:50 AM

Quote from: natewelt on November 10, 2015, 03:20:28 AM

Quote from: natewelt on November 03, 2015, 05:20:11 AM

2500

Don't mind me. Just recycling.

Jinxed us

again before back to the queue

Capitulation candle to 290 or was that it?

Quote from: barbs on November 11, 2015, 07:40:21 AM

Quote from: 600watt on November 11, 2015, 07:23:00 AM

just look at the charts. this will create such big time confidence for all those btc investors to come. now it looks as if the "bubbles" get smaller and smaller. Tongue

the following months will be more of 2015 style. let�s wait for the halving of 2016.

how am i gonna tell this to my wife, for fuck sake? no skiing in switzerland this winter i guess.

What gets me is just how brazen and rude it is

Rational people just roll their eyes when Bitcoin goes up and they're alway right

The people who get fooled and fucked over are the ones Bitcoin needs to actually go somewhere

This won't keep working but early adopters have a payday once again off the back of noobs

Swings in the bitcoin price are exacerbated by fear and greed.

One can be a part of the solution rather than the problem by buying some when the price looks like crap and everyone is panicking or depressed... and by selling some when everyone is feeling euphoric and you're checking the fiat value of your stash multiple times a day.

Easier said than done tho...

Quote from: rpietila on November 11, 2015, 11:20:46 PM

Hope that stuff's been kept at about 4C for the last decade.

What a ~~long~~, strange trip it's been.

Quote from: DieJohnny on November 12, 2015, 02:57:59 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 12, 2015, 02:55:31 AM

Quote from: micky123 on November 12, 2015, 02:45:50 AM

It is now quite clear that this latest huge P & D was orchestrated by the USMS to ensure they got the maximum value out of the auction. Now that the auction is over, down we go! Thank goodness they have no more "seized" bitcoins to sell. Hopefully we will now see Bitcoin steadying itself.

This is actually probably the least likely of all possible explanations.

Seems like an insane coincidence that this happened the very moment the auction closed..... why is this the least likely explanation?

The unlikely part is the USG giving a damn about making an extra million or two on an auction. The same organization takes in 2.6 trillion $ in revenue per year, and this blowoff top required much more than a million or two $ for fuel.

It's slightly more plausible that (part of) the market wanted them to pay more for the coins, thus making them less inclined to dump them on the open market.

IMO this has much more to do with MMM demand sparking dreams of a new bubble which was fueled further by people not wanting to miss out on it. The market then dumped many 10's of thousands of coins on their heads to disabuse them of this notion. While completely wiping out shorts on the way up, and slaughtering overambitious margin longs on the way back down.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on November 12, 2015, 04:21:36 AM

Quote

The report concludes that worldwide, private financial wealth of between $21 trillion and $32 trillion is located in secretive locations around the world, where it is either untaxed or lightly taxed.

opportunity knocks ... killer app?

http://www.thelocal.ch/20151103/swiss-remains-on-top-for-financial-secrecy

"Just not tonight, dear."

Lots of 100 coin orders on bearstamp without corresponding movements.

Anybody want to panic sell 1000 coins down to $320 finex?

Quote from: Mervyn_Pumpkinhead on November 12, 2015, 06:17:53 AM

Increased my position into LTC, PPC, NMC to 60%.

No BBQcoin?

Quote from: Tzupy on November 12, 2015, 11:02:55 PM

Quote from: ssmc2 on November 12, 2015, 10:47:42 PM

Quote from: Tzupy on November 12, 2015, 10:06:30 PM

2h PSAR flipped to bearish on BTCChina and Bitfinex.

Seems to be an unreliable indicator Wink

In this case, it was misleading... Angry

Oh shit...

Your short term technical indicators have no power here.

Quote from: makeacake on November 12, 2015, 04:25:07 PM

Quote from: AlexGR on November 12, 2015, 04:17:02 PM

Quote from: Turdarasorus on November 12, 2015, 03:55:38 PM

Not that again Roll Eyes

No, not everything that gets laughed at [though the internet never was] eventually becomes outrageously popular. Most do not.

Bitcoin transactions are growing. Payment processors like Bitpay release stats that show increasing usage.

Payment processors like BitPay release stats that they're letting people go because faulty business model (see Fig. 1).

Fig. 1

Quote

If you've bought at 3$ you are up 100 times and if you bought at 30$ you are up 10 times.

More like $7-$40 and sold at avg. $6xx, but what does this have to do with bitcoin not being a purely speculative asset and me being ridiculously lucky?

Why $6xx? On the way up, or the dead cat bounce after the peak? Any ideological reasons for the exit, or just gettin' while the gettin' was good?

Did you buy some fine british automobiles with the proceeds?? Wink

Quote from: brg444 on November 13, 2015, 02:22:55 AM

Quote from: DieJohnny on November 13, 2015, 02:07:58 AM

So the trend for bitcoin is that it will be the safest haven for all investors. While all other asset classes can only diminish in the eyes of the ever improving bitcoin. Eventually the wealthy will come to terms with this inevitability and start to buy bitcoin to preserve what wealth they have as Bitcoin will become the obvious choice to everyone.

cheers

"Just not tonight, dear." Angry

Quote from: brg444 on November 13, 2015, 02:36:03 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 13, 2015, 02:27:32 AM

"Just not tonight, dear." Angry

~"He smiled understandingly�much more than understandingly. It was one of those rare smiles with a quality of eternal reassurance in it, that you may come across four or five times in life. It faced�or seemed to face�the whole external world for an instant, and then concentrated on you with an irresistible prejudice in your favor. It understood you just so far as you wanted to be understood, believed in you as you would like to believe in yourself, and assured you that it had precisely the impression of you that, at your best, you hoped to convey."~

Quote from: ChartBuddy on November 13, 2015, 04:11:13 AM

Explanation

Quote from: wutizurkwest on November 16, 2015, 01:01:56 AM

Quote from: galdur on November 16, 2015, 12:46:44 AM

Quote from: wutizurkwest on November 16, 2015, 12:30:50 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on November 16, 2015, 12:06:30 AM

Quote from: wutizurkwest on November 15, 2015, 11:50:57 PM

It's Monday morning in Shanghai. The next 6 hours are critical. Cheesy

http://news.yahoo.com/imf-experts-recommend-inclusion-chinese-yuan-elite-currency-010527771.html

So, will BTC go down because China dumps their hodlings, or will it go up as USD devalues?

Perhaps both? First China dumps and we revisit $275. When they run out inflation takes over again and we're back to $400 before you know it.

The dollar has been dying for as long as I remember, or so they�re always saying, but is presently at a 7-year high and looking pretty healthy. The FED will most likely be forced to start hiking rates in the near future which should be good for the greenback. I would imagine that this would be rather bearish for bitcoin. If it is a counter-trade to the dollar like most things that is.

Perhaps. Looking at that chart, I can't help but think we're getting close to the other side of the hill. I don't know if the Fed will raise interest rates or not next month, but I suspect they're thinking about more QE. If the world starts dumping USD for Yuan, they won't have to.

Volume is positively anemic right now. Undecided

Barring a miracle, looks like those big bids protecting 300 are ripe for another test.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 16, 2015, 02:36:49 AM

Lookit! Can we please just come to some sort of consensus about what is going to happen in the immediate future regarding the price? It seems to me we would all stand to benefit under such an arrangement.

You've heard the herding cats analogy?

Try a group of idealistic neckbeards, greedy rubes, good traders, bad traders, govt plants against fungibility, and a generous dusting of criminals and ponzi victims... huoo boy.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on November 16, 2015, 03:03:51 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 16, 2015, 02:00:38 AM

Volume is positively anemic right now. Undecided

Barring a miracle, looks like those big bids protecting 300 are ripe for another test.

I agree with you regarding a very considerable potential that $300 will be retested; however, you are way off base to assess volume as anemic.

look - about 5 hours ago, we witnessed a battle involving nearly 14,000 BTC on stamp over a period of about 90 minutes.

In the past 4 hours, we have also witnessed about an additional 3,000 BTC exchanged... relative to 14k, that is a smaller amount, but it is no where near any contextually accurate concept of "anemic."

Will you look at that? JJG is NOT wrong, and is somewhat terse about it... Not sure how I feel about that yet.

That said... I don't trust stamp volume at all. Curiously enough, finex has the only volume that looks to be organic trading.

Quote from: dragonseer on November 16, 2015, 04:17:25 AM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on November 15, 2015, 11:00:30 PM

Can't you guyz and galz just launch this mofo to 10k so I can buy a boat?

Is that really too much to ask for?

I sold during the last pump and while I could buy back in for less right now, I'm staying out of it.

The CEO of Coinbase made comments this month about how they plan to 'upgrade' their system in the second week of December, as they undermine the core developers and go against community sentiment about what Bitcoin is.

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/coinbase-ceo-brian-armstrong-bip-is-the-best-proposal-we-ve-seen-so-far-1446584055

This is a corporate move to take Bitcoin over and turn it into something appropriate for bankers (the XT fork WILL NEED more updates, while its blacklists will be updated too), who can then use it to dump their fiat into while other systems collapse and hyperinflation starts.

For this to work, they are counting on people like you, to be so happy with your profits and new boat that you won't care that Bitcoin has lost its integrity along the way.

I'll get behind Bitcoin again if the community proves itself smarter than this however.

So you sold your coins because XT was thoroughly defeated, zero blocks of the last 1000 solved and a paltry amount of nodes...

Will you buy back if the max block size is 1MB in 2017?

hory shet

it really is a pump on all exchanges at once.

Quote from: MatTheCat on November 18, 2015, 01:50:24 AM

WTF!

We have the whale, whaling around on Bitstamp once again, whipping up a shit storm of trades within a $2 range.....

......but what is he trying to tell us this time?

Is $338 strong resistance, or is this meant to be incredible support at these levels?

He's trying to tell you that stamp's "real" volume looks like crap.

*May also derail entire threads about bitcoin speculation, careening them into page upon page of unrelated argument.

Borders are imaginary lines, or at least should be, but can't be, 'cause welfare statism.

A globalized society will eventually result in the lines of "race" becoming very blurred. I, for one, welcome the age of the mud people. We slowly but surely will shed the chains of racism and dogmatic religion from our rugged but misguided past. They are but crutches for the weak to lean on.

We have unleashed the power of the atom, we can harvest energy from the natural forces already at work on our planet. We can communicate/collaborate with nearly any person at any time, anywhere in the world. We have designed an (admittedly exploratory) internet currency system to route around the self-serving system of nation-state central banking.

As for the lizard people stuff, get a room u guise.

adam, post a random image if you're in trouble

Jorge is a bitcoiner, he just wants a spectacular crash to sub-dollar levels, then it can resume rightfully, without all the wanton speculation. Cheesy

It pains me to see what little credit and admiration his buttcoin buddies bestow upon him tho, he is probably their most valuable redditor!

Yep, that totally real and organic trading in a couple dollar range on bitstamp.

Why does "large of volume" mean anything, when a nice chunk of that is obvious wash trades?

At least they could adjust the algo to make it a little more convincing... like the chinese appear to be doing.

Quote from: adaseb on November 19, 2015, 05:19:04 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 19, 2015, 05:04:33 AM

Sorry for the typo. Meant lack of volume.

Ah, carry on then.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on November 19, 2015, 06:21:46 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 19, 2015, 05:04:33 AM

How can you be so convinced that the volume on Stamp is not real?

There is a BTC price battle going on, no?

And, such BTC price battle has been going on for nearly 14 weeks (specifically on Stamp - as the price leader), and more intensified in the past about 4 weeks, no?

What's your evidence to the contrary?

It's just my strong personal impression. Looking at the walls, looking at the action, round numbers, comparative volume before and after...

You can believe it's just two hardened traders fighting it out, then giving up, the price about where it left off... if you want.

They are doing anything but manipulate the direction of the price in these bitstamp volume spikes. I think it's probably nothing more than getting them nearer the top of the global volume stat pages. I also doubt it's bitstamp doing it, more likely a trader with enough volume to have near 0 or 0 trading fees, doing the job of returning the favor.

*All just strong personal impression, not investment advice, not accusation of wrong-doing.

ZOMG! "European Union to ban bitcoin for being currency of terrists!"

And all we got was this measly $4 discount? Get it together, bears.

interdasting, I'm not fully convinced tho

https://twitter.com/izakaminska/status/652631955540979712

https://twitter.com/izakaminska/status/646420175554768897

Quote from: gentlemand on November 19, 2015, 10:54:30 PM

I do believe that particular woman has, like, other stuff to do. The entity who plagues this place clearly does not.

Posts scary looking crash charts on twitter, but totally not likely to have spare time with all that FT blog writing.

https://twitter.com/izakaminska/status/518792102734749696

Quote from: The Doxing on November 19, 2015, 11:27:30 PM

Hey Izabella, how much of your tiny salary did you lose with your leveraged shorts. You could have made more money at mickeyd's for all your effort. Whats it like being poor? This is so much fun laughing at you!

Sure there's some interesting similarities of profile but you certainly haven't offered proof, I wouldn't go dancing on the rooftops over your "victory".

Huobi ded?

edit: back up

I don't completely agree with the tactical decisions Hearn made over the last year, and I'd be fine with slower increases than BIP101, but I'm 100% certain he did more for Bitcoin on his worst day than Nov 2013 hdbuck ever will.

If we're still (inexplicably?) stuck at 1MB popescu pogs through the majority of 2016, I'll be lacing up my shoes too.

Quote from: xyzzy099 on November 20, 2015, 09:12:44 PM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on November 20, 2015, 09:08:48 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 20, 2015, 09:04:56 PM

Hear, hear!

Could someone point out a few of Mr. Hearn's more notable contributions to Bitcoin? I am having trouble finding them. (serious question)

Ever used schildbach's Bitcoin Wallet for android? It uses bitcoinj, which was created by Mike.

Quote from: gentlemand on November 20, 2015, 09:56:33 PM

Quote from: Winner on November 20, 2015, 09:42:36 PM

Woops

http://www.wired.com/2015/11/coinbase-unveils-countrys-first-bitcoin-debit-card/

bitcoin debit card

The article bangs on about it breeding Bitcoin acceptance. I think I must've missed why. You still have to buy it to spend it. Why not, er, cut out Coinbase and just spend your dollars?

Annoyingly, each purchase you make is also a taxable event in the US. One of the biggest impediments to wider adoption imo. Capital gains from trading are messy enough, adding 300 lunch transactions to the mix makes it even worse, especially when the merchant is still just getting USD via the visa network.

If you do ALL of your buying/selling/spending via coinbase they'll produce statements for you... but that's not for everyone.

Quote from: xyzzy099 on November 20, 2015, 11:39:52 PM

Thanks.

Yeah, I was aware of bitcoinj - and that is certainly a contribution - but I was thinking more along the lines of contributions to the actual Bitcoin protocol. Although Mike has been at the center of a lot of controversy in the Bitcoin world over the last couple of years, it seems that he has actually only worked on his own projects, as far as I can see. It's hard to tell if he influenced the work of others or not, though.

You'll notice I placed a fairly low bar. Wink

And Hearn easily cleared it.

Years is a long time to continue the same argument.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=157141.80

Quote from: xyzzy099 on November 21, 2015, 12:35:19 AM

lolwut?

Was that just a declarative?

Yeah, Hearn ragequit out of frustration with stasis on this issue, first by trying the XT gambit, then bailing when that didn't work. Everybody wants to just shit on him now, but I've appreciated his input, in code and ideas. You don't have to agree with him to show a little respect for the time and effort he put into the project.

Quote from: abercrombie on November 21, 2015, 12:59:38 AM

Conclusions of the Council of the EU and of the Member States meeting within the Council on Counter-Terrorism

"in order to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing in conformity with Financial Action Task Force (FATF) recommendations, to strengthen controls of non-banking payment methods such as electronic/anonymous payments, money remittances, cash-carriers, virtual currencies, transfers of gold or precious metals and pre-paid cards in line with the risk they present and to curb more effectively the illicit trade in cultural goods"

Quote

b) is committed to ensure a swift and effective freezing of terrorist assets throughout the Union, whether through autonomous EU decisions or in compliance with UN Security Council Resolutions.

An ominous or silly statement.

Why don't they just swiftly and effectively arrest all the terrorists while they're at it?

Quote from: xyzzy099 on November 21, 2015, 01:07:38 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 21, 2015, 12:58:30 AM

Quote from: xyzzy099 on November 21, 2015, 12:35:19 AM

lolwut?

BFL Customer?

Quote from: xyzzy099 on November 21, 2015, 01:18:40 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 21, 2015, 01:10:49 AM

Quote from: xyzzy099 on November 21, 2015, 01:07:38 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 21, 2015, 12:58:30 AM

Quote from: xyzzy099 on November 21, 2015, 12:35:19 AM

lolwut?

BFL Customer?

What response do you want? I asked an honest question - "What had Mike Hearn contributed?" - The answer is clearly NOTHING to anyone who bothers to look. And yet you post this nonsense? What is my response supposed to be?

You say that bitcoinj is nothing because it's not in the holy Core repository, fine. Because of this, in your mind, he has contributed nothing to Bitcoin, fine. I disagree.

Of the rare occasion I've actually talked to someone in depth IRL about bitcoin... Shooting some mBTC across the android wallet, using bitcoinj, has been the main trigger of an "ah ha" moment, where they start to actually be interested (or feign interest so well as to be undetectable Cheesy

Quote from: adamstgBit on November 21, 2015, 05:06:33 AM

ya.. so 350 in the next 26 hours Grin

When volume is weak like this... why bid things up? What's the rush?

We were comfortable at $220 not that long ago, $320 is a hard pill to swallow without substantial changes in the atmosphere. We need resolution from the 200k gox dagger above our heads... then comes max_block_size increases and the halvening, everybody's just buying/selling discount or premium tickets to that, at the moment.

Edit: "Fine, bid things up then."

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 18, 2015, 11:37:56 PM

4MB max in 2016, doubling at the halvings. (2MB would/could/should have been the limit at the drop to 25btc block rewards.)

Growth in the max could be halted or slowed by soft fork if alternative scaling solutions present themselves and are proven to be both functional and desired by the market.

Code:

Max Blocksize Block Reward Year(~) Native TPS(~)
1MB 50 2009 3
2MB 25 2013 6
4MB 12.5 2016 12
8MB 6.25 2019 24
16MB 3.125 2022 48
32MB 1.5625 2026 96
64MB 0.78125 2029 192
128MB 0.390625 2033 384
256MB 0.1953125 2037 768
512MB 0.09765625 2041 1536

There's something nice about the available space in a block for fee paying txs doubling at the same time the reward is cut.

If only satoshi would have spared us the drama. Doublings fight halvenings... forever.

To be technical, all 4 are the work of apes. Cheesy

Quote from: brg444 on November 22, 2015, 07:53:22 PM

Quote from: hdbuck on November 22, 2015, 07:45:35 PM

we all know their dirty secret is to ban cash and digitalize your influx so they can ~~track~~ tax you better.

Of course but now we have Bitcoin

So... as long as your salary is paid in bitcoin, and all the things you buy are paid directly with bitcoin (without any identifying information collected in the process), we are FREE from taxation!

Oh, but wait, we are only replacing central banking, not commercial banking. Huh

I guess it's back to sitting on our private keys and talking shit about anybody who wants to actually do anything with this invention. At least we're still guaranteed to get filthy rich, very soon�. Cool

Quote from: adamstgBit on November 22, 2015, 08:23:22 PM

there was like 1billion dollars unaccounted for that the pentagon spend and it wasn't ever recorded...

You dropped a few zeros there adam.

Always nice when chian wakes up frisky on monday morning.

Quote from: hdbuck on November 22, 2015, 09:31:34 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 22, 2015, 08:15:21 PM

Quote from: brg444 on November 22, 2015, 07:53:22 PM

Quote from: hdbuck on November 22, 2015, 07:45:35 PM

we all know their dirty secret is to ban cash and digitalize your influx so they can ~~track~~ tax you better.

Of course but now we have Bitcoin

So... as long as your salary is paid in bitcoin, and all the things you buy are paid directly with bitcoin (without any identifying information collected in the process), we are FREE from taxation!

Oh, but wait, we are only replacing central banking, not commercial banking. Huh

its pretty simple yes:

Unloading our bags on literally children... the killer app!

Quote from: jbreher on November 22, 2015, 10:37:22 PM

Quote from: ingiltere on November 22, 2015, 10:30:02 PM

2.3 trillion dollar went to the organisation who run the world. They can do whatever they want with that kind of money.
Bitcoin is nothing comparing to it.

Today. If tomorrow seven billion decide that the use of bitcoin over fiat is in their best interest, it shall come to pass.

The immovable object is demolished by the unstoppable force.

I get that you're speaking metaphorically. But it's important to at least recognize the reality... the system would be completely choked if even a medium sized city adopted bitcoin over fiat. I hear we may double or quadruple things next year tho.

Getting 7 billion acquainted with lightning payment channels settling with the blockchain will also take some time and magic.

Quote from: hdbuck on November 22, 2015, 09:40:37 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 22, 2015, 09:37:21 PM

Quote from: hdbuck on November 22, 2015, 09:31:34 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 22, 2015, 08:15:21 PM

Quote from: brg444 on November 22, 2015, 07:53:22 PM

Quote from: hdbuck on November 22, 2015, 07:45:35 PM

we all know their dirty secret is to ban cash and digitalize your influx so they can ~~track~~ tax you better.

Of course but now we have Bitcoin

So... as long as your salary is paid in bitcoin, and all the things you buy are paid directly with bitcoin (without any identifying information collected in the process), we are FREE from taxation!

Oh, but wait, we are only replacing central banking, not commercial banking. Huh

its pretty simple yes:

Unloading our bags on literally children... the killer app!

meh daddy issues much?

yes we all know you prefer in-suit banksters that build big phat corporations, impose their government laws & taxes with their private blockchains.

bequick kiddo, get yourself one of these fancy coinbase bitcoin debit card, maybe they'll even let you choose its color! Grin

I would love to be able to make a poll about which joke was funnier.

Also

Quote from: jbreher on November 23, 2015, 12:03:49 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 22, 2015, 11:50:36 PM

and magic.

...but I don't believe in magic.

And then you go and take me literally. For shame. Angry

I agree with most of your other points. Patience is tough though... it feels like our time is rapidly approaching but we don't have the time to make it ready.

Quote from: r0ach on November 23, 2015, 12:33:00 AM

Quote from: acakf on November 22, 2015, 11:04:05 PM

Oh oh... Bitcoin terrorists enraged, coming to get me. Any time left for me to plead, in tears, on my trembling knees, for mercy? I'm scaird Sad

Another JIDF, Zionazi, central banking shill spammer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlyL2r2j7VQ

Another december 2013 joiner, what's with you guys? I realize you lost some money, but jeez, no need to spew your projected inadequacies all over us.

Quote from: r0ach on November 23, 2015, 12:50:12 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 23, 2015, 12:38:55 AM

Quote from: r0ach on November 23, 2015, 12:33:00 AM

Quote from: acakf on November 22, 2015, 11:04:05 PM

Oh oh... Bitcoin terrorists enraged, coming to get me. Any time left for me to plead, in tears, on my trembling knees, for mercy? I'm scaird Sad

Another JIDF, Zionazi, central banking shill spammer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlyL2r2j7VQ

Another december 2013 joiner, what's with you guys? I realize you lost some money, but jeez, no need to spew your projected inadequacies all over us.

Looks like someone is offended. If you don't want to be offended, tell your govt financed, JIDF shill friends to stop making 100 spam accounts per day on the Bitcoin forum.

Did you ever think for a second, that they might, just maybe, gain personal satisfaction from laughing at you? And that's all the payment they need?

How about you stop paying them?

See? No scary shape shifting joos involved.

The temporary deflation blues. Invest this or else!

Silly day when one can go long physical cash.

Quote from: jbreher on November 24, 2015, 11:28:40 PM

Whatevs. Use a service, pay for the privilege. Not a problem. You got a better way to spend bitcoin at 'Every Where You Want To Be', as it says in the tagline?

Yeah, just sell some bitcoin and spend the proceeds. They're just selling your bitcoin for you in small amounts, creating a taxable gain/loss on every single transaction you make.

I get that some people like to think they're spending bitcoin, but you're just having a middle man sell it for you, while creating a complete accounting mess in the process.

I know, I know, most of y'all don't pay taxes. But that's not because you aren't required to... it's just because you're too small for them to go through the hassle of pinning you to the wall and shaking the lint out of your pockets. (not you specifically jbreher, just a general observation)

I wish them luck with the card, but personally, I see absolutely no benefit to using it.

Quote from: jbreher on November 24, 2015, 11:28:40 PM

I think maybe you're too dug in on hating this idea to open your mind to the benefits.

It's not something I'd use daily. Hell - it's not even available yet in my jurisdiction. But any option is another option. In this crypto world, more options are only a good thing.

I don't hate the idea, like I said, I wish them luck, if someone finds it beneficial to them and their situation... great.

I've also said previously that if someone does ALL their fiat interfacing with coinbase, their gain/loss statements will be quite convenient.

For me personally, it doesn't seem beneficial in any compelling way.

heh https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3u4nax/bitcoin_startups_face_backlash_for_perceived/cxbxjfh

I see you lot have been wilding again while I was away.

Looks like it was mostly huobi huoobin and okcoin ok'ing? With ~4k bfx shorts bailing and over $1mm longs added in the mix.

Quote from: mixan on November 27, 2015, 08:10:21 PM

Quote from: noob2001 on November 27, 2015, 06:29:37 PM

price going to dump soon

It is happening already and I thought it would be soon the trading day for it to go down. Was $357 last I checked around ten minutes ago thought it broke 360 barely two hours ago. Up to $366 and down to almost $10 is not very promising end of the month tally.

Quote from: r0ach on November 27, 2015, 09:14:54 PM

Quote from: Richy_T on November 27, 2015, 07:06:04 PM

Two years ago today when we crossed into 1k territory. Unfortunately, as we were later to find out, that was 1k GoxBux

Since nobody seems to know how many Bitcoins Gox actually had, it's still possible that instead of pumping, Gox might instead have had a negative effect on the market by selling more coins than they owned (shorting). Yea, they're buying and selling with customer funds, but that doesn't mean they're pumping if they have 600k coins in liability on the books and only had 200k coins. They would be naked shorting like Blythe Masters and silver. I haven't really seen any good summary of Gox liabilities vs assets over time, but if there's always more liabilities than assets, they're naked shorting!

Think it through again champ. Mark was missing 600k btc. Closed banking channels meant that no one could withdraw via wire transfer, but they could withdraw btc. He was buying real btc with fake and/or customer money to keep btc withdrawals working. This having a negative effect on exchange rate is ridiculous... until the scam came crashing down of course.

Quote from: r0ach on November 27, 2015, 09:30:32 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 27, 2015, 09:25:36 PM

If Gox coins really were stolen, and the thief dumped coins for cash, then how is Karpeles pumping by buying a smaller amount of coins with customer funds to enable withdrawal? It would be a wash or probably negative movement from him not buying as many as were stolen. The only way Karpeles is pumping in that scenario is if the "thief" didn't sell any. Who would steal $200 million dollars in goods and not sell any?

We have no idea really when the theft occurred, it could have happened as early as 2011. It could have been liquidated at much lower prices. One thing we know for sure, a criminal clever enough to waltz off with 100's of thousands of btc, would not be trying to sell them on mtgox in the late 2013 bubble when there was no way to get the fiat out.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on November 27, 2015, 09:54:26 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 27, 2015, 09:40:18 PM

Quote from: r0ach on November 27, 2015, 09:30:32 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 27, 2015, 09:25:36 PM

People frequently will assert that Gox shenanigans caused the BTC market to go in one direction or another, yet neither is really clear and unambiguous.

I'm not saying Mark's scrambling to stay functional caused ALL of the movement of that rally, China was obviously a factor, their relative effects are difficult to ascertain and quantify.

Quote

In the end, it appears pretty clear that Gox did increasingly engage in a kind of fractional reserve banking of bitcoins to be trading coins that it did not in fact have in its possession.

Yes.

Quote

So a bot created pumping is one thing to cause the price to go up, but a flooding of the market with non-existing coins, is another thing that causes the real price to go down....

That's the problem, people were withdrawing coins, something that can't be done with "non-existing" coins. Hence, the reason he had to "buy" them at almost any price (and entice people to deposit more coins in the process.)

The mining game is pretty simple on the macro level, either the price goes up, or mining power falls as reward decays. The idea that a big group of miners will shut off their machines around the moment of the halving is cute... but I think there are so many variables at play (efficiency, power sources, selling of machines to the public) that any shift will be smoothed, and the difficulty mechanism will do its job.

Above $300, plenty of gear will be profitable post-halving. And if it isn't... it will drop off, but not faster than what is corrected by the adjustment window. As mining gets less profitable, the cheaper way to acquire them becomes the market, which adjusts incentives accordingly.

Quote from: Richy_T on November 28, 2015, 03:21:31 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 28, 2015, 02:46:04 AM

Above $300, plenty of gear will be profitable post-halving. And if it isn't... it will drop off, but not faster than what is corrected by the adjustment window. As mining gets less profitable, the cheaper way to acquire them becomes the market, which adjusts incentives accordingly.

I hope so. And people say things were OK last halving. But I think I noticed in the data that the block time did lengthen out for a while after it happened. I'll have to run the numbers.

GPU days, pretty sure I ran at a nominal loss for a while there, harvesting heat to compensate. What's old is new again. At least the field was a bit more level back then for the little guys. GPU rigs actually took some maintenance, even if it could be streamlined with scripts and pdu's with ip control.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on November 28, 2015, 03:40:50 AM

Quote

As mining gets less profitable, the cheaper way to acquire them becomes the market, which adjusts incentives accordingly.

this is the mechanism that puts the effective floor under the bitcoin price. And as long as difficulty keeps rising and halvings keep going the floor keeps rising Wink

It's like a ratchet mechanism, speculators bid it up, miners chase the profit and expand operations, difficulty rises, new floor cost<=>price rises, price drops back to floor cost, miners buy at market, speculators pile back in, miners expand, difficulty rises, rinse, repeat.

This only happens in the face of demand for the product.

Block reward is Bitcoin's manna... to be consumed while the network grows to eat everyone else's lunch. Let's hope we get some action on capacity in 2016, additional capacity from multiple angles.

Our secret weapon, with no known antidote... badger nlc with jjg, until the will to continue is lost.

Ahh, 'nother hit of that ~~china white~~ organic growth.

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on November 29, 2015, 08:47:46 PM

Quote from: gentlemand on November 29, 2015, 01:31:22 AM

It was a rather surreal experience.

I first learned of bitcoin sometime in October or November 2013, when Rick Falkvinge (founder of the Swedish Pirate Party) tweeted that he was putting all his savings into bitcoin ("but this is not investment advice"). I did not pay attention at that time.

Then he tweeted again about bitcoin while the big crash was in progress. He was furious because, halfway through the crash, MtGox's ticker started replaying the same trades over and over again. (I never found out whether it was a bug, or an intentional desperate attempt by Mark to stop the crash by posting fake prices.) That is when I started digging into the topic in earnest. (I had just given up on following the Fukushima accident, after i learned that the data I had been plotting and studying for 3 months was totally meaningless readings from broken instruments. Perhaps I needed some other disaster to fill the void. Grin

)

Later still, in December 2013 or early 2014, Rick wrote that he had a six figure amount in euros locked up in MtGOX, which he was unable to withdraw. I gather that he managed to withdraw some of it eventually, before MtGOX folded for good. Yet, last time I checked, he was still positive about bitcoin. There is a man of strong convictions...

People saw the entire financial system basically implode under its own weight and rampant mortgage/debt security fraud in 2008. They watched as governments scrambled to postpone the inevitable by printing and injecting trillions of dollars (mortgages against the productivity of future generations) into the very entities that made it happen while profiting from it.

Last I checked, people are still using those same (further debased) FRN iou's... strong convictions.

Now, if the Bitcoin network magically issued 600k coins to bail out the creditors of mtgox, while diluting the value of the coins held by people who didn't keep them in an obviously failing bucket shop, and got Karpeles a massive bonus in the process (and maybe giving pirateat40 commit access to the github)... we might have a good analogy.

If our resident r0ach didn't have such an illustrious history of investing in Dogecoin, Catcoin, and even... Corgicoin(?), I would have pinned him as a relatively advanced form of lambie trolling.

Sadly, it appears he is quite real, quite butthurt, and will continue working tirelessly to shit up this thread while making veterans cringe and newbies blush before they close the tab.

Quote from: r0ach on November 29, 2015, 09:57:52 PM

Oh, did my posting a chart of factual reality offend you? What would make someone offended by facts? Do you have something you want to admit to us of why that chart offended you? Are you ashamed to admit it? I guess you are. This is a common theme with you. All of your posts are far leftist, ultra politically correct in nature. This is the Bitcoin crypto anarchy forum, not the Karl Marx institute of higher learning. If you're going to continue to try and push your mainstream media ideology of fraud and lies, you should find another forum. Maybe MSNBC, Huffingtonpost, or Goldmansachs forum.

Offended me about as much as someone posting a chart of MLB batting averages on a thread about coffee grinders.

You obviously know nothing about me, and don't care to find out, I'm OK with that.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 23, 2015, 12:56:30 AM

Quote from: r0ach on November 23, 2015, 12:50:12 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 23, 2015, 12:38:55 AM

Quote from: r0ach on November 23, 2015, 12:33:00 AM

Quote from: acakf on November 22, 2015, 11:04:05 PM

Oh oh... Bitcoin terrorists enraged, coming to get me. Any time left for me to plead, in tears, on my trembling knees, for mercy? I'm scaird Sad

Another JIDF, Zionazi, central banking shill spammer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlyL2r2j7VQ

Another december 2013 joiner, what's with you guys? I realize you lost some money, but jeez, no need to spew your projected inadequacies all over us.

Looks like someone is offended. If you don't want to be offended, tell your govt financed, JIDF shill friends to stop making 100 spam accounts per day on the Bitcoin forum.

Edit: Choo Choo

Entering that nervous zone.

Quote from: ssmc2 on November 30, 2015, 02:35:12 AM

Bid support on Stamp is slightly worrying Undecided

Both bid and ask sides were almost non-existent when we were in the 400's last round on stamp. The side leading the charge tends to be smaller.

Quote from: brg444 on November 30, 2015, 02:40:58 AM

Quote from: ssmc2 on November 30, 2015, 02:35:12 AM

Bid support on Stamp is slightly worrying Undecided

Deposits get cleared tomorrow Wink

The volume's crazy now! Imagine when deposits clear!

Seems this recent rally train is fueled by chian and margin.

Quote from: suda123 on November 30, 2015, 02:58:00 AM

Quote from: peonminer on November 30, 2015, 02:17:22 AM

Obvious BTC pump is obvious. $400.00 in bound. Cool

Cconvert2G36

peonminer

same people

Sorry to disappoint son, I have no alt accounts. Cool

Quote from: adamstgBit on November 30, 2015, 03:13:11 AM

how i feel having sold at 345

She's a brutal mistress adam, but better than gambling with leveraged margin and losing the whole shebang.

Didn't you get the memo? We only talk about our spot-on winning trades here.

Quote from: natewelt on November 30, 2015, 03:37:31 AM

Has anybody here purchased anything off of tigerdirect.com with Bitcoin?

I might be due for a new laptop one of these days...

Edit: here's a relatively recent article about them https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/18-months-adopting-bitcoin-tigerdirect-reports-fantastic-experience-continued-growth-1438985840

I've bought parts from both tiger and newegg. I usually lean toward newegg because of western US ship times, but tiger direct was first to integrate a bitcoin processor option (iirc)...

Quote from: jbreher on November 30, 2015, 03:47:34 AM

WTF is GBTC?

Shares of Barry's trust that trade with the pink sheets?
http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/GBTC/quote

Quote from: Richy_T on November 30, 2015, 05:34:25 AM

No one clamoring for the ATH pic? Oh well, have it anyway.

More support for jstolfi on /r/btc than on his native board? Wink

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/3us1kl/free_jstolfi/

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on November 30, 2015, 07:45:54 PM

Quote from: ImI on November 30, 2015, 07:39:04 PM

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3uu3we/bitstamp_will_switch_to_bip_101_this_december/cxi370c?context=3

astonishing that we see this little bull run although we have this kiddy nerd fight going on at the same time

Even the mods are lining up against him. Is he on the wrong side of history here?

Quote from: hdbuck on November 30, 2015, 07:07:57 PM

Quote

[�]theymos
If they do it, then yes, they will be banned.
Very disappointing. I thought that BitStamp was one of the better exchanges.

https://archive.is/4rvPe

dat gate keeper Grin

He really does think that he, personally, is the one man standing between Bitcoin and utter chaos and destruction. It would be kinda cute if it wasn't so damned destructive.

Quote from: hdbuck on November 30, 2015, 10:27:26 PM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on November 30, 2015, 10:20:22 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 30, 2015, 08:23:16 PM

He really does think that he, personally, is the one man standing between Bitcoin and utter chaos and destruction. It would be kinda cute if it wasn't so damned destructive.

Yup, he's a proper nutter.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/27/42/cb/2742cb7adeb28d0106b713db6c179bca.jpg[/img]
Eventually, he will make himself irrelevant with this sort of crap.

Can't wait.

still on his forum tho.

kids these days.. Roll Eyes

I think he honestly thinks he's doing the right thing.

I don't even completely disagree with him on BIP101's increase schedule, and think abandoning Core for a Hearn dominated XT would be a bad idea.

Buuuuut... this banning of dissent and playing thought dictator is having exactly the opposite effect he wants it to.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3rfapk/new_post_by_mike_hearn_appears_to_have_been/cwnl57m

Welp, well there goes that plan.

Meanwhile, $380 resistance keeps on resistin'.

Looks like it's about time for the "economic majority" to fire up the old LOIC again...

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/slush-pool-to-re-enable-bip-bitcoin-mining-1448902761

The "legions of vote brigading and the usual suspects and useful idiots running around like headless chooks" are at it again.

Quote from: hdbuck on December 01, 2015, 09:51:50 PM

Meanwhile, at Bitmain HQ...

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 01, 2015, 10:54:13 PM

Aston Martin is not a watered down brand.

Not since Ford dumped them for less than $1b to an investment group in Kuwait.

Pretty, but heavy, poor handling, and terrible resale values for the non-classic cars.

Quote from: oda.krell on December 01, 2015, 11:15:26 PM

Meh. Who needs those unreliable, flashy supercars. A man should own two cars:

A Mercedes, probably S class (for being serious), and a Porsche, probably 911 (for fun).

Pretty similar tastes.

E39 M5 with manual trans instead of S class techno barge.

Any 911 except 996 and 991. Cayman GT4 acceptable Cheesy

Quote from: Fatman3001 on December 01, 2015, 11:41:43 PM

I'd skip the 964 as well.

Well, maybe at today's prices. Would have been nice to have filled a warehouse with them a decade ago.

Quote from: Alley on December 02, 2015, 03:57:09 AM

GBTC continues to rise. $470 coin value. Is this the true value without exchange manipulation?

Nah, this is the laziness/ineptness/fear premium placed on exposure to btc without actually touching the stuff.

U guise, let's try to move from 3 tps to 6 tps before we get all hot and bothered about supplanting the global financial system.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 03, 2015, 01:14:07 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 03, 2015, 01:06:37 AM

U guise, let's try to move from 3 tps to 6 tps before we get all hot and bothered about supplanting the global financial system.

How many tps is SWIFT? or FedWire?

Yep, just waiting for central bank mass adoption.

I'll put a pot of coffee on.

1MB4EVA is going to(has) deter(ed) a huge amount of investment.

�I think it is urgent, because the transaction volume is increasing on the blockchain, and if the price rises in near future, it will push the transaction volume to be even higher. I think the max block size should be raised as soon as possible, but it should not be raised too much. Two megabytes is preferred as the first step.� Wang Chun, operator of F2Pool, which comprises about 20% of global hash rate

SWIFTNet Link: > 40 system transactions per second, per installation

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 03, 2015, 01:45:33 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 03, 2015, 01:25:05 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 03, 2015, 01:14:07 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 03, 2015, 01:06:37 AM

U guise, let's try to move from 3 tps to 6 tps before we get all hot and bothered about supplanting the global financial system.

How many tps is SWIFT? or FedWire?

Yep, just waiting for central bank mass adoption.

SWIFTNet Link: > 40 system transactions per second, per installation

so eliminate all the spam transactions, blockchain graffiti and sundry freeloaders and raise slowly to 8MByte by 2025 and we're done?

Each link to the SWIFT network can push more than 40 tps.

For those that didn't see it... I'm leaning this way:

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 02, 2015, 12:22:30 AM

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-mining-pool-f-pool-discus-fish-maintains-bip-not-an-option-1449003767

"On the Bitcoin development mailing list, Chun recently suggested raising the maximum block size in accordance with the block halving. As such, the block-size limit would be raised to 2 megabytes as soon as possible, followed by an increase to 4 megabytes halfway through 2016, up to 32 megabytes by 2028."

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 18, 2015, 11:37:56 PM

Code:

There's something nice about the available space in a block for fee paying txs doubling at the same time the reward is cut.

I'm quite certain we'll have some nice hardware and fiber connections in 2026.

Quote from: Hyperjacked on December 03, 2015, 02:11:36 AM

Quote from: peonminer on December 03, 2015, 02:05:56 AM

Quote from: bit-con-it on December 03, 2015, 01:28:44 AM

Quote from: peonminer on December 03, 2015, 01:01:58 AM

Crawl back into your WWIII bunker filled with your useless filth you call fiat. Bathe in it, burn it for warmth, use it to wipe your disgusting arses, because soon that is all it will be useful for.

Wait, you expect to use your funbux after the apocalypse you've been prepping for? Because the comsats'll be comsatting and interweb providers'll be providing interwebs@groundzer0?
Maybe swap some paper wallets for tins of dog food, hmm?
You wacky, disruptively stupid young people! The nutty shit you imagine!

I guess you've never heard of bartering or precious metals, eh, cabal filthmonger? Oh, that's right. You prefer PAPER FRACTIONAL RESERVE for your precious metals. Right, because that bunk representation will not be moot during an apocalyptic event. Wink

Keep it coming, scumbag sock shill(s).

silver is old school money...slow and you can't eat it!

Tell that to the alex jones listeners, they pop that colloidal stuff like candy.

Quote from: Hyperjacked on December 03, 2015, 02:27:54 AM

...so sick of the newbie shills! Maybe I'll come back someday soon...

maybe that's there goal...I could care less...I haven't givin free coffee as much as free tips for the homeless retail investors on this thread!

See you some sunny day Roll Eyes

Say it ain't so Hyperjacked. Your tips have kept me solvent these last few weeks. Wink

I never got the coffee thing, you want random internet anons to just give you money, that you'll surely spend on the homeless... why don't they just hand it themselves to some of their local homeless folk?

As for the newbie shills? it's just lambie, who's been here almost forever, and will remain with us barring the prospect of newbie jail coming back and the stockpile of accounts running dry.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 03, 2015, 03:11:04 AM

Quote from: jbreher on December 03, 2015, 03:00:15 AM

Quote from: xcdrx on December 03, 2015, 02:25:52 AM

Quote from: jbreher on December 03, 2015, 02:10:27 AM

Wait, you expect to use your USD - overwhelmingly digital, or your Visa - intractibly dependent upon the Internet, after the apocalypse you've been prepping for? Because the comsats'll be comsatting and interweb providers'll be providing interwebs@groundzer0?
Maybe swap the $117.37 that your on-hand cash is limited to for tins of dog food, hmm?
You wacky, conventionally stupid old people! The nutty shit you imagine!

Us fiat-lovers ...

The point is that the old saw about 'your bitcoin is useless when the interwebs go dark' is trotted out time after time by idiot detractors that don't even realize that they're in the exact same predicament. They ignorantly toss it about as if to make their case.

Of course, when it comes to picking up the pieces afterwards, my money is on the prospect that the resourceful cryptonerds will get up a fully functional bitcoin packet radio network long before the merely resource-controlling overlords will restore access to the Internet-dependent monetary system to the mere peon subjects. Of course, if not, it's not as if its dollars before bitcoins -- it would be dollars concurrent with bitcoins.

edit: s/their/they're/

if the lights go out quickly and the power stops working fiat cash is going to be in high demand ... less than 10% of all monetary reserves are in cash form, and it will be the most recognisable in the short term.

Long term in a post-apocalyptic scenario bitcoin as a highly distributed network is well-placed (as long as blocksizes are small and resource requirement to run highly isolated nodes across severely untrusted, asynchronous networks is kept small).

Post apocalyptic... you're gonna need water source, food, firewood, ammunition, guns, maybe silver rounds... and probably in that order. I doubt anyone's going to be waiting for transactions to be included in a block to sell any of the above in that situation.

Making memes out of the disabled is kinda in poor taste brah.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 03, 2015, 03:32:26 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 03, 2015, 03:29:16 AM

Making memes out of the disabled is kinda in poor taste brah.

i agree ... but taste was buried a long time ago after lambchop and the shit-slinging brigade showed up to smear this place with their excrement, begin there?

Peon might be able to take a hint.

Lambie is lambie. Like I said, newbie jail is a possibility, but forum owners like more forum users. And when you think about it, this place would be boring as hell without a little shit-stirrin'

I really wish those 200k gox coins would drop before we get resolution on block sizes followed with the halving. That would be the perfect storm.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 03, 2015, 04:17:13 AM

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1512113/li-ka-shing-boosts-bitcoin-investments-amid-currency-crackdown-china

Quote

Asia�s richest man Li Ka-shing has boosted his investment in bitcoin .....

wonder what he's thinking of doing next?

Yeah, in may of 2014. Bitpay has since laid off a good chunk of their employees? (that isn't supposed to happen at startups before ipo or sale)

Quote from: yefi on December 03, 2015, 04:31:25 AM

Quote from: xcdrx on December 03, 2015, 01:36:07 AM

Technically, *unlimited*.
You must also realize that I don't buy groceries with SWIFT. Few people do.
I use cash or CC, of which Visa is but one. Visa has a peak capacity of around 56,000tps.

That's roughly 19,000 times more than Bitcoin

Bitcoin wasn't meant for buying groceries. That it was based on Bit Gold gives a hint of its purpose. This mediocratization of the system to facilitate the transaction of individual corn nuts will end badly.

Going to 6 tps from 3, and 12 tps from there, until 2019 at the earliest, is nothing like trying to replicate a visa or swift. This all or nothing crap is tiresome, on both sides.

Quote from: suda123 on December 03, 2015, 04:41:11 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 03, 2015, 04:12:52 AM

I really wish those 200k gox coins would drop before we get resolution on block sizes followed with the halving. That would be the perfect storm.

Yea but thats going to hit mainstream news on the ATH then even more of a rush towards bitcoin.

Disagree, ideally, they would be returned to their owners at the lowest price possible, rewarding those who decide against dumping immediately. The possibility of 6 figures of coins being dumped is bearish, even in a bull market.

Quote from: suda123 on December 03, 2015, 06:20:05 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVeC_y_310U

A pox on you, and your house.

Quote from: Meuh6879 on December 04, 2015, 09:42:22 PM

Quote from: alesx.onfire on December 04, 2015, 08:36:35 PM

what's wrong with blockchain?

0 confirmations in 6 hours

https://blockchain.info/tx/b44be4deceef22bd5467c321e2d4b5a389cbd17b94ae9eeb66b192072bf2c78f

Just a couple of buyers ... discover Bitcoin.

And shortly thereafter discover this censhoreship free network is only for high value Central Bank reserve settlement. Cool

#1MB4EVA #gavinREKT #replacebyFIST #hdBOOM #popescutoldmeSO

Quote from: Hyperjacked on December 04, 2015, 10:37:26 PM

Hi bears...sup? Leveraged anyone?

Disclaimer:margin calls are gonna be da fuel dat pumps dis to da moon!

Margin shorts on BFX are less than half of what they were for last month's euphoria filled run.

Feels like directionless chop for a while until a whale wants to do something exciting.

Quote from: Hyperjacked on December 05, 2015, 12:47:25 AM

Quote from: The Littlest Mermaid on December 05, 2015, 12:42:53 AM

Quote from: Hyperjacked on December 05, 2015, 12:39:57 AM

Well I'm in the composite operators head! This is a mosaic work of art that takes time and skill...

If really in 'composite operator's' head, why dick around with TA?
Seriously tho, if we drop the mystical shit, and just deal with my hypothetical?

because it's all mathmatics...if you play within the parameters then you can throw in random chaos!

When you play within...you play all sides!!! Cool

Of course you have no idea what I'm talking about...?

Nobody does. Cool

Quote from: ssmc2 on December 05, 2015, 12:59:03 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on December 05, 2015, 12:57:27 AM

what if the past 10 days of trading painted the right shoulder of what will be a 30day head and shoulders

neck line at 333, head will top out around 420, we bottom out at ~280 in about 1-2 months

Just buy now Adam! Cheesy

We saw how that worked out. He needs to dump some and we can get a nice rally going. Cheesy

Quote from: adamstgBit on December 05, 2015, 02:12:04 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on December 05, 2015, 02:05:09 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on December 05, 2015, 12:37:39 AM

i'm thinking 400 is coming soon, very soon.

Either you are attempting to use reverse psychology, or you have bought back in....

oh that last thing about selling everything again was BS Cheesy

i sold ~9 days ago, bought back 80% last night at a small loss.

Are you one of those people that has a segregated "trading" stash and pretends that these %'s mean something? Or you sold all of your BTC 9 days ago?

Quote from: adamstgBit on December 05, 2015, 02:27:51 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 05, 2015, 02:21:25 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on December 05, 2015, 02:12:04 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on December 05, 2015, 02:05:09 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on December 05, 2015, 12:37:39 AM

i'm thinking 400 is coming soon, very soon.

Either you are attempting to use reverse psychology, or you have bought back in....

oh that last thing about selling everything again was BS Cheesy

i sold ~9 days ago, bought back 80% last night at a small loss.

Are you one of those people that has a segregated "trading" stash and pretends that these %'s mean something? Or you sold all of your BTC 9 days ago?

what kind of nut bag sell ALL his bitcoin on a whim?

generally i don't trade with more then 10% of my total bitcoin
i feel extremely nervous selling more then 30%
and that can only happen if market move like 20% higher then my initial sell.

tnx 4 context

Quote from: adamstgBit on December 05, 2015, 03:03:52 AM

best case sanrio

Aaaadammm, have you been drinking again? Angry

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 25, 2015, 01:27:03 AM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on December 05, 2015, 06:20:11 AM

Quote from: r0ach on December 05, 2015, 01:33:12 AM

Quote from: ssmc2 on December 05, 2015, 01:29:46 AM

So what is the general consensus on what the outcome of the scaling conference this weekend might be?

Blockstream has conceded and it's going to 8mb blocks:

"Another idea that has been gathering support is Blockstream CEO and Hashcash inventor Dr. Adam Back's �2-4-8� quick fix, which would incrementally increase to the limit to 8 megabytes in three steps over four years time."

So small blockers are officially dead. Adam Back is a part of Blockstream.

It is my estimation that Bitcoin needs around 10MB block size to remove the glass ceiling on price (8MB is close enough), so next stop moon:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1271254.msg13115160#msg13115160

Adam floated that 2-4-8 proposal a few months ago. Sorry, but I can't believe that it is a sincere proposal.

AFAIK, that proposal has no implementation yet, not even a BIP. (There are only two proposals with implementations: Gavin's BIP101 and my BIP99� Grin

).

I strongly suspect that Adam does not have any intention of implementing that plan, certainly not before the network gets saturated. I believe that he made that proposal only to pretend that he is a reasonable guy, and to steal support from BIP101.

If the 2-4-8 plan were implemented in time, there would be no "fee market". Then all those small-blockians who are impatient to see the fee market in action would be protesting loudly. Why aren't they? Perhaps because they too sense that Adam does not really mean it?

Writing the code isn't the problem. If we get well into 2016 at the status quo, I'll start to entertain your insinuations. Until then, I am assuming good faith and evaluating proposals on their merits.

Quote from: AlexGR on December 05, 2015, 06:33:03 AM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on December 05, 2015, 06:20:11 AM

I strongly suspect that Adam does not have any intention of implementing that plan, certainly not before the network gets saturated. I believe that he made that proposal only to pretend that he is a reasonable guy, and to steal support from BIP101.

The quality of saturation is the critical element one should be worried about.

Saturation from dust, spam, worthless micro-txs, faucets, dice, "stress tests", scripts that are purposefully wasting space in the blockchain for minimal fees, etc = nobody should even bother.

Saturation from legit txs should get a bump to accommodate for new capacity.

If you enlarge the block size prior to being genuinely saturated, you are just opening the bloat-attack-vector, wide open. And then users will say 'ohhh, this is bullshit, this program BTC requires me to download 2 tb of data prior to using it"... or, if someone is in a country where bandwidth is expensive and they are charged for over-the-top use, after, say, 100gb/month, "aaah, I can't even sync this without going over my monthly quota". Or "shit, I have to send these money out, and I'm syncing the last 30 hours and it takes an hour to do so"... because 8mb blocks are full of cheap spam and dust.

If someone says "but we can send these users to thin clients, web wallets etc", just contemplate that if this happens now, and having your own bitcoin-qt is unsustainable for a lot of people, then what will happen in 5 years or 10 years?

Block size needs a glide path that co-incides with actual usage, and marginalizes spam/dust, or makes it expensive for such txs.

Miners and nodes should set their own prices and dust limits. There are economic pressures compelling them to. The overarching max block size should be a circuit breaker / malicious miner protection only. A sort of training wheels.

Quote from: brg444 on December 05, 2015, 05:52:07 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on December 05, 2015, 05:50:31 PM

Quote from: brg444 on December 05, 2015, 05:47:30 PM

Quote from: Richy_T on December 05, 2015, 05:36:59 PM

Quote from: AlexGR on December 05, 2015, 05:26:00 PM

Restricted space => creates fee competition => dust will become non-economically viable to move around.

Restricted space => fee competition
More adoption+fee competition => expensive fees
Expensive fees => stalled adoption
Stalled adoption => declining interest
Declining interest => what are we even trying to do here?

This, however, is not a description of how bitcoin will fail but how bigger blocks are inevitable.

I suggest you go back and reread what Jorge wrote also. He describes well how the block size limit encourages attacks on Bitcoin

Also, it is not on developers to be setting up fee markets. It should be the realm of, well, the market.

Not all Bitcoin users are created equal. Not all individuals have the same financial pain threshold.

Expensive fees might deter direct adoption of Bitcoin by less financially priviledged persons but has absolutely no impact for the faction of individuals controlling the largest portion of monetary wealth worldwide.

Contrary to popular belief Bitcoin's immediate target market is NOT mainstream consumers.

no it impacts the financially privileged as well, they can no longer speculate bitcoin will be currency.

Nonsense. Bitcoin is not limited to its blockchain and the obvious end game for transactional uses are open payment networks like Lightning.

The wealthy are mostly concerned with shielding their capital from dirty regulators hands and oversight. Bitcoin offers unparalleled value in that regard.

Such a strange fantasy world you erect around yourself...

Titans of industry, meeting in back alleys or smoke filled basements to buy thousands of bitcoin... (surely they wouldn't send fiat wires to regulated exchanges that will have their identity and amounts on file, along with the addresses those coins were removed to.) Always wearing the finest tailored suits, their shoes custom made... Invariably one step ahead of those dirty regulators with their capital in hand (in massive stacks of untraceable, non-sequential, unmarked bills ofc)... When is the last time you met a wealthy person that wasn't almost pleading with you to help them pile all of their wealth into experimental internet tokens? It's almost a daily occurrence now.

Meanwhile, back in reality, some want Bitcoin used by more people, more of the time, for more things (even while, gasp, paying fees that are determined by the free market of transaction processors)... while staying distributed and decentralized.

Your toady mr buck is beyond help. Instead of thinking, he just throws up anything popescu wrote, like it's a tourettes tick. But I'll hold out hope for you brg444.

Quote from: brg444 on December 05, 2015, 07:52:52 PM

edit: speaking of Popescu....

Quote

I don't think it's either practical nor feasible nor even desirable to use Bitcoin in the day to day dabble of pizzas, phone credits, hairspray and sneakers. People try to, because of the misguided belief that Bitcoin value is somehow related to or deriving from its crossection in the retail market. This happens to be completely untrue : you can't buy any pizza with SDRs, and yet that doesn't somehow make SDRs worthless. The belief itself may be a case of "everything appears a nail to the man holding a hammer", in the sense that people who have never interracted with any other aspect of economy besides the supermarket counter may genuinely imagine that's what economy is. Still, that makes no difference.

"Interraction" with the economy... like exchanging shares of blogs and gambling sites with other titans?

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on September 03, 2015, 07:07:49 AM

Peer to Peer Electronic Cash System
vs
Peer to Peer Electronic Wealth Storage System

I think we've distilled it down. I also think it can be both, but the former facilitates the latter.

Quote from: brg444 on December 05, 2015, 09:47:44 PM

Original Bitcoin collectors are enjoying tremendous returns Wink

Worthy of emulation, right?

Quote from: oda.krell on November 26, 2015, 04:22:27 PM

So, realistically, you had about 1 year of time to buy at a "loss" compared to current prices, between Nov. 2013 and Nov. 2014. Buying at any other time means you're not in the red, and, in fact, made a profit (on paper, assuming you're long)

Date Registered: February 16, 2014, 06:46:12 PM Undecided

Quote from: Fatman3001 on December 05, 2015, 10:16:21 PM

ech... who cares?

Bitcoin XT is winning now that Gavin Andresen is at the helm.

I'm actually curious to see if you and hdbuck will keep bitching on about this stupidity when it's all over.

Over 25% of the hashing power has explicitly said they wouldn't be doing 101, especially as XT.

Both fundamentalist camps are going to have to swallow their pride and come to a compromise in the form of a more conservative increase schedule.

Hory shet that finex candle.

Quote from: WhatsBitcoin on December 06, 2015, 01:18:52 AM

This is the kind of insane pump we should be selling. Innit?

Short term trader in me says yes. Degenerate moon kid in me says "Are you crazy?"

It's an idea for a startup competition, hope no one is betting the farm on that piece of news.

Well, seeing as you lot have turned it into the Lambie Observer Thread again.

Quote from: CoinCube on December 07, 2015, 04:47:29 AM

Quote from: Scarce is better on December 07, 2015, 04:28:41 AM

Izabella Kaminska has a classic case of acute sociopathic personality disorder. She fits the symptoms as well as one can. The sociopath fears exposure above most things. I don't know what methods The Doxing used to unmask her and they likely weren't legal in many jurisdictions, but it has already been done. It is understandable that The Doxing left no concrete proof to avoid incriminating himself. I for one would not want to see him arrested for making the world a better place. It is very obvious she is indeed Lambie, and she has admitted it on multiple occasions, so further proof is not necessary. If she is low on funds from shorting bitcoin in hopes of blogging hit pieces and trolling the market so much she turned a profit, then I believe she would make a great candidate for a high level psychiatric study that might warrant a stipend. I believe in her delusions of grandeur she believed that one blogger could affect a world wide market. One can't help but notice the irony that Izabella tweets about her financial hardships, yet spends her days and nights fighting to defend the corrupt system that make her barely able to afford the high cost of living in London, rather than finding a mate and giving birth to and raising more Izabellambies. Perhaps that is for the best, who knows. It is nice to know who is doing all the ridiculous trolling, so The Doxing, if your reading, this ones for you buddy.

https://twitter.com/izakaminska/

This is an obvious attempt to provoke people to harass an innocent financial blogger in an attempt to generate bad press for bitcoin.

I tend to agree with this.

This, " interested in all things energy, central banky, market structurey and science fictiony.", is just so horrible... a pseudo-intellecutual-valley-girl-speak that doesn't jive with what we know. Real lambie's ego is far too huge and confident to willingly smear their own public image so badly.

Quote from: xxxxxzzzzz on December 07, 2015, 05:11:28 AM

wow people have finally figured out it's retarded and completely against self interest to loan your coins out to people who want to dump down the price ? hot damn !

If you are confident that bitcoin has positive demand pressure in the long term, it is absolutely not against your interest to loan them the coins to push you higher when they close. Unfortunately you have to park them with someone else, which could very easily negate the interest income. We have too few shorts right now, not too many.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 07, 2015, 08:40:48 AM

Quote from: Searing on December 07, 2015, 08:05:08 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 07, 2015, 07:34:15 AM

maybe we will see dinosaurs, or sheep, mutton dressed up as lamb ... who knows what in the run to six hundy?

well ....if there is a plan of a plan that comes out of the Hong Kong btc scaling dev conference....well we will go over 400 usd btc quick imho..

http://www.coindesk.com/chinas-miners-heat-up-blocksize-debate-at-scaling-bitcoin-hong-kong/

if nothing comes of it ...even something as lame as the above a plan for a plan....some kinda process hell it will probably drop back to mid 200's again

I mean the rest of KNOW we don't know wtf is going on with crypto and btc......we have 'guideline' that we think is gonna happen

but if the core devs can't figure it out among themselves either well ..'shudder' just scared myself Sad

just saying..they can lie to me/ make stuff up/ I don't care ...I don't code.....just make it frigging 'plausible' that there is a plan for a plan

us bitcoin types are used to little info and much hope ...so hell even that much would work ...to calm the 'kiddies"

not sure if you read some of my previous posts up page ... there is way more than a plan in place already
imho that seg-witness stuff looks like a viable solution for the foreseeable future (4-6yrs) plus some other benefits to boot, better than a risky can kick, it is a low risk restructuring that buys time and makes lite clients a real thing again (not just security theatre like SPV bitcoinJ)

tl;dr short-term scaling is solved ... we can worry about the long term when it arrives because we will know better what it looks like then (particularly the fees market with less reward transition conundrum)

tl;do read

I'll let luke-jr supply a little cold water for your 4-6 year solution euphoria:

Quote

[�]luke-jrLuke Dashjr - Bitcoin Expert 6 points 2 hours ago
Hmm, problem here is that CPU usage is not the primary bottleneck for block sizes: bandwidth is. And unfortunately, SW doesn't help in the bandwidth area at all. So while I do think we should take this opportunity to get the block size changes softforked in instead of hardforked (buying us a bit more time before a hardfork is required?), it does still need to be gradual and not just 4x at once.
My suggestion is to go based on either BIP 103 or John Sacco's double-the-limit-every-subsidy-halving idea.

The miner panel at Scaling HK:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-ErmmDQRFs&t=18m12s

Worth a watch for any bitcoin investor. My impression was that they all want bigger blocks, but feel that BIP101 is too aggressive. They don't hate the idea of being given more power in the form of BIP100, but added complexity and the possibility of a 20% miner blocking increases are negatives.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 07, 2015, 09:10:45 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 07, 2015, 08:50:48 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 07, 2015, 08:40:48 AM

tl;do read

I'll let luke-jr supply a little cold water for your 4-6 year solution euphoria:

Quote

euphoria huh? Luke-Jr is always conservative on bandwidth because lives in rural Florida on an apparently sub-par connection. If we scale TX rate 4x without a hard-fork then current bandwidth is already capable of handling that ... not sure where your cold water thinking is here, a damp squib?

The key is without risky hard-fork for now ... in the meantime technology hardware, software and network data knowledge all improve while transition to fees driven PoW security gets closer (halving to 6.25btc reward) ... and lite nodes now have a viable future instead of client-server (risky offchain). It's all very encouraging, an alternative consensual path for foreseeble future to bludgeoning through an unpopular blocksize hardfork with exponential scaling into an unknowable outcome. The world might look very different in 2 years, let alone 5 or 20.

I thought the quote was appropriate because even luke-"dialup"-jr is for conservative max increases (sooner than 2019 or 2021), and he understands the actual gains provided by SegWitness better than me and most.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 07, 2015, 09:30:12 AM

he's talking about raising the total data rate (seg. witness + tx data) gradually, not the max_block_size limit ...

Sigh, you're right, he's afraid about even getting these "free" gains already... I knew that didn't sound like luke. Cheesy

An hour later he gave us a kernel of moral wisdom on slavery.

Quote

To Christians: why is slavery not permitted today? by some_random_guy_5345 in DebateReligion
[�]luke-jr 1 point an hour ago
Slavery is an imperfection. We can and should strive to get rid of imperfections. However, since slavery is not inherently immoral itself, when it is practised, it must be done morally and slaves treated as people, hence the need for guidelines.

Quote from: brg444 on December 08, 2015, 03:50:57 AM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on December 08, 2015, 03:25:59 AM

To be sure, Blockstreamers only now are coming to realize that an increase of the effective block size limit to 4 MB will have the unexpected and unwelcome consequence of increasing the effective block size limit to 4 MB.

Jesus christ at least get your FUD right.

Fully validating nodes will effectively be moved to 4MB max... something you guys have been fighting and #rekking for many months now. The irony of your gracefully fluid position is lost on most observers, but not all.

Quote from: brg444 on December 08, 2015, 03:50:57 AM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on December 08, 2015, 03:25:59 AM

So Luke has already proposed to keep the 1 MB limit for the total block size, including the segregated part.

Provide quotes or GTFO.

Quote

Admittedly, he didn't literally say keep 1MB effective max, but if you get 4x from SegWit, you would actually have to soft fork lower on the max block size to keep luke happy. At least that's my reading.

Quote from: brg444 on December 08, 2015, 03:50:57 AM

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on December 08, 2015, 03:25:59 AM

But they should not worry, since the space savings will only occur if the clients start issuing transactions in the new SW format. Which will not happen right away, if SW is deployed by soft fork. And even after the clients have upgraded, the use of SW will be optional. Will there be incentives for the clients to use it?

No, regular transactions get a 75% bump in space.

Could you explain the math behind the 75% "bump" you state here?

Quote from: JayJuanGee on December 08, 2015, 06:27:49 AM

Quote from: brg444 on December 08, 2015, 02:41:18 AM

why no one told me $gbtc closed at 520$ Shocked

That's an amazing price difference between gbtc and regular and real btc, and so far, I have not seen nor read any meaningful explanation regarding why such considerable price difference exists between gbtc and regular and real btc except that people (investors) are so BTC volatility adverse (shy) that they invest in some investment vehicle related to the stock market, gbtc, that they "know" - rather than one that they feel that they do not know, BTC. h

however, ironically, the ongoing considerable price difference between gbtc and btc seems to create an additional uncertainty regarding the continued price "stability" of gbtc, which to anyone knowledgeable about BTC would rather own real btc rather than the paper imitation shit of gbtc... in spite of apparent arbitrage opportunities.

Possibly because it's highly illiquid? And the only way John Q. Public can buy bitcoin "exposure" while logged in to his Schwab account?

The arbitrage opportunities are shit, due to the lock-in of shares in the BIT.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on December 08, 2015, 06:39:17 AM

That's the whole point of "academically neutral" FUD spreading.... obscurity... and still surprising to see, from time to time that some posters give the dufuss some credit.... hahahahaha paid shill or not, there can be a bit of humor in seeing some of the stupid-ass theories he comes up with in his attempts to describe a world that doesn't really exist.

"The irony of your gracefully fluid position is lost on most observers, but not all."

Quote from: JayJuanGee on December 08, 2015, 07:21:26 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 08, 2015, 06:39:14 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on December 08, 2015, 06:27:49 AM

Quote from: brg444 on December 08, 2015, 02:41:18 AM

why no one told me $gbtc closed at 520$ Shocked

Thanks for that further information, which helps my thinking and speculation somewhat.

Accordingly, it's all fine and dandy and easy to get into buying GBTC (buy high) at $520, but you probably have to jump through considerable hoops to get out.

I have seen some of those institutional-type investments that pre-require that the investors have to wait a year before they can get out, which is bullshit when we know that we can easily and quickly buy and sell bitcoins directly with few restrictions.

So, in essence, when investors ("institutional") are currently buying GBTC for $520 (31% inflated prices) and the direct BTC price is $395, that signifies that the long term (1 year into the future) outlook for BTC by those long term investors is at least $540, which is 4% higher than $520.

in other words, a fairly bullish present/future value indicator.

Just to clarify, shares in the BIT, Bitcoin Investment Trust, not GBTC, have a lock in period. Say you trade 500 BTC for a commensurate amount of shares in the trust... you have to wait a year to be able to take a cash payment to divest, or to convert those BIT shares to GBTC to sell them on the pink sheets exchange.

Maybe people are speculating that the "Tulip Trust" is sitting tight until 2020.

Wright at Bitcoin Investor Conference - Las Vegas, NV Oct. 29 - 30, 2015

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LdvQTwjVmrE#t=140

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LdvQTwjVmrE#t=2897

Quote from: podyx on December 09, 2015, 01:18:04 AM

I haven't read so much from what satoshi said back in the day but from the little amount I've read, he never came across as a attention craving shady old man like this dude seems to be.

Not to imply I'm fully on board with the story yet but...

In 2011, it was a pretty widely held fear that Bitcoin could be declared illegal in most/all jurisdictions, and you wouldn't want to be out in the open as the creator. In late 2015, that fear seems to have mostly abated.

Quote from: ImI on December 09, 2015, 01:23:59 AM

Quote from: Chalkbot on December 09, 2015, 01:16:52 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 09, 2015, 12:06:22 AM

Quote from: GreekGeek on December 08, 2015, 10:21:35 PM

http://www.wired.com/2015/12/bitcoins-creator-satoshi-nakamoto-is-probably-this-unknown-australian-genius/

Bullish or bearish ?

satoshi is some lone genius (albeit little-crazy eccentric (i mean he must have been)) versus he is NSA derp? I'd say crazy bullish.

I think the bullish part of the story is that the million+ Satoshi BTC stash is locked in a Trust until 2020. If this turns out to be true, (and I'm leaning toward yes) That means there is no risk of satoshi coin dump for the next 4 years at least, which is something that we couldn't say before.

the coins maybe hitting the market at 2020 would be a bearish outlook imo. a very bearish outlook.

i personally hoped that those coins got burned in the first place and may never seen selling cause the keys got destroyed.

So you were previously bullish on some blind hope that such a man destroyed/lost his keys? The market hates uncertainty.

Quote from: gentlemand on December 09, 2015, 03:54:59 AM

And here's why it pays to stay under the radar, kids - http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/dec/09/bitcoin-founder-craig-wrights-home-raided-by-australian-police

soooooo, we panic nao?

Quote from: gentlemand on December 09, 2015, 04:04:08 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 09, 2015, 04:03:32 AM

soooooo, we panic nao?

You gotta do what feels right for you. I for one am not performing any more camsex shows tonight just in case.

Your comedy game is banging on all cylinders today gentlemand.

The more you dig, the more you're left with the impression that Wright went to fairly extensive lengths to out himself as satoshi.

I considered for a brief moment that Wright concocted the story to somehow get control of the late Dave Kleiman's bitcoin, but after looking a bit into Kleiman... it appears that is also not the case.

Fun story though ('cept for Dave's role). Sadly, it looks like the "Tulip Trust locked up until 2020" was just a dream. Cry

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 05, 2015, 03:46:02 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on November 25, 2015, 01:27:03 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 10, 2015, 05:09:54 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 10, 2015, 05:01:46 AM

Quote from: Alley on December 09, 2015, 09:41:13 PM

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.

Quote from: AlexGR on December 10, 2015, 05:35:05 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 10, 2015, 05:01:46 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.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 10, 2015, 05:54:47 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 10, 2015, 05:50:26 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? Roll Eyes

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.

Holding these heights for a day or two more would paint a pretty picture compared to the skittish euphoria of the 504 spike.

Quote from: SnokkomBTC on December 10, 2015, 07:50:51 AM

Gentlemen?

I hereby call that when Jay Juan Gee hits his first dollar in gains... it is grentlemen.

All you idiots and your innuendo about "basic economic theory". Bitcoin is the one ring to rule them all, except monero, which is better, but... where was I? Oh yes, Bitcoin is gold, digital gold, elementally unique and free from outside competition. We simply have to sit back, read popescu's blogs, snark the free shit army, and just wait for all those central bank reserves to come rolling in. And then... guess what? We're rich! Cool

Can I get an amen and a XTard, hdbuck? Maybe a devastating one liner from early adopter brg444?

brb, syncing my catcoin and corgicoin full node clients to make some purchases

Price holding the 400's handily, lambie talking all sorts of sense all day... ughh

I'm off to play some Fallout 4 to imagine a bleaker world.

♫ I don't want to set the world on fi-ire... ♬

take your meds radr0ach

Waiting for that euphoria candle...

Quote from: Fatman3001 on December 12, 2015, 01:47:54 AM

I'm writing a reply for just about every post.

That's a sign.

G'nite y'@ll !!1!!!1!

Quote from: Chalidore Phoenix on December 12, 2015, 02:08:46 AM

Quote from: brg444 on December 12, 2015, 01:56:24 AM

Quote from: JimboToronto on December 12, 2015, 01:53:49 AM

Quote from: Chalidore Phoenix on December 12, 2015, 01:32:17 AM

This rally is losing steam. Nobody wants to pay $450+. Everyone remembers what happened last time the price went this high this fast. When the bubble pops again, people are gonna get hurt.

Yep, losing steam alright, all the way to over $460.

The people getting hurt are the shorters and those who sold too early.

Of course we'll have corrections along the way but this 5 month old uptrend is far from over.

+1

there is no supply at these prices

miners are fighting for coins, weak hands have been flushed.

the scarcity is real. you can feel the halvening already Wink

A correction along the way is what I'm counting on. I am bullish long term, but when the price jumps 8% in one day, a correction is a pretty safe bet.

Oh you'll get a correction. The only question is whether you get in a bit lower, or a bit higher.

Quote from: Patel on December 12, 2015, 02:13:32 AM

How is stamp/finex $40 over Huobi? Huh

Normally its the opposite

it's not, china is $10 more

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on December 12, 2015, 12:48:04 AM

If only Shroomskit could have hodled until Ethereum and The Bitcoin Foundation and the U.S Federal government and Theymos had all finished dumping. Sad

The old cum rag's got a little life left. Cheesy

edit: my sincerest apologies to those who don't remember the reference

2 million $ worth of longs added on bitfinex in the last 12 hrs, total near $26.5 mil . Shorts below 8k btc.

Buy support is stronger than I thought around here on finex. I look at their volume with more weight because I don't see obvious bot shenanigans. That said, many of these recent rally songs seem to be led by china.

I will raise a hearty toast when we hit $502? something and JJG's break even party.

Feel like 2013 yet TERA?

Quote from: spooderman on December 12, 2015, 03:49:06 AM

QUICK. WHERE'S THE WIL-E COYOTE GIF

Careful what you wish for. Sad

Make it harder, grentlemen.

Quote from: peonminer on December 12, 2015, 09:39:07 PM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on December 12, 2015, 09:22:46 PM

@Peonminer. sfyl

Yep. Waiting on 157 ETH withdrawal. TXID and not showing on the blockchain. @JShock says around t-minus 8 hours til it's fixed. Fingers crossed.

Hope you get your $150 back from craptsy... why are you still using them? There's been big waving red flags for months now.

When the network gets near hitting capacity of ~220,000 tx per day, the rally gets its head lopped off... coincidence?

https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions

Any future rally will be meaningfully constrained by this "safety feature".

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 12, 2015, 10:17:12 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 12, 2015, 10:09:24 PM

... soon time to start high-grading for valuable TX anyway. It's an industrial level tech., can't always remain a sandpit for toy projects. Which makes you misguided about rallies being "constrained" ... but hey, who am I to stop people losing money?

Miners should decide which transactions are valuable enough to process, not a central planning committee. Especially not a committee which is dominated by a for profit company which was explicitly formed to offer a "solution" to the "problem".

Quote from: brg444 on December 12, 2015, 10:54:13 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 12, 2015, 10:40:29 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 12, 2015, 10:17:12 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 12, 2015, 10:09:24 PM

A.Miners should decide which transactions are valuable enough to process, B. not a central planning committee. Especially not a committee which is dominated by a for profit company which was explicitly formed to offer a "solution" to the "problem".

*facepalms*

which one is it.? a central planning committee of miners?

notsureiftrollingorstupid.jpg

Who has incentives better aligned with the network? Many individual companies that have built pools with massive investment in hashing behind them (their success is nearly synonymous with the success of Bitcoin), or one company that benefits (almost solely) from artificial scarcity of capacity?

The questions are somewhat rhetorical, because I already know your answer.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 12, 2015, 11:19:00 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 12, 2015, 10:40:29 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 12, 2015, 10:17:12 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 12, 2015, 10:09:24 PM

c'mon, enough with the conspiracy FUD smearing, stirring up, slinging and smearing.

The miners do indeed decide but they are for now more than happy to delegate that responsibility, wholly, and huge development costs to the development community (no committees involved for those not paying attention). Feel free to submit better ideas to the bitcoin development github

Issues: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues
Pull requests: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls

Garzik already submitted BIP102, which I think would be an acceptable "can kick" to further study the issue and possible solutions... The conference is over, and there is no plan in sight. I don't really think a controversial overhaul of the system in the form of SegWit is going to offer any relief, any time soon.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 12, 2015, 11:53:14 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 12, 2015, 11:33:25 PM

heh, so that's the disingenuous spin you guys are going to use for redditard herp's consumption is it? Any of the latest breakthrough improvements that are not approved by the benevolent, wise, central committee guardians and protectors of the free shit derp army are now going to be a "controversial overhaul of the system" ??

Unless of course we raised blocksize (bigger fat wheels are ok for the beer-can hat brigade).

I'm still weighing SegWit's costs and benefits... but I know it will be controversial. In fact it seems to be your camp that is suffering defections.

You made the bed with Mircea, now lie in it.

Quote from: hdbuck on December 11, 2015, 12:01:58 AM

salt..

Quote

This denigration of signatures represents nothing less than an attack on the primacy of cryptography in cryptocurrency. The blockchain represents a complete and verifiable historical record of every transaction and balance in Bitcoin. Attacking verifiability by lopping off signatures in a misguided effort to cram more transactions into a megabyte. This leaves a eunuch which is no longer the virile Bitcoin we love. As signatures fade into history, cryptographic certainty is replaced by faith and hope.

Quote

Ultimately, it is about increasing the number of places where Bitcoin can break and reducing the prominence of cryptography in cryptocurrency.

http://qntra.net/2015/12/after-xt-failure-gavin-andresen-supports-jim-crow-for-signatures-on-the-blockchain/

and pepper... http://trilema.com/2015/theres-a-one-bitcoin-reward-for-the-death-of-pieter-wuille-details-below/

Less adoption ---> higher price, pretty simple really. Cool

Quote from: adamstgBit on December 13, 2015, 09:59:48 PM

Adam shilling for nickels from cam girls... bullish? Huh

Quote from: DaRude on December 14, 2015, 04:07:20 AM

Where did that ~$1.5MM in BFX longs go!?!? Did i miss something?

Borrowed doesn't necessarily mean used...?

That dump earlier was pretty underwhelming.

Quote from: TERA on December 14, 2015, 04:22:30 AM

lol

Quote from: DaRude on December 14, 2015, 04:35:19 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 14, 2015, 04:24:42 AM

Quote from: DaRude on December 14, 2015, 04:07:20 AM

Where did that ~$1.5MM in BFX longs go!?!? Did i miss something?

Borrowed doesn't necessarily mean used...?

That dump earlier was pretty underwhelming.

Currency Flash Return Rate Total sum of active margin funding Total amount used in margin positions
USD 0.0531% 25,395,106.54 24,946,110.62

https://www.bitfinex.com/pages/stats

It was only $400k in unused longs

Strange...

Might not be a coincidence that the volume spike on Coinbase took place the day this went into effect?

https://blog.coinbase.com/2015/12/08/coinbase-exchange-introduces-volume-based-rebates/

Going from 0.25% to 0.1% taker fees doesn't seem like all that great of an incentive to do this?

Quote from: Hyperjacked on December 14, 2015, 11:41:23 PM

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on December 14, 2015, 11:26:48 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 14, 2015, 11:21:29 PM

go short now, please.

Yeah this ^^

Please all bears get your leveraged shorts on right now, go all in, everything you've got.

I only short when we are above the BB for an extended time or my other indicators call for it...never without multiple indicators! We are going to 1000$ again...shorting is insane unless your crazy!

You're also crazy if you take financial advice from a mathematical savant/Wall Street veteran who hasn't learned basic grammar.

Quote from: Hyperjacked on December 15, 2015, 12:11:01 AM

Bye ignored...like the rest of your troll patrol!

Do I win too?

Quote from: Hyperjacked on December 15, 2015, 12:42:26 AM

Quote from: ssmc2 on December 15, 2015, 12:36:40 AM

CCMF

As in Richard Li and the famous PCCW Pacific century cyber works! anyone remember when Meryl Lynch was pushing the Hong Kong telecom deal in 1999-2000? probably not...how about when Richard Li lied about attending Stanford or the Internet fragrance BS??? flashbacks...

Nope, but I do remember that the firm is named Merrill Lynch.

Edit:

BJA...

Quote from: Chalidore Phoenix on December 15, 2015, 12:50:14 AM

Quote from: WeltMaster on December 15, 2015, 12:47:10 AM

God damnit bfx, I've had a market buy open since it was 442 and it still hasn't gone through!

bitfingoxed

Anybody know wtf is going on over there?

Exchange poops the bed when you need it most.

Welcome to Bitcoin!

Thankfully, it's not like the old days when there was only one choice.

https://bitfinex.statuspage.io/

Ouch chalidore, that's like a gigaSFYL. Puts an exclamation point on jbreher's sage advice. Kinda blown away you're so open about it... does add a few points for character though. You've made some good calls so far... best of luck.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 15, 2015, 04:07:36 AM

Over $27 million in longs now. This is getting crazy. There's not nearly enough money on the exchange to absorb that. Are y'all expecting suckers to wire 27 million bucks to a sketchy exchange to buy coins when you close your longs?

It's going through the floor if there is a major shock.

Shorts are at 6k btc. Even the bears are bullish. There were more longs back in august, and what was the price then and now? People are feeling some tectonic rumblings here, humans have innate herding tendencies... sure it'll end in tears for some/most. We need a bearwhale to step up and lay down on the tracks, but they're being shy.

Quote from: Chalidore Phoenix on December 15, 2015, 04:52:48 AM

Quote from: suda123 on December 15, 2015, 04:46:50 AM

Quote from: Chalidore Phoenix on December 12, 2015, 03:33:26 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 12, 2015, 03:25:59 AM

2 million $ worth of longs added on bitfinex in the last 12 hrs, total near $26.5 mil . Shorts below 8k btc.

If that isn't a recipe for a crash, I don't know what is. When the price starts dropping, there will be margin calls.
I will admit, I shouldn't have sold at 450. I should have waited for 465-470. That doesn't change the fact that this leverage fueled rally is not sustainable, and will end with a massive move downward. Get out now, or lose all your gains.

Eventually yes, but I won't lie about it. This shit fucking hurts. I hate being wrong, and I hate losing money. I am gonna stick this out. I'm not taking this loss. The crash is coming. Maybe it will happen tonight while you are asleep. Better cash out now. You may wake up tomorrow wishing you had.

ddrerrrrrr i have been in da gaem since 20111

I sold at 450, started shorting at 455-460, and an hour later it crashes all the way down to about $400. I was the only one on the forum predicting a correction that night. I bought back in at 420. Why exactly do you find it appropriate to mock me for making one of the smartest trades possible a couple days ago? Are you even reading what you are posting?

You're not the only one that was trading the euphoria of friday night. The rest of us are just a bit more subtle. You want to present yourself as the perfect trader, go ahead, take snapshots all the way back to 3000 btc.

JJG is kinda our macabre mascot around here, he first bought at the very tippy top of the $1200 bubble. He's been buying the whole way down iirc. He breaks even at 501, so I (we?) kind of cheer for him, and if he's even... well... Yes, he's long winded and often nitpicks things for bizzare reasons, but he's our long winded nitpicker.

This whole thread is a weird cast of characters, best to just post what you post and try not to get emotional about the possibly unwelcome replies.

Quote from: spooderman on December 15, 2015, 05:36:43 AM

were walls at 450 eaten or pulled?

The bitstamp wall was mostly pulled before it got there.

Quote from: spooderman on December 15, 2015, 06:53:59 AM

i take my comfort in the price alone. the bids/asks are just manipulation if you ask me. who knows what's really going on behind the scenes at these exchanges?

Remember that massive bid wall on that failed 317 run? Yeah, that didn't work out so well for bulls in the short term. At least it was mostly real... turned out pretty well for the bidder.

If someone really wants to buy, why telegraph that to the potential sellers? Same for the asks, why chase down the price if you want to sell higher?

Not saying that the on-book data is useless, but close.

Quote from: conspirosphere.tk on December 15, 2015, 08:03:36 PM

Quote from: Richy_T on December 15, 2015, 05:25:13 PM

Calm down comrade. If you wait patiently, you too will get your ~~loaf of bread~~ place in the blockchain in good time.

But don't worry, if you have any concerns, you can make them heard through our Minister of Truth, Commissar Theymos.

He can wait forever, if he does not want to pay a damned fee for the service.
The free shit party is happening in some other place.

Why even have a block reward? People should have been paying damned fees to fund mining since the beginning... oh wait... that'd be dumb as fuck and it would have failed already.

Quote from: conspirosphere.tk on December 15, 2015, 08:33:19 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 15, 2015, 08:15:48 PM

Quote from: conspirosphere.tk on December 15, 2015, 08:03:36 PM

Quote from: Richy_T on December 15, 2015, 05:25:13 PM

He can wait forever, if he does not want to pay a damned fee for the service.
The free shit party is happening in some other place.

http://tpc.pc2.netdna-cdn.com/images/various_uploads/Capital_One_Card_Marx_330.jpg

Why even have a block reward? People should have been paying damned fees to fund mining since the beginning... oh wait... that'd be dumb as fuck and it would have failed already.

Still, it's full of geniuses lamenting the scarcity of the blockspace and the consequent fees, ignoring that economics is all about scarcities.
And since that's way too much ignoring, they must be trolls for hire.

I support free markets, miners should set their own block sizes and min fees, there are natural economic incentives compelling them to. (orphan risk) If there must be a centrally planned limit, it should act as a circuit breaker/malicious miner protection only. What we see now is a small group in control of the reference implementation donning their central planner hats and distorting the free market towards their own ideology or financial interests.

Quote from: rebuilder on December 15, 2015, 10:02:16 PM

-snip-

If you say X is the amount of transactions the network should, at most, be able to handle, you're making a policy decision. If you say there should be no limit and miners should decide whether they want to include 0-fee transactions, you're also making a policy decision. You can't pretend one is more of a "free market" solution than the other.

No need to pretend. If there is any policy decision involved... it is a decision to allow the free market of transaction processors to determine their production levels while taking into account their costs/competition/and network health as a whole (a miner's success is nearly synonymous with the success of Bitcoin). Make huge blocks that take forever to verify and your chance of being orphaned goes up, denying you income. That's the free market at work. Bloat the chain to the point that the node network is in a handful of datacenters... confidence in the protection of decentralization is lost, value of your revenue plummets... free market incentives again.

Quote

The network is considered roughly secure against economically sensible attacks when the cost of an attack is greater than the profit gained.In rough terms, the greater [network value] / [cost to gain 51% of hashrate] is, the less secure the network becomes. To increase security, you need to either decrease network value or increase the cost of gaining a percentage of hashrate. Both the small-blocks and large-blocks solutions essentially hope that a balance is naturally found where the cost of running the network doesn't hamper usage to the point that fees and subsidies aren't sufficient to provide security.

I don't have a solution here, but I think we're turning a blind eye to this issue of security vs. cost when that's the real question that needs addressing.

I take issue with your use of [network value]. What's the point of spending $100 million (probably much more) to end up killing the golden goose? Mutually assured destruction is at work here, for both of these issues. Satoshi understood free market incentives, he designed the system around them, we should let them work.

Vampire Squid doing a little gentle pumping.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 17, 2015, 11:45:44 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 17, 2015, 11:37:26 PM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 17, 2015, 11:24:36 PM

I'm a firefighter. You can't put out a conflagration with a garden hose, no matter how much water you have in the tank. Capacity matters.

As a firefighter, do you also have cantankerous, intransigent opinionated positions on technical details of the electricity network grid, the railway network, the telecomms infrastructure or interstate traffic systems?

Yes. In every case you mentioned, capacity matters. If the core devs can't increase capacity, then we have a 6.7 billion dollar network that can only handle half a million active users, no matter how high fees they pay.

I also don't power whole cities with an extension chord or run bullet trains on narrow gauge tracks.

BJA, give them a day to mourn.

All that milking of lolcows has turned out to be rather stressful work.

Quote from: owlcatz on December 18, 2015, 01:09:49 AM

Off topic. Sprouts is a shitcoin, who cares. this is the bitcoin wall observer thread, show some respect. lol. Wink

But it's our jew fearing friend Peonminer's shitcoin, therefore relevant.

Edit: embarrassed about being a reactionary mouth breather? fine I'll delete this as you apparently recognized how stupid you looked

Edit2: doubled down? ok nvm

Quote from: peonminer on December 18, 2015, 02:46:53 AM

Would you just look at that! Altcoins going down when BTCitcoin price is going up!

I must've missed that 14.43% jump in BTCitcoin's price today Huh

No need for tears friend. A few months of solid growth and the global market cap for Sprouts will be approaching that of a nice Toyota. Cool

Dat volume doe Shocked

Quote from: peonminer on December 18, 2015, 03:06:33 AM

-impotent thrashing-

Seems I touched a nerve. I'll do everyone a favor and bring this nonsense to a close.

My sincerest apologies to the readers, apparently Peon has plenty of reasons� to blame his shortcomings on the rabbinically inclined.

Interesting to note that the "huge" wall protecting $70 would be ~3500 BTC today. Grin

Longs down almost $4 mil on finex over the last couple days, lookin' good.

okcoin quarterlies shenanigans

Quote from: AlexGR on December 18, 2015, 09:08:00 PM

Quote from: rocks on December 18, 2015, 08:45:34 PM

Agreed, Why anyone would be heavily invested in an artificially capped currency that most people can not use is beyond me.

Remember a fee market does not work. A fee market simply prices people out, it decides who can use and who cannot use Bitcoin.

It is not "beyond you" to understand this. It is pretty elementary.

1. You can understand pretty well the concept of abuse.
2. You can understand that not 100% of humanity is dependable to behave in a good manner, 24/7/365.
3. If you leave the option of free and totally unrestrained use of the blockchain then it's just a matter of time before the blockchain is bloated to infinity by some script kiddie who creates some script and lets it run continuously and adds tens / hundreds of gigabytes of spam, "for the lulz"...
4. You can now fully grasp that fees and "limitations" are what prevent system abuse that would have already rendered BTC a swift death.
5. If you have a better solution for the problem at hand, please present it.

The question you pose is actually reversed: Who would actually be invested in a joke currency that a script kiddie can render it useless for the lolz?

Miners have plenty of incentive to set their own min fees and spam filters, and they do/will. People seem to have a hard time understanding that max != actual. You think a tx spammer is just lying in wait for a limit increase to run their script? That 1MiB (that we haven't hit until now) is protecting the network from complete disaster?

The more honest of your faction just admit they don't want their (often potential) full node to slow down their netflix habits, because of course that is more important than a global p2p digital cash system unlike the world has ever seen. This is sometimes combined with the argument that it would make Bitcoin more robust against malicious attacks by actors with nation state levels of funding... sure. The biggest defense against this attack vector is to become so widespread and so useful that such a state action would be untenable, it would be an attack on more people and more of the economy.

As many of the 1MB4EVA crowd seem to be quite interested in Monero (completely tangentially of course), maybe that would be the best option for them. It would have a limited supply, meaning it would be a great store of value (wouldn't you agree brg444?), with complete built in fungibility. They could crank fees way up to keep the riff raff lolcows out, and their hardware and bandwidth requirements tiny... seems perfect.

Quote from: AlexGR on December 18, 2015, 10:46:44 PM

They have the incentive but they are not configured accordingly. Not all of them. That's why dust/spam/no-fee and "stress test" txs get processed.

Have you used the network lately? No-fee transactions aren't getting included, and definitely won't be once priority is removed. Dust and spam should not be subjectively determined, fee per kb is all that matters. Miners have a very real incentive to keep their blocks to a reasonable size, it's called orphan risk.

Quote

The 1MB limit is definitely helping to prevent abuse. Otherwise the attack vector and the willing miners are there for exploitation in a 5MB, 10MB, 20MB block scenario.

Straw man, the miners have said they are ready for 2MiB, maybe 3, so that should be the starting point for our can kick. See jgarzik's new proposal out today, it seems a very reasonable compromise between the harder line factions of the two camps.

Quote

I do not believe that BTC should stay at 1MB. If it was up to me, it would grow depending the actual organic growth of the network* and other considerations that have to do with security, centralization etc.

* by that I do not mean the number of transactions. This is a pretty useless metric if one can start issuing tens of thousands of txs.

Thanks for clarifying that. If you have suggestions of how to measure the organic growth outside of transaction levels and address usage, I'm sure the dev's would love to hear about it.

Quote from: wachtwoord on December 18, 2015, 11:19:35 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 18, 2015, 11:11:28 PM

Quote from: AlexGR on December 18, 2015, 10:46:44 PM

They have the incentive but they are not configured accordingly. Not all of them. That's why dust/spam/no-fee and "stress test" txs get processed.

Have you used the network lately? No-fee transactions aren't getting included, and definitely won't be once priority is removed. Dust and spam should not be subjectively determined, fee per kb is all that matters. Miners have a very real incentive to keep their blocks to a reasonable size, it's called orphan risk.

I send a zero fee transaction yesterday. It was included in the first block.

I never pay a fee if I don't have to and still I'm in favor of rising fees, by limiting supply (of space).

Enjoy it while it lasts.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on December 18, 2015, 11:25:52 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 18, 2015, 11:21:26 PM

Quote from: wachtwoord on December 18, 2015, 11:19:35 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 18, 2015, 11:11:28 PM

Quote from: AlexGR on December 18, 2015, 10:46:44 PM

They have the incentive but they are not configured accordingly. Not all of them. That's why dust/spam/no-fee and "stress test" txs get processed.

I send a zero fee transaction yesterday. It was included in the first block.

I never pay a fee if I don't have to and still I'm in favor of rising fees, by limiting supply (of space).

Enjoy it while it lasts.

At some point there will have to be a fees market because of the halvenings, right? Has anyone crunched the numbers? Are there studies? What will it look like?

Everybody agrees that there will be a fee market. Some just want to force it now, before the drop to 12.5 btc per block, which I think is ridiculously early and would be using the wrong (artificial vs market determined) mechanism. In the future, miners will be much more sensitive to their fee pricing, and the fee load will be spread over many more network users.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on December 19, 2015, 12:25:55 AM

Fatman, you mine. I wouldn't consider you a threat to decentralization. What size blocks do you figure would keep fees low and keep you running smoothly? If prices are higher, is there more competition for txn's? Or will small mines have a harder time solving blocks?

I doubt he's running a pool and solving blocks. Smaller miners are mostly worker bees communicating with the hive over stratum.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on December 19, 2015, 12:36:44 AM

So his machines would contribute hash to the pool that solves blocks? And get a cut of the reward based on how much hash he provided?

Right, they delegate those decisions to the pool operator.

We in for another exciting friday night?

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on December 19, 2015, 02:15:37 AM

Quote from: MinermanNC on December 19, 2015, 02:00:30 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on December 19, 2015, 01:57:16 AM

I guess a concern (for someone who was prone to be concerned about such things) could be that we become of victim of too much adoption too quicky (Santa?), transactions get all jammy and we're just as quickly disowned.

Yep and that's what all the fuss is about lol I don't think short term its a big issue resulting in that... but will have to be reckoned with one day soon.

In deep Bitcoin time then, a scenerio where fees replace block rewards is inevitable. Is that right?

How much money did you invest before figuring this out?

Don't answer that, I am inclined to think you are doing some kind of dialectical exercise... Cheesy

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on December 19, 2015, 02:21:45 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 19, 2015, 02:20:28 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on December 19, 2015, 02:15:37 AM

Quote from: MinermanNC on December 19, 2015, 02:00:30 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on December 19, 2015, 01:57:16 AM

Yep and that's what all the fuss is about lol I don't think short term its a big issue resulting in that... but will have to be reckoned with one day soon.

In deep Bitcoin time then, a scenerio where fees replace block rewards is inevitable. Is that right?

How much money did you invest before figuring this out?

Don't answer that, I am inclined to think you are doing some kind of dialectical exercise... Cheesy

So wait, what's a Bitcoin again?

And are there any use-cases that will become unviable because of a creeping fees market?

Shift your question. What alternative's use-cases become viable...? Block reward is the network's manna to consume while eating everyone else's lunch, effectively leveraging its first mover advantage. The free market provides the guard rails and the trajectory.

That monday morning feeling when you open the rear door of your crowd-economied Alphabet Sprout... nearly tossing your briefcase on the glistening upholstery stain... Angry

The dev mailing list and the chart right now, like cookies and milk.

Any change that is "controversial" can not happen, so... (the totally uncontroversial) 1MB4EVA it is!

Quote from: pinger on December 20, 2015, 06:05:50 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 20, 2015, 05:42:37 PM

The dev mailing list and the chart right now, like cookies and milk.

Any change that is "controversial" can not happen, so... (the totally uncontroversial) 1MB4EVA it is!

This morning at twitter there are some whales saying this would happen, so I don't think is about the news, unless the take profit before the news happens.

I'm not trying to imply causal relationship, or that any major change happened in Wladimir or Pieter's (2015) positions today. Just that... from where I'm sitting as a long term investor, these things go well together.

The dumps are probably just because volume was completely dead and we needed to go to a lower level to move some coins.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 20, 2015, 08:04:55 PM

Quote from: ErisDiscordia on December 20, 2015, 07:50:13 PM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 20, 2015, 07:34:40 PM

Quote from: rpietila on December 20, 2015, 07:06:19 PM

Follow the weekly Bitstamp chart. If it closes green for 6 times in a row, we are on bubble territory (currently 4 consecutive weekly greens). If we instead end this week in red, there is nothing to worry.

IF we get 6 greens, this means we can go on for a long time still but watch for a blowoff top and trade accordingly.

The methodology worked perfect in the latest 500 spike, and you can easily check a very good match with all previous bubbles as well.

First TERA and now Risto- we're getting the band back together!

no better indicator of a bull market than old-timers becoming active again

Hold on there, Pardner. Don't confuse cause and effect. All that means is the price is higher. The bull market isn't really back until the ATH is topped. That won't happen without a scaling fix because long before we get to four digits, we'll slam into the 1MB blocksize limit.

When the blocks are totally full, the fees could go up 100X what they are now because there is only enough capacity for ~600,000 transactions per day. That's it, no matter how high the fees go, there won't be enough capacity for each of us to have even one xation/day each. NO MATTER HOW HIGH THE FEES GO.

You don't wait until the snow starts falling before you start chopping firewood. It's coming.

Assuming inelastic demand for bitcoin transactions is wrong. If fees go high enough, there will be plenty of room in 1 MB blocks. There will also probably be plenty of cheap coins in this situation.

Realistically, the network's actual capacity in current form is more like 2.7 tps.

Quote from: Elwar on December 20, 2015, 08:27:33 PM

How many gold transactions are possible each day?

Gold is protected from competition by its atomic structure. Bitcoin is open source code, it competes by being the best.

Quote from: AlexGR on December 20, 2015, 10:36:10 PM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 20, 2015, 10:23:19 PM

https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

We're going to see a noticeable slowdown in confirmation times or a noticeable increase in fees by the time we hit 300,000 Transactions/day. By the time we hit 400,000 TPD, This slowdown or fee increase will be dramatic and with current code, 500,000 may not even be possible.

With high fees and/or slow confirmations, MOST of the current business models of the major bitcoin companies (Coinbase, Circle, 21, Bitpay etc) will be unworkable.

There isn't anything close to a consensus on anyway to fix this. There isn't even a consensus that it needs to be fixed.

Expecting Bitcoin to rally into four or even five digits before the scaling problem is corrected is like expecting a Boeing 777 to take off in your driveway. We're gonna run out of road before we get above stalling speed.

You are using a chart that has a hidden story behind it and pretend like that story doesn't even exist.

The hidden story is that most of the transactions there are bogus, spam, dust, very low to no-fee, etc.

So to get the true representation you must know the ratio of normal transactions vs the spam/dust transactions within the capacity limit.

What will actually happen is that the ratio of the quality of txs will shift internally, within the prescribed limit. So if you have something like half a million of txs per day as a limit, and you currently have just 100k normal transactions per day (with the other 100-150k being bogus/spam/dust), then you have a 5x margin to hit the actual limit, when dust/spam/attacks are priced out and become uneconomical to execute.

If you are always considering dust/spam/bogus/attack txs to be the same in quality, then you could have an increase to 2MB tomorrow morning and by tomorrow evening someone could be filling the extra mb with "stress test" junk txs. That would prove what? That "Bitcoin is at its limit"? Just because someone has filled the new TPD limit with another 500k bogus transactions? No. It would only prove that if your block size supply is much larger than block size demand, then you can have plenty of free riders in that space. And those free riders will be using that space irresponsibly. Why not, anyway, since they aren't paying much for doing so...

Perhaps after being priced out of using Bitcoin these nefarious spammers (that have had us bumping against the 1MB limit for years now) will use Darkcoin or Dash Cash, frightening eh?

Quote from: BldSwtTrs on December 21, 2015, 12:38:45 AM

Quote from: fisheater22 on December 21, 2015, 12:37:59 AM

I'm leveraged long and this is the worst day of my life. If 430 doesn't hold, why, I just don't know what I'll do.

Then cut your ~~losses~~ loose.

ftfy

I posted this in another thread but it seems relevant to what you guys are talking about.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 21, 2015, 01:05:16 AM

Do we really have security and decentralization today when a few phone calls from the PRC could shut the whole thing down?

The only security against nation states with hundreds of billions of $ at their disposal is either through obscurity (monero) or through ubiquity (too big and important to attack).

Practically, it seems a compromise to 2MB would buy time to develop and roll out other solutions (segwit, LN, SC, etc) and could allow us to have more productive dialog in the interim.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on December 21, 2015, 01:53:24 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 21, 2015, 01:49:54 AM

I posted this in another thread but it seems relevant to what you guys are talking about.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 21, 2015, 01:05:16 AM

Have we considered the fact that a lot of those small-blockers seem to also have a vested interest in the success of a certain altcoin?

Meh, I don't dismiss their concerns completely because of this.

There are real concerns about maliciously formed 8MB blocks made by a dominant selfish miner. IMO it would be a miner acting against their interest in continued income, but the possibility is there, and the worry is not completely unfounded.

It's greatly diminished at 2MB, so I think that's a good compromise to buy some time and allow us to stop obsessing and fighting for a while.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on December 21, 2015, 02:08:03 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 21, 2015, 02:02:45 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on December 21, 2015, 01:53:24 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 21, 2015, 01:49:54 AM

I posted this in another thread but it seems relevant to what you guys are talking about.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 21, 2015, 01:05:16 AM

Have we considered the fact that a lot of those small-blockers seem to also have a vested interest in the success of a certain altcoin?

I have to admit the King Satoshi and his little castle analogy made a lot of sense.

Is there any indication anywhere that Satoshi was aware of difficulties with scaling for mass adoption?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=532.msg6306#msg6306

Quote from: satoshi

The current system where every user is a network node is not the intended configuration for large scale. That would be like every Usenet user runs their own NNTP server. The design supports letting users just be users. The more burden it is to run a node, the fewer nodes there will be. Those few nodes will be big server farms. The rest will be client nodes that only do transactions and don't generate.

Quote from: bytemaster

Quote from: bytemaster on July 28, 2010, 08:59:42 PM
Besides, 10 minutes is too long to verify that payment is good. It needs to be as fast as swiping a credit card is today.

Quote from: satoshi

See the snack machine thread, I outline how a payment processor could verify payments well enough, actually really well (much lower fraud rate than credit cards), in something like 10 seconds or less. If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.
http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=423.msg3819#msg3819

Quote from: peonminer on December 21, 2015, 02:04:00 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on December 21, 2015, 01:59:28 AM

Quote from: JimboToronto on December 21, 2015, 01:58:08 AM

Quote from: peonminer on December 21, 2015, 01:49:04 AM

Doubtful $330 will hold this time.

It dropped by $30 so you think it will drop $100 more? Undecided

If wishes were horses...

Give it a week for sub $330.
-snip-

u liek brass balls too?

People struggling to access coins from 2011... bullish Huh

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 21, 2015, 04:55:16 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 21, 2015, 04:53:46 AM

People struggling to access coins from 2011... bullish Huh

he's running an XT node, may as well just send them straight to Uncle Sam now and be done with all the other formalities and hassle ... lol.

Why bother with the truth... amirite?

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 21, 2015, 05:08:31 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 21, 2015, 04:56:47 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 21, 2015, 04:55:16 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 21, 2015, 04:53:46 AM

People struggling to access coins from 2011... bullish Huh

he's running an XT node, may as well just send them straight to Uncle Sam now and be done with all the other formalities and hassle ... lol.

Why bother with the truth... amirite?

... the truth is Uncle Sam wants YOU running an XT node ... and why would that I be you wonder? because he wants to own your coinz, oh yes, you can use them and pretend like they are yours, but just like the Federal Reserve Debt Notes, in the end he wants to have the ultimate control over your money so that it can be called in at any time. Without OWNING your own money (as in the fullest legal sense, possession, control and knowledge) you are not a sovereign economic individual, just another subject to the corporations and other entities controlling the money of the Kings and would-be Kings.

Alright capn' hyperbole. Let's bump core to 2MB for a year to work on other solutions. Security through ubiquity, tptb are still gonna get a huge amount of our coins, BJA's scrambling to hand them over at 400.

Blockstream has reached consensus on Blockstream's future plans for Bitcoin. (2 weeks ago)

Don't like it? Fork off.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 22, 2015, 12:26:30 AM

-snip-
Get on board or get out of the way.

Quote from: hdbuck on December 11, 2015, 12:01:58 AM

salt..

Quote

Ultimately, it is about increasing the number of places where Bitcoin can break and reducing the prominence of cryptography in cryptocurrency.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 15, 2015, 06:54:08 PM

Quote from: hdbuck on December 15, 2015, 04:19:31 PM

Quote from: brg444 on December 15, 2015, 03:50:37 PM

Quote from: johnyj on December 15, 2015, 03:42:19 PM

But at least you understand that BIP101 will increase the risk of centralization. However for SW proposal, I totally don't understand anything at all: By changing the bitcoin architecture, Pieter essentially change it to something else, an alt-coin. So all the talks about SW should go into alt-coin section, not here. And all this large degree of deviation from Satoshi's original design for what? A mere one time increase for capacity of light nodes, not even helping full nodes?

I've been quite surprised by your reaction to this proposal.

It's as if you're being intentionally obtuse because clearly you are making no effort at understanding SW and overexagerate its complexity.

Whether or not you agree with its motivations and underlying ideology SW is pretty straight forward.

straight forward in cutting out the cryptographic signatures out of the blockchain... to allow more spam.

thank you but no thank you.

forkers should create their own altcoin already.

Bye hdbuck and Mircea Popescu! The technical consens-o-tron bids you farewell! Grin

Full blocks and rising fees... settlement network here we come, gentlemen.

Gentlemen.

As the mempool fills, and our great (totally not captured) technocrats continue to implement what's best for Bitcoin. I'd like to remind you that a new moon is cresting the horizon. Some say $5000 incoming, some say $32000, these are all low-ball estimates.

Some may say that it will take 9-12 months to roll out a complicated accounting trick to gain us 0.75MB of effective space. I say nay, it might happen tomorrow. Wumpus, sipa, and gmax have your best interests at heart. They have heard a panel representing 90% of hashing power state that they are ready for 2MB, and they have graciously and courageously rejected it... to keep you safe.

Institutional investors are very aware that the current number of users and transactions are more than enough to support mining security as the block reward dwindles. This is why they continue to pile in at ever increasing rates. There is not a private, for profit, company that is ready to use the blockchain as their own personal settlement network, this is a lie proffered by conspiritards.

For the first time in Bitcoin's history, everything is looking poised for success, and I've never had more confidence in our future.

Keep the price in the 400's gentlemen, at least for this week.

Quote from: brg444 on December 22, 2015, 08:06:00 PM

Damn, Core really did pull a rabbit out their hat Shocked

How do they do it? Incredible.

Quote from: TERA on December 22, 2015, 08:47:14 PM

You know that sentiment has reached adequately negative levels when people think that crypto is done, over some mining issue

It's not a mining issue. Err, it is, in the sense that they are unwilling to exercise their influence against a team that has formed to eat their lunch.

This is not a crisis that ends in a flash of red fireworks, it is a long, slow, bleeeeeed. The scramble for pre-halving coins may even disguise it for most of next year.

Today's hilarious edition of unintended metaphors:

Luke Jr talks about compromise.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TraditionalCatholics/comments/3xp9rr/sedevacantism_and_the_alleged_loss_of_the_four/cy7me2i

aaaaand...

https://www.reddit.com/r/TraditionalCatholics/comments/3xp9rr/sedevacantism_and_the_alleged_loss_of_the_four/cy7rtxa

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3xwium/bitcoin_core_capacity_increases_faq_part_1/cy8oj9q

Masking the truth with self-deprecating humor... cute!

Quote from: suda123 on December 23, 2015, 06:58:51 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 23, 2015, 06:56:58 AM

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3xwium/bitcoin_core_capacity_increases_faq_part_1/cy8oj9q

Masking the truth with self-deprecating humor... cute!

wait im sorry but what is the satire and what does this mean lol

Don't worry friend, people much smarter than you have it figured out. Cypherpunks write code.

Quote from: Richy_T on December 23, 2015, 07:08:58 AM

If there's one thing that isn't "core" to bitcoin, it's lightning.

There are many parts that are in the code for bitcoind that shouldn't be there. Most notably the wallet but other parts too. If a true, proper bitcoin core were written, a lot of this nonsense would sort itself out as obvious. Unfortunately, Satoshi failed to implement proper code separation and a lot of the problems that we see extend from that.

(Not that core shouldn't provide a wallet but it should be a separate piece of software)

Right, not to say that LN can't be a very complementary protocol to Bitcoin, but designing Bitcoin for Lightning... is somewhat backwards in terms of priorities.

Things have changed 'round here. Undecided

Gentlemen, I realize we've flat lined here, but please... my asks are quite reasonable, and they're not fake.

Edit: Filled, thank you. Took some of the edge off.

Quote from: Dotto on December 23, 2015, 11:13:55 AM

Do traders provide some benefit to the system? (no just BTC traders, but traders in general) or they are just plain parasites?. It would be nice to listen at least some protraders opinion if it even exists.

A priori they look as pure parasites, but somehow a prioris use to be wrong.

Interesting debate while price go sideways

Hint... it's called price discovery, and it's occasionally useful.

Would you rather they used your money to figure it out? That can be arranged.

Quote from: flagpara on December 23, 2015, 11:36:44 AM

Quote from: ErisDiscordia on December 23, 2015, 11:20:28 AM

Quote from: Dotto on December 23, 2015, 11:13:55 AM

Having traders aka. "the market" discover what something is worth is the alternative to setting prices via central committee.

BJA used to talk about this when he was calling btc traders "decentral bankers". Their job is to buy when they feel like the thing is undervalued and sell when it is overvalued, providing liquidity. The ones who are better at this end up with greater means to influence the price.

So much for theory. In reality we have things like insider trading, government interventions and price manipulation by cartels going on.

Claiming traders don't bring any value to the table seems incredibly myopic. They are helping to set the price of things in a decentralized way which would presumably seem useless only to someone who would prefer to set prices of things through central committees and whatnot.

You're all talking about the invisible hand. Which not a bad thing in itself. You mean traders are the way for market to regulate itself, which not wrong.

Now think it the other way around, what does happen when a market is ONLY about self-regularization?
I have nothing against the fact that traders gives the value of things, when they ACTUALLY buy and sell things. But they don't, they just bet on rise or loss.

Not even 1% of exchange are real, they're not "value conquistadores", they're just plain parasites because they don't have to use real things to bet on.

Decentralization is good when you talk about real products. When one will really buy 1ton of corn at a price and sell it back at another price. When you exchange 10000 times the amount of good produced in the world, you don't set the value of anything, you just create "value" from thin air.

Quote from: dropt on December 24, 2015, 03:33:37 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 24, 2015, 03:28:22 AM

When blocks are full, anyone will be able to shut it down for an hour for $100,000. It will be slow for many hours after that. That's your idea of security?

What's 100 grand to stop a six billion dollar network? You just gave the banksters a kill switch.

Please show us where, among the numerous previous periods of full blocks, the network was 'stopped'.

It never happened. End of story.

Edit: Also, what does 'shut it down for half an hour' have to do with 'security'? When, during this fabricated scenario of yours, did people's coins get stolen from their wallets, or people magically have funds appear in their accounts? Is it a security issue when my bankcard doesn't work at a debit machine because the retailer's internet is out?

BJA, hitting the limit isn't an apocalypse. Think of it as a stuck brake caliper. It limits potential, but is not fatal, at least not while first mover advantage is still so strong. As long as people are salivating about the halving... getting much harder to mine... more good press... MMM still a rollin'... this thing could run well further than you expect.

Locking in some profits is never a bad thing, it's a comfort to have some dry powder, and a joy to sell into euphoria. True permabulls don't have a dime to buy panics, they're already all in. I'm pretty sure we'll see sub 440 again, and if not, great... that's what cold storage is for.

Look... I share your frustration with the current dev environment, their crooked incentives, and their merry band of sycophants, but there's no need to throw yourself on the tracks in a show of bravery. If they want to pay you more, might as well take it. I also don't think that the situation is doomed, miners have the incentive and the power to protect their investment by ditching Core� if the pain becomes pronounced and a reliable alternative presents itself. Bitcoin was designed to route around attempts to control it, let's see if that's true.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 24, 2015, 04:12:14 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 24, 2015, 04:09:49 AM

Quote from: dropt on December 24, 2015, 03:33:37 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 24, 2015, 03:28:22 AM

I just had a stuck caliper. It set my truck on fire.

Well, given enough time, that's going to happen. Especially when you don't have the periodic table on your side. Cheesy

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 24, 2015, 04:24:34 AM

Nobody has responded to the most relevant part:

Quote

Previous periods of full blocks didn't have as many people who NEEDED not just wanted the network to work. The more people who NEED it to work, the more vulnerable it is to a spam attack. The blocksize limit is an effective way to not just keep bitcoin small, but to keep it unimportant.

People who NEED it to work will bump their fees. It's not a killer, it's a crippler. A destroyer of potential.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 24, 2015, 04:50:38 AM

-snip-
The block limit is the technological limit that constrains the on-chain capacity, the arise of fees is the free market reaction.

People representing 90% of global hashrate disagreed during their panel in HK.

The idea that 1MB, "scaling" up to 1.75MB equiv with the gradual rollout of segwit, well into 2017... is the technological limit? That's BS and you know it.

The important part of their plan is that hard forks remain "controversial".

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 24, 2015, 05:08:42 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 24, 2015, 04:58:45 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 24, 2015, 04:50:38 AM

-snip-
The block limit is the technological limit that constrains the on-chain capacity, the arise of fees is the free market reaction.

Currently the network node operators are overwhelmingly supporting 1MByte block limits, so that is the reality of the technological limit on the network today.

How that changes in the future is the subject of much debate, as you well know.

I was attempting to get causality straight in BJA's mind.

You have to admit that Core has a certain sort of inertia. There's a big chunk of operators still plugging along on previous versions of Core. I also haven't seen an alternative that has the level of ongoing support that I'm comfortable with... so far. I really had high hopes for some kind of good will compromise between the opposing forces (ala garzik), bringing us back together with a common purpose... but it appears that is not going to be the case.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on December 24, 2015, 05:39:38 AM

Yes, there is a huge amount of inertia and for a very good reason, that is very organic and was to be expected if you have the right experience.

-snip-

Nuclear power plants and oil-rig safety shutdown systems that include software hardly ever make changes to their code after it has been commissioned and the plant "goes live" with active material. It takes committees of programmers and managers poring over every line to get even the simplest changes into an active system.

The disconnect between what is happening here and what the public have been told to "want to happen" is astounding for anybody with any experience in high-risk industrial software systems. The bitcoin protocol is almost complete now and will hardly ever change from now or else it will risk catastrophic failure. It is just very, very unfortunate that Gavin and Hearn "went there" with the whole hard fork MAD power grab, against the vast majority of the development community's technically better judgement and in an entirely reckless manner for critical infrastructure software management.

How does segwit fit with this critical infrastructure stasis analogy? Where garzik's plan does not. Huh

I agree that most of the network didn't want to jump into the arms of a benevolently dictatorial Hearn, but that does not preclude future possibility of hard forking from the previously dominant implementation's centrally planned capacity policy.

Quote from: dropt on December 24, 2015, 05:21:19 AM

-snip-
Take a look at the most recent blocks found and their size. If any of the BS you rant about had merit there would be countless people complaining about stuck transactions, the price would be crashing, and people would be screaming from the rooftops. But they're not, are they?
-snip-

Well, if they're anywhere near 10min blocks... they're pretty well full. If miners thought they would risk orphaning because of size and validation time, they would be smaller.

It's "fine" if you want to block small legit transactions to steer them into other providers and solutions, but at least admit it, and sign a statement clearly stating this is the direction of Core. This is going to be a change to the steady state economic operation of Bitcoin since the genesis block.

http://hackingdistributed.com/2015/12/23/bitcoin-fee-market/

Quote

I do not have experience with my old age. I do not go around artificially inducing osteoporosis [2] to get ready for my old days -- instead, I make the best of my working days when I'm blessed to have a working skeleton.

Quote from: brg444 on December 24, 2015, 03:08:01 AM

back over 3000

that bull though Cool

Quote from: brg444 on December 24, 2015, 02:13:32 AM

shorters get #rekt

Thanks ~~Obama~~ Blockstream!

Quote from: brg444 on December 27, 2015, 03:14:49 AM

-snip-
All that good momentum wasted by Coinbase XTards...

Well, we know it couldn't have been this...

Quote from: brg444 on October 31, 2015, 02:43:22 PM

Quote from: masterluc on October 31, 2015, 02:37:30 PM

Quote from: brg444 on October 31, 2015, 02:35:44 PM

IMO the buying action is not representative of individual purchases, even from an organized scheme.

I see you don't know who is Mavrodi. In 1990s he brought up ponzi scheme in russia with funding half of country budget.

I do know who the guy is.

What I'm saying is if we are to believe that individuals are participating in his ponzi by funding their "account" using Bitcoin purchased from BTC exchanges this, IMO, does not correspond to the action we are seeing on Huobi & OKCoin where seemingly numerous buying bots are involved.

Unless we are suggesting Mavrodi is purposedly gaming the Bitcoin market while running the ponzi in question it seems to me there is more to the story and the volume we are seeing in China.

Those XTards sure have a lot of coin to dump. (in china)

Quote from: hdbuck on December 27, 2015, 07:43:31 PM

Quote from: ImI on December 27, 2015, 07:35:08 PM

Quote from: BldSwtTrs on December 27, 2015, 07:24:57 PM

Keep faith bitcoiners. Coinbase is actually making something happens regarding the endless scaling controversy.

The power of totalitarian and economics illeterate nerds over Bitcoin is coming to an end ("but... but we have a roadmap" lol).

yes, maybe its the right step, nevertheless......... lol coinbase

corporatist cheerleaders gettin all wet and sassy before their overlord brian armstrong from goldman sachs to ph0rk bitcoin and (hopefully) put an end to his useless cash burning regulated service.

bitpay you are next! Grin

Hi Grover Dill,

Are you going to end up a ph0rk of a ph0rk when Blockstream removes signatures from blocks?

Kind Regards,

Quote from: hdbuck on December 27, 2015, 08:06:41 PM

-snip-
ps: i dont give a heck about core which is more of a debased codebase anyway, may they phr0k you noobs *softly*
-snip-

Do you know what happens if miners start using Blockstream segwit, and you don't use their latest debased codebase...?

Quote from: conspirosphere.tk on December 27, 2015, 09:47:34 PM

Quote from: macsga on December 27, 2015, 09:20:51 PM

1 exahash/s limit to be broken tonight?

https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate?timespan=2year&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=

that's some hard evidence to expect an imminent price rise of comparable scale.

2014 would like to have a word with you...

Next gen chips have been designed, fabbed, assembled into miners, and now they're being deployed.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on December 28, 2015, 08:48:44 PM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 28, 2015, 07:26:04 PM

Quote from: toinew on December 28, 2015, 07:22:33 PM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 28, 2015, 07:20:24 PM

3K bidwall on BFX

EDIT: Aaaand it's gone.

lasted less than 1 minute, and someone sold 800 bitcoin to that wall. What do you think about this kind of trick ?

Looks like it backfired. Someone trying to push the price up or hold it up in a futile effort to keep the 1 HR moving average green.

Nobody's buying my coins retail. I have to keep lowering my premium and they still don't move.

You are a fucking liar in this post. You had plenty opportunity to sell your coins in the upper $420s in the past 12 hours or so, if you really wanted to sell your coins, and if you have any to sell.

The only reason you wouldn't be able to sell you coins is that you would have been attempting to sell them at a 1% or more above retail, and farting around with your price, as to never get them to sell.

So, yes, sincerity is important, when you are spinning such bullshit... regarding supposedly what you have been attempting to accomplish, but supposedly unable to accomplish.

You were much more pleasant when you harbored the shame and guilt of losing half the money you plowed into BTC. Now that you're only down 17% or so... you've become fairly arrogant. I'm increasingly unsure if I can celebrate your break-even party with as much vigor as I originally intended... Undecided

Well, you handled my thinly veiled insult with a convoluted wall of text... so at least I'm reasonably sure I am still conversing with the original owner of this nick. Cheesy

I'll forego commenting on your perception of BJA's "grievous lies".

Quote from: aminorex on December 29, 2015, 05:50:20 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on December 29, 2015, 04:44:17 PM

It seems to me that bitcoin can accommodate a lot of political ideologies, not just libertarians, even though there seem to be quite a few strongly-viewed libertarians (especially some of the early adopters) who seem to have been viewing bitcoin as the savior (even though a few of them may have dropped off a bit when it was discovered that bitcoin may not be as anonymous as was initially asserted and/or marketed).

It's a technical problem. There are technical solutions. When I want to make a BTC purchase, I spend XMR using xmr.to or shapeshift.io. Consequently my privacy is assured.

I could see that for buying a rug on overstock or a monitor from newegg...

What's the technical solution for buying a car, a house, a commercial property?

Quote from: aminorex on December 29, 2015, 07:45:02 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 29, 2015, 07:17:35 PM

Quote from: aminorex on December 29, 2015, 05:50:20 PM

It's a technical problem. There are technical solutions. When I want to make a BTC purchase, I spend XMR using xmr.to or shapeshift.io. Consequently my privacy is assured.

What's the technical solution for buying a car, a house, a commercial property?

In each of those cases, the purchase is a matter of public record, and hence privacy concerns are moot.

But yes, there is a scale problem. When the nickel and dime volume is large enough, then the liquidity will suffice for the dollar traffic to insinuate itself, &c. Given the trend in privacy awareness in marketplaces which have historically been early adopters of crypto, I expect the scale problem to work itself out over time. "Price fixes everything."

I was thinking more along the lines of privacy of the origin of funds rather than whether you, as the new owner of property, were identifiable.

Your point is an important one though, and largely the reason why I am passionate about scaling, it's the small stuff that facilitates the store of value/big stuff.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on December 29, 2015, 09:55:01 PM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on December 29, 2015, 09:51:08 PM

Jeff Garzik on the Stalling Bitcoin conferences:

https://medium.com/@jgarzik/bitcoin-is-being-hot-wired-for-settlement-a5beb1df223a#.82qumsxby

Quote

One of the explicit goals of the Scaling Bitcoin workshops was to funnel the chaotic core block size debate into an orderly decision making process. That did not occur. In hindsight, Scaling Bitcoin stalled a block size decision while transaction fee price and block space pressure continue to increase.

This is far from fucking over.

That's right, and it seems that you are planning to continue to provide us with a blow by blow status update regarding the impending fulblocalypse on a several times a day basis.

That's gonna help to light a little fire under their britches... Cheesy

Seems pretty relevant to whether Bitcoin reaches its true potential or is captured for use by a for-profit company. This has profound implications for the price, which we are all speculating on. Are you a passenger or a participant? Would you rather we discussed the weather?

Quote from: Richy_T on December 30, 2015, 02:53:45 AM

Quote from: Richy_T on December 30, 2015, 02:45:42 AM

It will also start to be an issue before 100%. I'm not sure what the exact level would be but I'm thinking around 85%

It's tough to get an accurate picture with a single number. Usually, the less than 10 min blocks are going to be smaller, and coinbase only blocks are going to be tiny.

If you plan max capacity to avg capacity... you're going to have issues. Undecided

Today's edition: Political Contributor to the Central Committee of the Inhibit Party of the Technical Consensus Union.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 30, 2015, 06:01:31 AM

Quote from: brg444 on December 30, 2015, 05:58:05 AM

Quote

[00:08] <petertodd> bramc: but today we have a blocksize limit low enough that everyone has access to reasonably low orphan rates
[00:08] <petertodd> bramc: (remember that the networking code we have right now on the p2p network is *really* inefficient)
[00:09] <bramc> petertodd, And the blocksize limit is staying down there, by design
[00:09] <petertodd> bramc: what do you mean?
[00:10] <bramc> petertodd, The current 'plan of record' is for the block size to de facto go up by less than 2x with segwit and otherwise stay put, at least for now
[00:10] <bramc> For exactly that reason
[00:10] <petertodd> bramc: sure

Not tonight, dear.

Always cute.

Quote from: xyzzy099 on December 31, 2015, 03:14:23 AM

Quote from: jbreher on December 31, 2015, 02:09:33 AM

Quote from: brg444 on December 31, 2015, 01:28:14 AM

Quote from: jbreher on December 31, 2015, 12:25:56 AM

Home. My entire bitcoin folder tree amounts to less than 64 GiB - or less than USD $10 of disk space. Bandwidth is such that I don't even notice any degradation to other apps. I admit that my ISP is better than many. I've never thought to measure it with any finer resolution than 'computing demands are irrelevant'.

Care to share how many peers you're connected to?

Hmm... just a sec... checking....

OK, back. 8. I'm guessing that's a default. I've not modified that part of bitcoin.conf.

As long as we're nitpicking my particular node, it may be worth pointing out that I am running it over Tor.

If you have exactly 8 connections, it almost certainly means you have no incoming connections at all. This usually indicates a network misconfiguration, such as port 8333 blocked by your firewall, or maybe in your case, it's a Tor issue.

The default is 8 outgoing, unlimited incoming. If you open the Help->Debug Window menu item, it will show the relevant information.

Running a full node over tor requires setting up a tor hidden service first. I found this tutorial but don't have personal experience with it:

https://www.sky-ip.org/configure-bitcoin-node-debian-ubuntu.html

If you just want to run from your home IP, it's as simple as forwarding port 8333 in your router to your machine running bitcoind. Once you see more than 8 connections, you will be contributing to the network.

Be advised that XT nodes have had their broadcasted IP's DDoS'd in the past, although that seems to have subsided vs the days when it was quickly gaining share. I imagine it will happen again to XT and Unlimited nodes if they continue growing.

Quote from: Alley on December 31, 2015, 03:57:19 AM

I'd like to see a business start to pay people for running nodes. Maybe they can get advertisers to pay them money to cover the cost. I end up running a node for a few weeks then stop since I get nothing.

Sounds more like a charity than a business. Also, a bunch of nodes under the control of one person or in one place isn't all that helpful. It would also be rife with dbags trying to game the system with pseudo nodes and such.

I think the expense/hassle makes sense for someone with a decent amount of coin. If you are interested in the long term success of your investment, you may want to contribute to the health of the network behind that investment, and have your own copy of the blockchain with the means to verify that it's accurate.

Going from 2.7 tps to 5.4 tps isn't trying to make a VISA competitor where the world's cups of coffee will be forever on the blockchain. It's simply growing in line with (actually more conservatively than) hardware/bandwidth improvement. With current number of tx, and no block subsidy... this thing is as good as dead.

That's why the block reward exists, to provide cheapish transactions while we grow the base number of transactions that will eventually cover the cost of mining security.

That's the baffling/infuriating part with small blockers, they assume that if we hard fork to 2MB once, 256MB is right around the corner... it's not. It's also completely different from changing the reward schedule, which is often raised in the next sentence.

If Bitcoin is artificially crippled at 1MB4EVA, or even 1.75MB with segwit through 2018, competitors will be picking away at that first mover advantage like a vulture on a corpse. This is not gold, it's not on the periodic table, it's open source software. It's value is derived from utility, and expected utility. Kill the utility, kill the coin... or at least relegate it to rpietila's new castle game.

Quote from: AlexGR on December 31, 2015, 07:06:43 AM

-snip-
If you make a free, or almost free crypto, that can do tens of millions of TXs per day, what's stopping someone from abusing it and getting the network to its capacity limits, triggering a priority queue through fees?
-snip-

The same thing that's stopped it from 2009 until today... miner's dust and spam limits. They are incentivized to make small enough blocks to avoid orphaning, unless the fees offered shift them along that supply curve. It really comes down to whether you trust the free market and the system's built in incentives... or you trust a small cadre of dudes that all happen to work for a certain company that plans to produce the medicine for your disease.

Quote from: BitUsher on December 31, 2015, 06:13:26 PM

Rusty is a talented and competent developer and I am grateful that he can contribute to our ecosystem. I really appreciate all the testing and data he has provided our community.

He certainly is. That doesn't stop me from wondering how much is a conclusion in search of evidence vs evidence in search of a conclusion. Blockstream� has an unhealthy amount of influence on an open and distributed project.

Quote from: BitUsher on December 31, 2015, 06:22:57 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 31, 2015, 06:20:12 PM

Rather than wasting time bikeshedding, infighting , or assuming intentions we should simply do our best to support all implementations to raise the bar of the whole ecosystem.

On that note ... I am off for today ...

Happy New Year to everyone.

Don't drink and drive and if you can avoid the roads by sleeping with the host/hostess of the party than take the opportunity.

Good to hear the talking points are out, and the matter is all settled folks. Nothing to see here.

Meanwhile, the COO of a company controlling 11% of the hashrate is not being shy...

And is apparently bothered with the censoring and steering.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on December 31, 2015, 06:43:53 PM

Actual businesses are telling them they�re being prematurely priced out of the economy. How is that a trivial detail??

Do you even code? No? Well, just lie back and it will all be over soon. We have consensus and you're not part of it.

Quote from: AlexGR on December 31, 2015, 07:44:41 PM

Quote from: jbreher on December 31, 2015, 06:22:30 PM

Quote from: AlexGR on December 31, 2015, 07:06:43 AM

...even if the blocks are full with bogus transactions.

Please provide a definition of 'bogus transaction'. Without such, I am unable to understand your argument.

A very simple or simplistic explanation:

If I want to buy something, I need to pay. That's a valid reason for making a transaction so that transaction isn't bogus.

Now, if I start sending dust between my wallets, in thousands of transactions, in a meaningless way (as far as real-life transactions go), just to generate spam, clog the network etc => that's plenty of bogus transactions right there.

Who do you need to pay? The miner.

Who should decide how much you need to pay them? The miner.

Who is attempting to centrally plan production quotas? Core developers with a conflict of interest that is glaring you in the face.

Quote from: AlexGR on December 31, 2015, 07:57:16 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 31, 2015, 07:53:00 PM

Quote from: AlexGR on December 31, 2015, 07:44:41 PM

Quote from: jbreher on December 31, 2015, 06:22:30 PM

Quote from: AlexGR on December 31, 2015, 07:06:43 AM

...even if the blocks are full with bogus transactions.

Please provide a definition of 'bogus transaction'. Without such, I am unable to understand your argument.

Who do you need to pay? The miner.

I meant the seller Cheesy

I'm not talking about fees here.

Does sending dust between wallets in thousands of transactions require fees? There is no distinction for the miner, pay the fee they require and your transaction is just as legitimate as any other.

Quote from: AlexGR on December 31, 2015, 08:05:10 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on December 31, 2015, 08:01:35 PM

Does sending dust between wallets in thousands of transactions require fees? There is no distinction for the miner, pay the fee they require and your transaction is just as legitimate as any other.

Some miners might process junk for free or near-zero cost. Others won't even process higher fee txs. As it stands, the answer is "it depends".

Bloating up a block with free transactions does have a cost to a miner in terms of propagation and verification time. By bloating a block they risk being orphaned by a longer chain of smaller blocks, costing them 25BTC. A very strong natural incentive to keep blocks at a reasonable size.

I'd expect that if the hardcoded max is increased, you'd see blocks largely the same size that they are now, perhaps at times of peak use and increasing fees they'd be slightly bigger.

A higher limit makes it harder/more expensive for a spammer to price out all legitimate transactions.

Quote from: Richy_T on December 31, 2015, 08:23:05 PM

Quote from: AlexGR on December 31, 2015, 08:05:10 PM

Some miners might process junk for free* or near-zero cost. Others won't even process higher fee txs. As it stands, the answer is "it depends".

* I recently consolidated some of my dust into one address for free.

Those zero-cost transactions are heavily subsidized by the block reward currently. Which is going away in time. Fees are an afterthought at the moment.

For the time being... there's also something called priority, calculated from age and size of inputs.

This should be about planning for the future, a happy future where demand for cheap frictionless bitcoin payments continues to grow.

If we're happy about today's # of uses, users, and transactions... 1.75MB equiv will be plenty.

Jorge is the troll we need, but not the one we deserve.

May your "academic interest only" continue through 2016. Cheesy

Quote from: Mrpumperitis on January 01, 2016, 05:39:16 AM

https://twitter.com/petertoddbtc/status/682710904098574336

I've signed the "Capacity increases for the Bitcoin system" plan for Bitcoin Core. https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/pull/1165#issuecomment-168263005 �

Pu-pu-pu-pumperitis babay

http://blog.viacoin.org/2014/07/31/viacoin-hires-peter-todd.html

Happy New Year,

You filthy animals.

In a stunning display of courage, and with an unwavering commitment to the forging of the truth in the crucible of the dialectical method... Our friend, and highly qualified mentor, has graciously offered to continue the debate of these important ideas rather than retreat like a coward to the wizard's irc clubhouse.

Like those who have not #ragequit under adversity before... may his example continue to inspire us in our efforts to fully realize the potential of this bottom-up, community driven effort towards changing the world through a fully decentralized, dialup and raspberryPi compatible, layer 1 settlement network.

Quote from: brg444 on January 02, 2016, 01:54:51 AM

This, gentlemen is the curtain call.

After much consideration I've decided to turn the page on this thread in light of the most recent developments but also so that it stops paying lip service to the lying fraudster above and his cohort of deception artists. (Remind me not to ever create another thread without making it self-moderated)

It is clear that we now have a path forward out of this arguable gridlock thanks to the hard work of knowledgeable but most importantly resilient people. (https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-core/capacity-increases)

Although it was never a consideration that a merry bunch of loud mouths with no authority could hijack the project and hardfork Bitcoin into inexistence the schism was of a great service to everyone involved with Bitcoin in that it help identify the malicious actors and to some extent purge them from the ecosystem.

The leaders of this governance coup are now nowhere to be seen, Mike Hearn having revealed themselves as the villain he always was is now gone working full time for the bankers he had probably always been in cahoots with. Gavin Andresen has taken residency over at a forum populated by notorious scammer cypherdoc and dangerous, sociopath, charlatan Peter R. After previously advocating for what was deemed a "safe" immediate increase to 20MB, he is now figuratively begging on his knees for 2MB "compromise" only for the sake of forcing a contentious hard fork on Bitcoin in order to undermine the trust of investors in what projects to be the most important year for Bitcoin yet.

As for the groups of shills they've spawned their "community" is in shambles largely because of the self-admitted fractious tendencies.

In what proved to be its strongest menace to date it is now safe to say Bitcoin has once again demonstrated its value and the strength of its antifragile nature.

Seeing as I can't bother responding anymore to the endless barrage of lies and deception spewed here by the shills (and I certainly understand why others have already given up) it would be a disservice to more naive & gullible individuals to leave the thread open and provide a stage for these scammers.

Nonetheless it was a good ride and proved to be a most informative experience. I'd like to thank all of the honest contributors who've helped separate the wheat from the chaff (you know who you are). A special mention for iCEBREAKER for being the originator of the #REKT movement. It was an honor to carry the torch.

To the rest of you contemptible, lying ph0rkers understand that by the grace of the internet your performances and subsequent downfall will forever be preserved for posterity and serve as a tell-tale of the consequences of going against Bitcoin.

May your souls rest in peace.

Long live Bitcoin!

Quote from: hdbuck on January 02, 2016, 04:13:42 PM

lol so now chartbuddy gone total shill and advertise yet another dead on arrival altcoin. Roll Eyes

mods? banhammer time? Grin

Quote from: Richy_T on January 03, 2016, 01:41:13 AM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on January 03, 2016, 01:21:07 AM

Adam Back's thread just turned good: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1312371.msg13431477#msg13431477

Such integrity. Such wisdom. Such constructive criticism.

Small blockers are so edgy and cool. I bet they smoke behind the bike sheds at lunchtime too.

Watch out gentlemand, Richy_T's gunning for your comedy crown. Cheesy

Calm, rational discussion punctuated by tourettes outbursts like that... a winning strategy for the "1MB4EVA socioeconomic majority".

Quote from: sAt0sHiFanClub on January 03, 2016, 06:38:46 PM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 03, 2016, 06:18:16 PM

Toxic.

Anyone archive the responses? ( they've been deleted by the posters)

I missed it too, anybody?

Quote from: r0ach on January 03, 2016, 06:36:18 PM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on January 03, 2016, 12:02:54 AM

(funny joke)

(failed PUA butthurt)

Yeah, I bet those human females are crawling all over you buddy. Hopefully they don't end up like the other visitors to the motel.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3z9gxt/scaling_bitcoin_the_great_block_size_debate_blog/

Quote from: spooderman on January 03, 2016, 07:48:46 PM

sorry for the offtopic guys, but can anyone help me with this?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1313835.msg13438751#msg13438751

thanks

It looks like rebuilder answered it already. You create an encrypted volume with VeraCrypt (or something else, do your own research as taking suggestions blindly from this forum is a bad idea), then upload that to a host (or 3) of your choosing. The data would be worthless to anyone that isn't able to decrypt it.

Quote from: r3t4rD4life on January 04, 2016, 05:30:26 AM

Quote from: chesthing on January 04, 2016, 04:42:28 AM

Quote from: Morecoin Freeman on January 04, 2016, 04:10:20 AM

If I remember correct my last trades were: buy 315, sell 418, took a vacation, and then when I could I did short above 440.
I am not even sure what my exact entry is but I feel good about said position for now...

You've just summarized a massive amount of incorrect posts in your favor. Nice try. Anyone acting on your input at this point deserves what they get. You may or may not be talking your book, but either way I rank you with Kwukduck. Good day, sir.

Yep, freeman is a shill until I see proof he sold at 420. I thought he was legit at the time he said he was out at 420. I left as well. Very stupid to follow anybody's lead, I know. I was lucky enough to get back in right around the same price but lost the opportunity to short at 450, 470 etc. If BTC does go below 400 within the next 6 months I'll eat everything I said. But till then, I consider freeman to be a person or entity casting bait for sheep.

Jeez Guise. Belligerently confident bulls don't have the best track record. Sure the dips towards 420 have been pretty nicely bought back up, but on low volume. This market is at the whim of whomever wants to throw some cash/coin around, and these days, I'm more likely to be placing asks than bids. Go ahead and check them, they're real. I'll be back on the good team once we have a dev team with a real plan, one that doesn't centrally plan a $6 billion economy from an irc room, and has less blatant conflicts of interest.

It's just coiling, like a cobra, ready to strike... right?... gentlemen?

Quote from: Divitiae miserae on January 06, 2016, 04:49:09 AM

The micro sale is ending.

IKR, the volume at $6 below yesterday's price is really reassuring.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on January 06, 2016, 06:15:55 PM

-snip- ... sharing bullshit quasi-irrelevant thread space fillers?

Quote from: Fatman3001 on January 06, 2016, 09:25:09 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on January 06, 2016, 07:07:45 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 06, 2016, 06:52:31 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on January 06, 2016, 06:15:55 PM

-snip- ... sharing bullshit quasi-irrelevant thread space fillers?

Hahahahahaha...

It seems that you are trying to say something about either the space and/or the relevancy of my posts? Helrow? go on, say it. Don't be shy. Tongue

Maybe he is worried about there not being enough space left in the thread, which I don't know if I agree with. This thread is 14525 pages already so there doesn't seem to be a problem if we write a lot of crap. But maybe he is worried that we spend too much time on this thread. He always seems to write quite short posts where he gets right to the point, maybe that's because he worries about bloat in the thread. If you look at BlindMayorBitcorn you can see that his post, which was kind of a response to Cconvert2G36s post you I THINK you will find he answered quite brief. But why? BlindMayorBitcorn can write pretty long stuff but he can also write short stuff. I THINK both of them worry too much about bloat in the thread, but BMB can post a lot of silly stuff so he can't be too worried about it I THINK. But maybe he's just an asshole who doesn't give a damn and just pretends to care about bloat in the thread. Who knows? Perhaps they know of someone who wants to put this whole thread on the blockchain and cause bloat there, that would be really unnecessary if that were true. That would be really stupid I THINK. Honestly, I THINK it's very unnecessary of them to bother you about this stuff just because someone maybe will put the thread on the blockchain. It's not like there's a warning telling us that this would happen. It really sounds like a dumb idea. Then again, maybe they just agree with you with regards to Aztecminer. I THINK it's difficult to tell from that gif. Aztecminer can write a lot of weird stuff you regret reading, he can also be quite repetitive. On the other hand, I THINK he can be quite amusing at times, intentionally or not, he seems to have some mind-blowing ideas about just about everything, the question is really if his mind is already blown. But I THINK that's his own business and nobody else's. Just like that dancer dude you have as an avatar and which your many many many words never have touched. Speaking of repetitive, look at BJA, I mean... that guy is repetitive. We've all heard that he's upset about the block size and all, but... give me a break. On the other hand I THINK all he probably wants to do is his bit to get this thing resolved. He writes quite a lot about it, maybe he wants to intentionally bloat the blockchain to push the issue that way. If that is true then I THINK that's not ok at all. He really shouldn't create a bad situation by creating bloat. Then again we don't know if this thread will ever get on the blockchain. Who knows? But his point about "paying for blockspace" can be relevant if this thread is going on the blockchain. Do we pay rent there then? Do I have to pay? This is a question we really should look into. On the other hand, I THINK he might have been full of shit... but that doesn't mean he wasn't on to something. There are other people here who use up a lot of thread space with pictures. Especially Peonminer and Adam. I guess it's not that bad if it's only the links that will be included on the blockchain. But if all the pictures are to be stored on the blockchain then I think that's a real problem. Most of those pictures are larger than your posts, if we're talking raw data. I THINK it would make little sense to upload the thread on the blockchain without the pictures. They provide a lot of context and at times they're kind of the bread and butter of this thread. Can you imagine someone trying to read this in five thousand years and not get to see any of the pictures? It would be completely nonsensical. Anyhew, I can't really understand what all this is about. It's really difficult to know exactly what Cconvert2G36 was getting at. There is so little information in his puny little excuse of a post that it just makes me mad. Not real mad, just a little bit. There seems to be some insinuation that you yourself can be contributing to "bullshit quasi-irrelevant thread space fillers" in a way that dwarfs any effort on Aztecs side, but I THINK that's something each and every one of us will have to decide for OURSELVES.

Speaking of borrowing money, almost $1 mil opened on finex to fuel that bullgasm.

Funny how okcoin had to kill the volumizer when things started going.

Dropt was right, there goes the $1 mil Cheesy

Quote from: macsga on January 07, 2016, 06:59:28 AM

China "success" story has been developed for quite a few months now. It would be churlish to give away what happens next, but it�s clear that we're heading for glory within the cryptoland.... Roll Eyes

Hop on in panicking global economy! We've been diligently planning and adding capacity to accommodate you for years. Roll Eyes

Quote from: DaRude on January 08, 2016, 05:03:35 AM

Quote from: DieJohnny on January 08, 2016, 05:01:02 AM

Quote from: Mrpumperitis on January 08, 2016, 04:22:13 AM

can anyone get onto btce?
afaik this is the longest its ever been offline.

Nope been trying....

Was about to ask if they went full gox Huh

any news from them at all?

They provided detailed reassurance 3 hours ago.

Quote from: Richy_T on January 08, 2016, 05:38:03 AM

Quote from: ChartBuddy on January 08, 2016, 04:02:00 AM

Dat's a lot of blocks. Shocked

In case anyone is wondering about the new bits, white squares are blocks, red squares are blocks >990000 bytes, black empty squares are 1-transaction blocks. The green goo now represents average fullness not including 1 transaction blocks, the red line is inclusive of 1 transaction blocks.

Chartbuddy widget progressing along nicely. Thanks Richy_T

Quote from: mymenace on January 08, 2016, 08:07:06 AM

-snip-

love btc-e

-snip-

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 08, 2016, 11:16:35 PM

Quote from: Andre# on January 08, 2016, 07:07:17 PM

Quote from: spud21 on January 08, 2016, 06:30:45 PM

Well gentlemand is a hero and he doesn't know what a bitpay node is, and I'm only senior. Fortuitously Fatman3001 read an explanation by brg444 who said they want kill all the firstborn. Gentlemand came to the conclusion that bitpay is coming to his shack to strangle his kitten, so it must be an evil node.

Can you add to our knowledge about WTF a bitay node is?

Ok then.

"A Simple, Adaptive Block Size Limit"

https://medium.com/@spair/a-simple-adaptive-block-size-limit-748f7cbcfb75#.7m37712tl

Stephen Pair should stick to blowing untold millions and running start-ups off the cliff at the end of the runway.

Nice analogy.

BTW... do you have any insight on how Blockstream might earn back the $21 million bestowed upon them by Reid Hoffman, Khosla Ventures and Real Ventures, with investments from Nicolas Berggruen, Crypto Currency Partners, Future\Perfect Ventures, Danny Hillis, Eric Schmidt�s Innovation Endeavors, Max Levchin, Mosaic Ventures, Ray Ozzie, Ribbit Capital, Jerry Yang�s AME Cloud Ventures and several others?

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 08, 2016, 11:44:30 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 08, 2016, 11:27:25 PM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 08, 2016, 11:16:35 PM

Quote from: Andre# on January 08, 2016, 07:07:17 PM

Quote from: spud21 on January 08, 2016, 06:30:45 PM

Ok then.

"A Simple, Adaptive Block Size Limit"

https://medium.com/@spair/a-simple-adaptive-block-size-limit-748f7cbcfb75#.7m37712tl

Stephen Pair should stick to blowing untold millions and running start-ups off the cliff at the end of the runway.

My "insight" is as per all the released materials and statements by the Blockstream founders, the funding for Blockstream is basically to "keep doing what you are doing", build out the infrastructure and eventually a long term payback will inevitably arise by having all the best guys producing all the best ideas in the space. In the same way Mozilla foundation eventually profited from their browser search box ($300 million per annum from google for the default search engine setting), Blockstream is expected to create something in the long term (next 5-10 years) that will inevitably be monetised ... in the meantime, all those investors you mention are helping to secure good people working on core 'unsexy' bitcoin infrastrucure, who were otherwise unpaid volunteers, and that will also future-proof their numerous other non-Blockstream investments in the space.

I'm sure you know all this and it is about the umpteenth time I've had to explain it to the usual trolls but today I'm feeling generous, so you should bookmark this answer for the hundred other times you will beg this question in the various forums.

Phew, I'm now reassured knowing Eric Schmidt has implored his team to work diligently on making Bitcoin Core the best it can be over the next decade, then we'll talk money...

I should have just read the tag line.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 09, 2016, 12:03:40 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 08, 2016, 11:53:00 PM

-snip-
I should have just read the tag line.

Reads quite a bit like sour grapes ... didn't get the invite to the big table? ... lost a little money on some half-baked start-up ideas? ... don't really understand the tech. as well as you thought?

Don't feel bad, Open Source is a difficult minefield to navigate commercially. Open Source money is guaranteed to leave no-one unscathed coming out the other side.

Now that we're focused on the messenger, any other guesses as to my motivations? This is fun.

I've had a policy of trust no one in cryptoland, it's worked out quite nicely for me so far. My questions WRT the motivations of Blockstream's investors, their employees, and the "reference" client they control... are very much in keeping with this policy.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 09, 2016, 03:09:48 AM

-snip-
Fixed/bolded.

*Vote Blockstream^TM.

Quote from: Mrpumperitis on January 10, 2016, 12:22:59 AM

im dumping some btc over the next few days...need to hedge a bit incase btc does go down. Not dumping for fiat...gonna buy a small basket of Alts.

Maybe it should have been "the last few days". She's coiling again, gentlemen.

Quote from: rolling on January 11, 2016, 04:40:55 AM

Quote from: lottery248 on January 11, 2016, 04:29:22 AM

nothing major. Huh

would powerball jackpot fund affect bitcoin price if the funds were gone to buy bitcoin?

I was thinking I would buy ~200k bitcoin if I won so that would move the price a little.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvE84AGMWpE

Quote from: rolling on January 11, 2016, 04:50:18 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 11, 2016, 04:46:28 AM

Quote from: rolling on January 11, 2016, 04:40:55 AM

Quote from: lottery248 on January 11, 2016, 04:29:22 AM

nothing major. Huh

would powerball jackpot fund affect bitcoin price if the funds were gone to buy bitcoin?

I was thinking I would buy ~200k bitcoin if I won so that would move the price a little.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvE84AGMWpE

Still only ~20% of the Powerball winnings to buy 1% of the coins there will ever be at bargain basement prices. Still plenty of money for hookers and cocaine.

Pepper for liftoff gentlemen.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 11, 2016, 07:02:34 AM

Quote

At 2:30 this morning @petertoddbtc committed a double-spend attack on @Coinbase by buying me Reddit gold and then redirected the payment

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/40ejy8/peter_todd_with_my_doublespendpy_tool_with/

https://twitter.com/petertoddbtc/status/686362883756695553

They better publish a proof of solvency after this.

You never thought someone would order a plate of onion rings, eat them, and walk out the door? Think again...

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 11, 2016, 07:55:20 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 11, 2016, 07:14:21 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 11, 2016, 07:02:34 AM

Quote

At 2:30 this morning @petertoddbtc committed a double-spend attack on @Coinbase by buying me Reddit gold and then redirected the payment

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/40ejy8/peter_todd_with_my_doublespendpy_tool_with/

https://twitter.com/petertoddbtc/status/686362883756695553

They better publish a proof of solvency after this.

You never thought someone would order a plate of onion rings, eat them, and walk out the door? Think again...

whoulda thunk huh? Roll Eyes

if it can be broken it will be broken, it's the mechanism by which an anti-fragile system evolves.

Coinbase has a deficient business model based on fictional technology that doesn't exist, the sooner they find out the better, they should be thanking petertodd.

Of course it could be done, it's been that way all along. Chief Scientist Viacoin just made it a little easier. Before he makes it really easy.

For larger amounts Coinbase waits for 3 confirmations. It's just like a restaurant, the majority of honest customers will pick up the slack on the dine'n'dashers. If the burden of fraud is too great, they'll eliminate the option.

Peter and you thinking this is a surprise is the "whoulda thunk it" part.

Quote from: yefi on January 11, 2016, 08:34:50 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on January 10, 2016, 09:30:24 PM

At the moment, seems all good to me.. and I see no major censorship, as seems to be implied by several posters who are asserting their opposition to recent administrator banning actions...

Sure, if you can stomach all of the ad campaigns and all of the disingenuous posts they generate.

So... you think price may raise to $500 tonight? or tomorrow than?

Quote from: Fatman3001 on January 12, 2016, 09:25:31 PM

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/40og2w/gavin_andresen_and_industry_leaders_join_together/

https://github.com/bitcoinclassic/website/issues/3

Edit: Notice BW and Antpool.

Might explain why antpool is down atm.

Core supporters are criminals.

Whoa, no wonder ~~Pravda~~ bitcoin.org slammed the lever into reverse today.

Wheels are turning... I just had a slight tingle of bullishness crawl up my spine.

Quote from: Fakhoury on January 12, 2016, 08:46:19 PM

Quote from: ImI on January 12, 2016, 08:39:55 PM

https://bitcoinclassic.com/

soon we will have x different versions of Bitcoin. Bitcoin Classic, Bitcoin Real, Bitcoin Original, you name it.

honestly, better expect double digits and keep your wallets synced!

I doubt this "alt-bitcoin" will have enough consensus to be adopted.

Fakhoury has doubts guise... Shocked

Notice the names there, their percentages... Antpool, BW, BTCC... Methinks they're not pleased about being steamrolled by their side chain competition... offered complex rewrites of the network (leaving a possible majority of nodes in a SPV+ mode) with softforks giving them 0.6MB equiv gain, vs a simple two line upgrade of what we already know works.

If Bitcoin does hardfork away from Blockstream Core, you'll have plenty of warning and time before you need to upgrade your software.

If it really makes you fume with rage seeing Bitcoin grow to support 5.2tps vs 2.7... I'm sure someone will release a client with a reduced difficulty and maybe another proof of work, but don't be butthurt if the "alt-bitcoin" slur is turned back on you, friend.

The day Mircea executes his "attack" of dumping all his Bitcoin for Cripplecoins may be the buying op of a lifetime.
popcorn.gif

Quote from: ImI on January 13, 2016, 01:17:24 AM

Quote from: podyx on January 13, 2016, 01:15:10 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 13, 2016, 01:09:17 AM

Quote from: podyx on January 13, 2016, 01:07:21 AM

Quote from: brg444 on January 13, 2016, 01:03:54 AM

This drop is brought to you by the good folks at Bitcoin Classic. Cool

Hopefully ya'll enjoy being hard forked into double digits prices Kiss

What is Bitcoin Classic?

https://bitcoinclassic.com/

So basically the fork we've been waiting on? Why is that a bad thing?

Because forks, especially controversial ones, can mean trouble.

75% of the last 1000 mined blocks to activate means the remaining 25% will switch sides very fast or be left trying to mine worthless coins at an extreme difficulty. This is how Bitcoin was designed to resolve disputes.

If it never hits 75%, nothing happens. Now you know.

(Agree that Marshall Long is a bit of a douche... but Antminer, BW, OKcoin, BTCC? etc etc are pretty serious endorsements)

Quote from: AlexGR on January 13, 2016, 01:29:17 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 13, 2016, 01:25:27 AM

(Agree that Marshall Long is a bit of a douche... but Antminer, BW, OKcoin, BTCC? etc etc are pretty serious endorsements)

And what exactly are they endorsing? Changing a constant to 2MB?

The only people who can seriously do development and maintenance work are core devs. Not bitpay, or coinbase, or the miners. Anyone can set the constant to whatever value and say "this is bitcoin xt, unlimited, classic" etc.

You really think that all people capable of developing Bitcoin are on Blockstream's payroll? That doesn't sound very promising for our decentralized, trustless network.

The Core devs had a chance and a clear endorsement by miners to start planning a hardfork after Hong Kong. They ignored it and offered to shoehorn in segwit with a soft fork to gain 0.6MB, with NO hardfork in the cards at all for the foreseeable future, and with the added side "benefit" of knocking possibly a majority of current nodes to SPV+ mode. Some miners didn't like that, this is how they demonstrate their disapproval.

If Core devs can't stand being second guessed by the free market... this is the way the free market could gently show them the door. If it never hits 75%, they have nothing to worry about and were right all along. It would be a clear vote of confidence in their chosen direction, a win-win.

Quote from: AlexGR on January 13, 2016, 02:08:29 AM

Bitcoin mining is more like a cartel rather than a free market. When 4-5 people have supermajority, it's an issue.

A little different when these 4-5 people are backed by thousands who contribute hashes to them, and will move their hashes if they vehemently disagree with their decisions.

In development, we have even fewer people with permanent veto power to block any change involving a hardfork, because consensus. Oh, and these people happen to have formed a company, and have been given $21 mil to build a profit seeking business that can provide the medicine for a disease that they incubated... an issue indeed.

Our gracious politburo has deemed this information unfit for your consumption.

https://archive.is/UsUH3

Summarily deleted.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on January 14, 2016, 01:15:53 AM

-snip-
THEREFOR: We will hit the limit and have a network congestion failure. The price will crash. It is almost inevitable now. The only question is when. My best guess is two months.

THEREFOR we are fucked.

Hitting the cap and negating use cases for the network isn't a fireworks explosion, we've been over this. It's a slow bleed away of utility. Some "store of value because reasons� people", some illicit commerce, some off chain speculation, will all still be around to a degree...

It may take years to fully squander the first mover advantage to other alternatives. Blockstream may hope that alternative is them, and they need Bitcoin to still function as a settlement layer...

See, it's not as bad as it could be.

If you still have any concerns, please consult the roadmap.

Moderators are standing by to assist you.

Quote from: BitUsher on January 14, 2016, 02:26:43 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 14, 2016, 02:18:17 AM

Blockstream may hope that alternative is them, and they need Bitcoin to still function as a settlement layer...

I keep hearing these insinuations that Blockstream is going to control the payment channel layer (LN) . Do you guys really think that LN isn't going to be open source and available for any node to to compete with Blockstream settlement nodes with? Do you really believe that any of us will bother touching any payment channel that isn't open source?

Did I say LN? I can think of 21 million reasons that there will be more solutions than just open source pre-paid payment channels.

Quote from: BitUsher on January 14, 2016, 02:48:01 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 14, 2016, 02:36:24 AM

Did I say LN? I can think of 21 million reasons that there will be more solutions than just open source pre-paid payment channels.

Sure, Like their product "Liquid"? Why Shouldn't hard work and innovation be rewarded whether its with Blockstream product liquid, Coinbases products like shift , or any other company. We all benefit from these competing products.

Not necessarily like Liquid, but yes, proprietary software and networks where money can actually be made. Like Coinbase, their investors want ROI. Unlike Coinbase, their employees and founders (currently) have and are exercising the power to veto any hardfork, even a bump to 2MB.

Quote

Your fears are completely misguided as you assume some sort of control or lock-in with developers or code when the reality is that we can go completely down the rabbit hole of core with LN framework and easily revert back to an XT model. The greater concern should be on the centralization of ASIC manufacturing, node count and Pool mining.

Who is this we you're talking about? Soft forks don't require consensus. 60% of current nodes are not running the latest Core release. Do you know what happens to the (real, verifying) node count when segwit happens? The free market will handle ASIC and Pool concentration, as it always has. It may concentrate further, it may not... not to be "fixed" by the central Core politburo and their apparatchiks.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 14, 2016, 03:23:47 AM

Quote from: Richy_T on January 14, 2016, 03:12:48 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 14, 2016, 02:36:05 AM

big blockers seem too well acquainted with random bad luck ... or maybe they are just losers who don't know squat?

Weak. Try harder.

yawn .. you guys are just a bunch of jealous blowhards who've never actually produced anything, except lots of noise and fanboy hero worship for the Gav and Hearn the huckster.

same old, same here it seems ... why bother dropping in to listen to broken record troll-hards?

We've had news, you can now add Jeff Garzik to the list of hucksters.

https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/687352747465830400

Quote from: BitUsher on January 14, 2016, 03:27:44 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 14, 2016, 03:05:39 AM

Unlike Coinbase, their employees and founders (currently) have and are exercising the power to veto any hardfork, even a bump to 2MB.

You are very confused. Core cannot force the miners , nodes, processors, and users what code to use. The veto is completely within our power. All I have to do I download a copy of Bitcoin XT or unlimited and I vetoed Core. A 12 year old child can create and alternative implementation and we can collectively veto core. Core only has power insomuch as we give them power and it can be taken away quickly in a moments notice.

I'll forego the introductory insult. You're right in explicit terms, I was speaking in practical terms. What you describe may be exactly what will happen, aside from the 12 year old child part and swapping an overambitious BIP101 with BIP102.

Quote

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 14, 2016, 03:05:39 AM

Soft forks don't require consensus.

They require consensus with adoption. If you don't upgrade you don't adopt segwit.

And your former full node is knocked back to SPV+ mode without your request or permission.

Quote

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 14, 2016, 03:05:39 AM

Do you know what happens to the (real, verifying) node count when segwit happens?

Sure... but let me guess a few of your disagreements. Soft forks are voluntary but than the old nodes won't get the lower fees and won't be able to verify properly new segwit txs making them obsolete. A soft fork forces nodes to upgrade to insure they get bug fixes otherwise they will be vulnerable.

Let me address these two concerns:

1) The tx fees comparing now to after segwit on non-upgraded nodes will remain the same unless a fee event occurs which is the exact same scenario with or without segwit. If you don't like the bundling of the other features with capacity improvement than that is what other implementations are for.

2) We are discussing open source code here, which means we can take all the bugfixes and backpatch them to previous versions so they remain segwit free and secure.

A hard fork is the honest way to force nodes to upgrade. A soft fork is a way to break them and suggest they upgrade.

1) Segwit isn't optional for a full node. And it gives only 0.4 to 0.75MB gain for a full bushel of complexity via an opcode hack.

2) We are talking open source code here where miners can get the modest increase in max_block_size they requested without all the extra "benefits", Classic.

Quote from: BitUsher on January 14, 2016, 04:16:02 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 14, 2016, 03:46:56 AM

How does a softfork break old nodes? The bugs exist with or without the new changes and one can backport any bugfixes to previous versions that don't want new features like segwit. Yes, segwit is indeed optional for full nodes, non-upgraded full nodes will continue to work and verify non segwit tx's,if and when you are the last non-segwit node than that is one of the most ideal examples of consensus we can have, where 99.99% of other nodes have switched over and you are the only one remaining , much fairer and flexible than a hard fork with lower consensus numbers.

You have a strange definition of bugs. After segwit activation, formerly full nodes not running the latest release will not be verifying signatures on witness data. Period. Full stop.

Quote

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 14, 2016, 03:46:56 AM

2) We are talking open source code here where miners can get the modest increase in max_block_size they requested without all the extra "benefits", Classic.

Are you suggesting the miners aren't excited about the features and benefits of segwit and are instead merely salivating over the extra tx fees from a mere 0-0.3 MB in capacity increase that classic is possibly proposing above segwit?

Hopefully you are not suggesting that only the variable maxBlockSize needs to be changed for Classic either- CVE-2013-2292.

I'm not sure how excited miners are about segwit. If you have any statements or acknowledgements from Pool admins stating that they support segwit as a solution well into 2017 I'm open to read them, is eloipool still a thing?

My personal opinion is that segwit would be cleaner, more thoroughly analyzed, and be better prepared for if released without the time crunch and soft fork provisos. In the end, my opinion doesn't matter much, that's why I bitch on these fora so much. The only influence I have is my node, a few rigs, my funds, and my words. Classic seems to be more collaborative in the way they approach miners and users about these issues... I agree that they are not fully fleshed out in terms of the distant future, but collaboration is messier than dictatorship, and this is the important issue of the day... imo.

jtoomim goes into more detail here: https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3ygu5d/blocksize_consensus_census/cydpcob

Quote from: BitUsher on January 14, 2016, 05:17:40 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 14, 2016, 04:58:56 AM

You have a strange definition of bugs. After segwit activation, formerly full nodes not running the latest release will not be verifying signatures on witness data. Period. Full stop.

Yes this is what I explained, but they will still verify tx from non-upgraded nodes.
The bugs I refer to are in reference to concerns of some that may prefer security patches and not some features like segwit /or RBF.

So... half-broken, fine, not a distinction that matters to me. Can you give a "for example" on the security patches nodes want besides not being half-broken?

Quote

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 14, 2016, 04:58:56 AM

but collaboration is messier than dictatorship, and this is the important issue of the day... imo.

jtoomim goes into more detail here: https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3ygu5d/blocksize_consensus_census/cydpcob

https://bitcoinclassic.consider.it/ gives the appearance of consensus forming through democracy but in the end there is little difference as jtoomim or gavin has veto power or can push through a change the community disagrees with -

The only real democracy in Bitcoin is measured in PH/s, other elements of the economy may influence them, and rightly so... their business depends on it.

Quote from: BitUsher on January 14, 2016, 06:05:11 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 14, 2016, 05:57:23 AM

Can you give a "for example" on the security patches nodes want besides not being half-broken?

Small sample..

   #6438 2531438 openssl: avoid config file load/race
   #6571 100ac4e libbitcoinconsensus: avoid a crash in multi-threaded environments
   #6694 834e299 [QT] fix thin space word wrap line break issue
   #6703 1cd7952 Backport bugfixes to 0.11
   #6750 5ed8d0b Recent rejects backport to v0.11
   #6769 71cc9d9 Test LowS in standardness, removes nuisance malleability vector.
   #6789 b4ad73f Update miniupnpc to 1.9.20151008
   #6785 b4dc33e Backport to v0.11: In (strCommand == �tx�), return if AlreadyHave()
   #6795 4dbcec0 net: Disable upnp by default

I would rather have all those issues than be half broken. Simple fix for upnp... don't allow it.

Imagine if "we" could be not broken and have bug fixes at the same time, plus 2MB blocks, why didn't anyone think of this...?

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 14, 2016, 07:20:12 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 14, 2016, 06:33:19 AM

Imagine if you could code (or pay someone to code) you could actually fix all those things you perceive as being broken, make changes to your hearts content ... instead of sitting on the sidelines, back-seat driving, monday morning quarter-backing and generally sounding like a pompous know-it-all.

Why didn't you think of that?

Thankfully, like-minded people... investors, coders, miners, and exchanges are beginning to coalesce around something I agree with. Our mutual self interests align... Imagine that... could it be possible?

Quote from: brg444 on January 16, 2016, 12:14:45 AM

"Raise the block size!" they said.

"We have consensus!" they said.

"Market is going to rally around big blocks" they said.

welp Cheesy

Your tears are delicious.

I saw you rage tweeting BitFury earlier... Cry

No matter, "socioeconomic consensus" doesn't need miners... amirite?

The tide is turning against the Blockstream takeover. Can't say I didn't try to warn you. Undecided

You've been bootlicking the wrong powers. Bitcoin routes around attempts to steer and control it, about time you learned that. The control you believed they possessed is slipping like sand out of a clenched and mailed fist.

I'm salivating about buying up a piece of Mircea's ~~suicide~~ short this spring. I would try to buy some of your rage dumping too... but your join date probably makes that goal moot.

Kiss

Blockstream Core... #REKT

Quote from: Fatman3001 on January 16, 2016, 01:08:33 AM

Quote from: Lauda on January 16, 2016, 01:00:46 AM

Stop defending him, he does not deserve it.

"Strong minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, weak minds discuss people."

Lauda's just worried now that it appears he's been bootlicking all the petty tyrants and would-be technocrats that have impeded Bitcoin's destiny. The internet remembers.

The tide is turning tho, the free market incentives upon which Bitcoin was built might just work... BitFury, Bitmain, BW, KnC have taken the gloves off and are asserting their right of vote by hashrate. Wonder who's next? Makes me more bullish than ever for the long term.

Short term, it's gonna be a little messy, lots of rage dumping and gnashing of teeth. When we emerge at the other end of the tunnel though... it may turn out to be a glorious spring day, with the summer halving right around the corner

Quote from: becoin on January 16, 2016, 01:33:42 AM

Quote from: rdnkjdi on January 16, 2016, 01:23:47 AM

From what I can tell BitcoinClassic has 50% commitment and they're about to add another 23 ...

From what I can tell there will be a ClassicBitcoin fork. Hope every want-free-bitcoin-space idiot will join them.

R u guise planning on forking at the same time to lower the difficulty and change the PoW for your <25% cripple chain side?

Quote from: ImI on January 16, 2016, 01:40:22 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 16, 2016, 01:25:00 AM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on January 16, 2016, 01:08:33 AM

Quote from: Lauda on January 16, 2016, 01:00:46 AM

Stop defending him, he does not deserve it.

"Strong minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, weak minds discuss people."

Lauda's just worried now that it appears he's been bootlicking all the petty tyrants and would-be technocrats that have impeded Bitcoin's destiny. The internet remembers.

The tide is turning tho, the free market incentives upon which Bitcoin was built might just work... Bitfury, Bitmain, BW, KnC have taken the gloves off and are asserting their right of vote by hashrate. Wonder who's next? Makes me more bullish than ever for the long term.

Short term, it's gonna be a little messy, lots of rage dumping and gnashing of teeth. When we emerge at the other end of the tunnel though... it may turn out to be a glorious spring day, with the summer halving right around the corner

Maybe, but i dont wanna loose the core devs. They are important as fuck! Just with Gavin and two, three others we wont be able to move on, we have to integrate them into the eventual 2MB version. If they fail to build peace it will get very difficult...

Still an open source project, they are welcome to contribute to Classic, or even update Core to be compliant with the network consensus. If any of them #ragequit and refuse to work with network consensus because they can't have it all their way, we're better off without them.

Quote from: becoin on January 16, 2016, 01:47:48 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 16, 2016, 01:38:06 AM

Quote from: becoin on January 16, 2016, 01:33:42 AM

Quote from: rdnkjdi on January 16, 2016, 01:23:47 AM

From what I can tell BitcoinClassic has 50% commitment and they're about to add another 23 ...

From what I can tell there will be a ClassicBitcoin fork. Hope every want-free-bitcoin-space idiot will join them.

R u guise planning on forking at the same time to lower the difficulty and change the PoW for your <25% cripple chain side?

We'll stick to the main bitcoin branch guise. I thought after XT altcoin fork got rekt you're planning the next one - the BitcoinClassic fork.

XT was 8MB now, going to 8GB over 20 years... miners said "no way", and with solid reasoning. Additionally, dictatorship by Mike Hearn was undesirable to them and me as well.

Classic is 2MB in 2016, growing to 4MB in 2018. This is exactly what miners wanted, and half of the hashrate has already signed on to that vision. Garzik, Gavin, and Toomim listening to miners, businesses, and the community for direction is far from a Hearn dictatorship.

Drawing an equivalence between the two just demonstrates your ignorance of the situation. You are sticking to the Blockstream Core side of the fork... I asked you how you plan to do that with less than 25% of the hashrate of Classic.

Quote from: orpington on January 16, 2016, 02:18:30 AM

Bitcoin "Classic"! What a stupid name. Logically there's nothing really classic about it. They should have spent a little more time thinking up a proper name at least.

It's called Classic because it is was inspired by Satoshi's scaling solution. And is in keeping with his vision for a Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System.

Quote from: BitUsher on January 16, 2016, 03:16:11 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 16, 2016, 02:53:44 AM

Quote from: orpington on January 16, 2016, 02:18:30 AM

Bitcoin "Classic"! What a stupid name. Logically there's nothing really classic about it. They should have spent a little more time thinking up a proper name at least.

It's called Classic because it is was inspired by Satoshi's scaling solution. And is in keeping with his vision for a Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System.

Bitcoin classic is BIP 102

Summary of differences between core+segwit and classic now -

Classic - BIP102
Effective 2MB block capacity + possibly removing RBF + possibly versionbits
5 developers maintaining

Core
Effective 1.75-2MB Block capacity
Version bits , future fraud proofs, signature pruning, simpler script updates, fixing malleability allowing future payment channels.
45 developers maintaining

Both are good.... but Classic isn't that exciting now that they decided to remove 2-4 + segwit as an option.

I must admit that you sound like a pretty reasonable person, so I'll go easy...

50% of the hashrate basically just said NACK to Core's Roadmap�.

Either the Blockstream devs and their wizards quickly alter course and are able to maintain and grow the shreds of support they still possess... or we are very likely to have a "contentious�" and quickly decided fork this spring. Out of those 45... how many do you think will #ragequit and never work on Bitcoin again because they couldn't keep 1MB and pave the way for LN and Blockstream� products?

Quote from: AZwarel on January 16, 2016, 03:40:46 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 16, 2016, 03:32:24 AM

Quote from: BitUsher on January 16, 2016, 03:16:11 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 16, 2016, 02:53:44 AM

Quote from: orpington on January 16, 2016, 02:18:30 AM

Bitcoin "Classic"! What a stupid name. Logically there's nothing really classic about it. They should have spent a little more time thinking up a proper name at least.

It's called Classic because it is was inspired by Satoshi's scaling solution. And is in keeping with his vision for a Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System.

Also, nothing stops the two group to team up after Classic forks to work together and implement the Core upgrades later into the now Classic chain. Especially after they realize they (core dev team) can be routed that easily, not like it is good -or bad-, just a fact. Consensus by the majority of the network, is not that how bitcoin developing supposedly?
So, why is that not an option? Because rage??

Nothing stops Core or anyone else from developing Bitcoin before, during, or after a fork. The market decides what direction they want to go via:

Quote from: BitUsher on January 16, 2016, 03:49:41 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 16, 2016, 03:32:24 AM

49% of the hashing power said "Ack" to to the idea of 2MB(which segwit essentially does). They are still all running core. We cannot assume their intentions towards acking Bitcoin classic 2MB until they actually change their code. My guess is there will be some consensus made between Core and Classic or some of that hashing power will just except Core + segwit if it gets rolled out ontime and merely acked classic because they wanted to reach consensus and move forward and would be happy with either classic or core + segwit.

If you have evidence that those miners oppose segwit and simply want BIP102 without segwit than please let me know.

I personally would be happy with either proposal , but am slightly inclined to core for obvious technical reasons. Can you explain to me why BIP102 is technically better than core + segwit?

You honestly think these miners would do this [endorse Classic]... if they were happy about the roadmap�? Look what it did to the price today... they are in it for the long term, even willing to take a huge hit in the price today to secure a more certain and prosperous tomorrow.

Some elements of segwit are likely to be introduced if their benefits outweigh the costs of complexity, and with the clarity/cleaness of a hard fork, the market will control the introduction and timing of such a solution.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 16, 2016, 04:12:01 AM

Annnnnd....I'm back. 72 hours in angsty exile and you godless monsters! Look what you've done!!

Confession: My deep sense of isolation drove me into the hoary orange arms another forum. Undecided

Thanks ~~Obama Blockstream~~ Mike!

There's no drama like internet nerd drama.

Quote from: BitUsher on January 16, 2016, 04:10:23 AM

Most are just frustrated at the infighting , politics, bikeshedding , and lack of consensus. I seriously doubt it has anything to do with the roadmap. They want an increase like everyone else.

Yep, I often stick a middle finger in the face of my "friends" too.

You need to wake up and smell the revolution. Fence sitting can be painful.

heheh, pulled a rabbit out of a hat there adam, well done Cheesy

Ugh, the cockr0ach is talking sense again... I'm outta here. Tongue

... This week in Stolfi's utopia.

In the grand experiment of Bitcoin, one involving a large number of human participants and for a variety of reasons... expecting only the right people being involved for the right reasons is ridiculous.

A tool has been created. What the tool enables, where that leads, and how, is up for history to decide. I doubt Satoshi was ignorant of this fact when he released it into the wild.

I'm sure his conscience will have an easier go of it than Oppenheimer's.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 18, 2016, 04:27:51 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 18, 2016, 03:47:24 AM

A tool has been created. What the tool enables, where that leads, and how, is up for history to decide. I doubt Satoshi was ignorant of this fact when he released it into the wild.

I'm sure his conscience will have an easier go of it than Oppenheimer's.

i think it was well known that Oppenheimer was a psychopath that likely didn't have a conscience ... yet a remarkable mind never-the-less.

The guy that quoted the Bhagavad Gita...

Psychopath confirmed.

Quote from: adamstgBit on January 19, 2016, 07:38:19 PM

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on January 19, 2016, 07:33:24 PM

Core devs will act when they absolutely have to. Surely they won't risk losing out purely through ignorance & refusal to change.

its starting to feel like if they don't do somthing fast, their opinion will be irrelevant.
they really need to commit to some kind of plan with a time frame at this point.

Hello [Bitcoin User]:

It sounds like you might not be very technical, and may have been misled by soundbites.

That's OK, the Core Team of Bitcoin is technical, and have discovered that a 2MB block limit would be an extreme blow to decentralization and censorship resistance. Verification time scales quadratically to size and there is no known or conceived way to stop someone from making a 2MB block that will take 10 minutes to verify, thus destroying Bitcoin.

Bitcoin is immune from government and corporate influence today, and very technical people are working around the clock to keep it that way. Conspiracy theories about nefarious profit and control motives of the Core Technicians have been promulgated by non-technical people [Big Banks], don't listen to them.

Core Technicians have come up with a time frame and a plan. It's unfortunate that someone [Big Banks], has kept that from you. All your concerns and questions are answered here: in roadmap.

Kind Regards.

Your patience is appreciated while coders write code.

Either Loaded Wink

is back... or his reddit account was compromised...

He's talking about this...

Quote from: brg444 on January 20, 2016, 04:35:38 AM

Quote

[23:26] <BlueMatt> thats probably still really tight, but I'd say at least a year
[23:27] <wangchun> BlueMatt: I agree
[23:27] <wangchun> Then we are talking something not happen until 2017

CONSENSUS IS FORMING

FORK CLASSIC

#REKT

But neglects to give what Chun said earlier. Cheesy

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on January 20, 2016, 08:12:01 AM

-snip-
It is like the Captain planning to "defeat" a sailors mutiny by rowing out with the First Mate in a small lifeboat, and declaring it to be the real ship.
-snip-

I might steal this one. Cheesy

Here's mine from another thread:

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 20, 2016, 07:18:30 AM

This is analogous to a negotiation... where you [greg&luke] place a loaded pistol on the table facing the other participants [miners] before you ask them for an answer. Reeks of desperation.

So now that there's rumblings of Blockstream "capitulating" with an empty promise for 2017... are you guise gonna let me sell some above $450 for the 3rd time in 2 months??

Not surprised that cripplecoiners can't discern the difference between Jonathan Toomim and his stoner brother Michael... oh wait... it's just a smear tactic by association... gotcha.

Software coming out at the end of the month... the DDoS'ing should be pretty epic!

Should also be interesting to see what Loaded has to say tomorrow, if he says anything at all.

Choo Choo Gentlemen. To 450 and slightly beyond!

Quote from: brg444 on January 21, 2016, 01:54:18 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 21, 2016, 01:50:17 AM

What a douche.

Core prevails. Market is going to rally.

You're gonna stop posting.

Thanks Berg.

For all that you've done to for Bitcoin... since 2014. Kiss

Quote from: ImI on January 21, 2016, 02:10:22 AM

no "empty promise" if you release the HF now and it activates it self at 01-01-2017

Cool, just in time for the halving volume... Undecided

HF is not released now... excuse me if I don't take their pronouncements as seriously as I used to. Especially if they haven't even made the pronouncement.

https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/41sl3t/daily_discussion_wednesday_january_20_2016/cz5tn13

[MySides.jpg]

Quote from: smooth on January 21, 2016, 05:28:42 AM

The sky will stay up there. You can put the umbrella down now.

I keep trying to tell him. Kid has rocks in his head or something. Undecided

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 14, 2016, 02:18:17 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on January 14, 2016, 01:15:53 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 21, 2016, 05:56:30 AM

-snip-
It is the long term economic model of a blockchain secured by fees that the ecosystem needs to observe and learn about, sooner rather later.

Yup, and I can't imagine a better time to do it than with 25 BTC reward blocks.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 21, 2016, 06:49:58 AM

In other news totally OT ... looks like the found evidence for Nibiru Shocked

http://www.caltech.edu/news/caltech-researchers-find-evidence-real-ninth-planet-49523

purported home of the lizard queen and her people.

And lo! There was much rejoicing among buttcoiners for many years after. Cheesy

Quote

"For the first time in over 150 years, there is solid evidence that the solar system's planetary census is incomplete."

Pretty cool tho

Toomim on wechat (I think). Gives a little more insight to what has happened, and what he thinks, agree or disagree... worth a read if you can handle it... loooong.

http://pastebin.com/B8YQr5TQ

Quote from: Richy_T on January 23, 2016, 12:45:18 AM

Quote from: biggus dickus on January 23, 2016, 12:38:42 AM

Could the dump have anything to do with Bitstamp and Btc-e getting blocked by Russian ISPs? It's unsettling when a country starts clamping down on

It's the full-blockalypse (did I get it right this time?). We hit full blocks and all those in control could do was to toe the ground a little and promise us a partial solution in 2017. The shitstorm that will be the halving without more block capacity is starting to be priced in. More to come.

Expect down until a solution is enacted.

The recent rise was part of a pump & dump. They knew what they were doing.

Full disclosure: Today was my last day at my previous place and I am well on my way to merrydom.

Cheers Richy.

Nice graphs you put out btw, thanks.

I've been snooping around 8btc.com with google translate, interesting to see what our chinese brethren are thinking, cute avatars too. Cheesy

Keep choochin' boys.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 23, 2016, 01:53:51 AM

^Teehee

Quote from: JorgeStolfi on January 23, 2016, 01:42:39 AM

Quote from: tomothy on January 22, 2016, 05:51:55 PM

http://www.coindesk.com/blockstream-ceo-bitcoin-industry-creating-toxic-environment-for-developers/
Thoughts?

Even worse:

SF Bitcoin Dev Meetup Co-Organizer gives Gavin Andresen and Jeff Garzik 24 hrs to renounce support for Bitcoin Classic or else face smear campaign

I like Gavin and Jeff a lot. But I've come to the sort of shaky conclusion that the threat of a contentious hard fork is the ultimate stress-test. I really think they should stop now. Undecided

Your difficulty is in believing the line that a "contentious�" hard fork is strange or bad. It's how the network fucking WORKS. Of course there is a governance problem... a worrying % of bitcoiners have been sold the idea that there is some kind of power structure or security staff to appeal to in Bitcoin. Fortunately there is, but their votes are counted in PH/s. Their business and future depends on both the success and security of the network + their customers and clients not dumping their ever more useful coins on the market.

The sooner you disabuse yourself of this silly notion, the better.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 23, 2016, 02:19:16 AM

Isn't this when full nodes and miners were basically the same thing? Hasn't everything changed now that the cartels are calling the shots?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=532.msg6306#msg6306

Quote from: rocks on January 23, 2016, 03:41:16 AM

Quote from: sAt0sHiFanClub on January 22, 2016, 09:53:45 PM

poor Austin...

Quote

�I know a number of Blockstream people are frustrated by people who aren�t discussing things with them, talking to other media outlets

have you asked theymos what might be the problem? Just sayin, like.

Hory Sheet.That drop. Shocked

I am currently serving a 30 day ban on /r/bitcoin

My offence? I replied to Maxwell to counter some ridiculous claims he was making.

Blockstream is not interested in discussing anything with anyone, and openly censors people who do not back them 100%. Cry me a river, they can go pound sand for all I care

If anyone was wondering why the same 10-15 posters on r/bitcoin seem to be all in agreement... Sad

Quote from: Adrian-x on January 23, 2016, 03:53:57 AM

-snip-
(digital influencer) budget ran dry
-snip-

Related?

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 23, 2016, 05:29:16 AM

no, so stupidly wrong and venal it is hard to imagine ... Blockstream have been advertising for Dev evangelist for ~12 months

12 months! How many more do they need! Cheesy

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 23, 2016, 06:10:42 AM

Is This The Bitcoin You Want? Because This Is The Bitcoin You Have

He paid too much, first of all. But this is the arena we are entering... one of uncertainty, bidding wars, and limited capacity... while the reward is 25 BTC per block.

We ~~are~~ should be planning for tomorrow, not today.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 23, 2016, 06:41:10 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 23, 2016, 06:19:09 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 23, 2016, 06:10:42 AM

Is This The Bitcoin You Want? Because This Is The Bitcoin You Have

Ok but, it seems to be a growing number of technically-minded people agree that under any real adoption scenerio this is going to happen. What happens when we move from 3tps to 6 or 10? I don't know enough to know if SegWit is just a dirty hack or not. But they all appear to be just can-kicks towards the inevitable day when adoption outpaces blockspace and the bidding war begins.

Oh what a happy day... but you shouldn't clamp iron manacles on your legs while you're waiting for the cavalry to arrive. Sidechains... LN... SuperLN, they all need to compete on an even playing field. Miners compete for fees and block subsidy, and they choose what software they run. The exterior solutions should cater to them, not the other way around.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 23, 2016, 06:53:27 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 23, 2016, 06:49:53 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 23, 2016, 06:41:10 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 23, 2016, 06:19:09 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 23, 2016, 06:10:42 AM

Is This The Bitcoin You Want? Because This Is The Bitcoin You Have

Yep. See that sounds right, too.

I guess we have to decentralize all the things by force..

It's the only force identified by satoshi for the handling of disputes. In a sense, it's the only authorized use of force in Bitcoin.

You either believe that free market principles work, or you don't. Time, explain, sorry, etc.

The Blockstream faction and MP's chatroom squabbling over the crumbs left over from a 75--->100% hard fork, assembling two different and competing altcoins without any practical utility... could there be a more deliciously ironic outcome?

Quote from: mymenace on January 24, 2016, 09:34:35 PM

With a large amount of financial institutions running blockchains or now implementing them, does this not prove the bitcoin blockchain is a success.

the only reason to implement a technology your competitor invented is because it works

With a large amount of companies running social media networks or now implementing them, does this not prove the myspace social network is a success.(?)

the only reason to implement a technology your competitor invented is because it works

[inb4 but mah sensorship free digital hodling gold store of value for captains of industry]

Quote from: JayJuanGee on January 24, 2016, 10:17:03 PM

-snip-
Maybe, those issues are behind Ethereum, but several aspects of ethereum seem to have its own issues in regards to pump and dump sense and various small community centralization like dynamics.

You mean like a single company stonewalling a simple upgrade to tx capacity... directly and negatively affecting its competitiveness against growing alternatives?

Perhaps you should stop insulting your betters like you did to mmitech earlier and start thinking about these issues.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 24, 2016, 10:41:22 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 24, 2016, 10:27:08 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on January 24, 2016, 10:17:03 PM

Stop lying and spreading lies. People like you have totally poisoned the debate to take it out of the realm of technical into the personal attacks, smears and political, which of course was your disgusting intention all along.

There is no "single company stonewalling a simple upgrade to tx capacity" that is a blatant lie.

We disagree on this. I connected some dots and have come to the conclusion that Blockstream is highly motivated to limit native throughput and is rightly concerned about a hard fork precedent. You may say they have nothing to do with it... and I would call that a lie.

In terms of "poisonous debate"... I learned that from your friends iCE n' brg. Crucible of internet nerd drama, and all that.

I've watched my favorite thread on this board, the old gold thread, be relegated to the memory hole. I've posted in threads with poisonous titles and motives, simply because a more reasonably titled submission would be zapped to the altcoin section by our dear leader... so please... spare me your concern trolling. I made an attempt at giving the benefit of the doubt all the way through the HK "scaling" conference. When I saw the roadmap� email become Core doctrine, I saw the reality of the situation.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 24, 2016, 10:41:22 PM

If lies are all you have left to try and scare some plebes into supporting a coup to a centralised development model then you are delusional and lying to yourself also. Bitcoin Core development has many different parties contributing code, review, analysis, testing and research (NB: decentralised already)... AND they all agree to the way forward. Bigger blocks will come when they are needed, when we have widespread functioning fee selection and replacement s/ware in wallets (in case it is needed and for future-proofing), and the low-risk beneficial algorithmic capacity increases have been implemented .... just not tonight dear (as someone said).

Again the irony of being accused of supporting a coup to a centralized dev model. Multiple development teams competing for miners to run them is my goal, according to satoshi's original consensus mechanism:

You may not like it, but Bitcoin was not designed to have a monolithic set of rules imposed by a centralized dev team, especially one with a concentrated and glaring conflict of interest.

Core's contributors (I'm aware that only a fraction of them[important ones] are tied to BS) are a talented and competent group, and I hope their talents won't be lost if network consensus moves to 2MB max blocks. A petty ragequit is the only thing I can see making that happen. No way a hardfork to 2MB max inherently means Core dies or goes away.

Telling miners, businesses, and users: "Not tonight dear.", when they understand the situation and their options is not a good strategy for Core. Almost as bad a strategy as threatening miner's entire investment with PoW changes.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 25, 2016, 03:09:04 AM

Analyzing the 2013 Bitcoin fork: centralized decision-making saved the day

https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/randomwalker/analyzing-the-2013-bitcoin-fork-centralized-decision-making-saved-the-day/?utm_content=buffer4f46c&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Quote

The incident shows the necessity of an effective consensus process for the human actors in the Bitcoin ecosystem.

Collaboration between mining pools solved that one. I watched it in real time. Something tells me we will see miners collaborating towards achieving their mutual self interests again...

Quiet Stolfi

Quote from: AlexGR on January 25, 2016, 03:15:45 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 25, 2016, 02:46:42 AM

Telling miners, businesses, and users: "Not tonight dear.", when they understand the situation and their options is not a good strategy for Core.

What exactly is the situation?

Cointape.com :

Which fee should I use?

The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 30 satoshis/byte, shown in green at the top.
For the median transaction size of 369 bytes, this results in a fee of 11,070 satoshis.

That's 4 cents / 0.04 USD for urgent first block inclusion, despite "full blocks" and 55+ mb of queued transactions. I asked "why" before but I didn't get an answer. Why don't we have 5$ fees? Why is it just 4 cents?

The answer is that the blocks are full with bogus transactions of extremely low fees. The blockchain is being artificially bloated by actors who aren't really intending to pay much or at all, for making payments that they don't really need. Let's send this back and forth 500 times for the lolz, yeah... who cares... as long as it bloats the hell out of this fucker and have the idiots shout "ohhh fullblockalypse".

Do you wait until a tire explodes on your car before you get some fresher rubber on there? "It got me home just fine today."

Miners can generate a fee market by setting their own spam and dust limits... why do you hate the free market?

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 25, 2016, 03:19:02 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 25, 2016, 03:16:09 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 25, 2016, 03:09:04 AM

Quote

The incident shows the necessity of an effective consensus process for the human actors in the Bitcoin ecosystem.

Collaboration between mining pools solved that one. I watched it in real time. Something tells me we will see miners collaborating towards achieving their mutual self interests again...

Quiet Stolfi

Of course I wasn't here then. But the article suggests it was central planning by developers that saved the day. Isn't it?

Simplified: It was gavin saying roll back to the old version... miners agreed and did it. He gave them some of the faucet coins for their orphaned blocks (probably unnecessary, but generous).

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 25, 2016, 03:26:06 AM

Like how the miners just agreed and are doing it again?

Possibly, we won't know until they start mining trigger blocks. It's also possible that this is all posturing and we will just hang out until 2017 and we'll see some segwit tx's trickle in later this year.

Quote from: AlexGR on January 25, 2016, 03:36:03 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 25, 2016, 03:18:20 AM

Quote from: AlexGR on January 25, 2016, 03:15:45 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 25, 2016, 02:46:42 AM

Telling miners, businesses, and users: "Not tonight dear.", when they understand the situation and their options is not a good strategy for Core.

Do you wait until a tire explodes on your car before you get some fresher rubber on there? "It got me home just fine today."

The analogy is wrong in the sense that you position the tire explosion in the future.

If we say that the blocks are full, the tx queue is growing etc, etc, then the tire exploded. It's not an "if", right? We hit the limit. What worse can we have?

Yet, the "disaster" we are facing are 3-4cents txs. Why? Because most of the txs in the queue are spam and dust.

Miners should not even process anything under 10 cents fees. Fuck the spammers.

That's never been my position, and I admit it's a bad analogy. It is a slow bleed away of the utility of the network, allowing competing networks to gain a foothold, while miners get 25 btc per block. An artificial competitive disadvantage. There will be no fireworks, just a slow erosion of dominance, at a crucial time period in the network's fight to gain share.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 25, 2016, 03:46:55 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 25, 2016, 03:21:59 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 25, 2016, 03:19:02 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 25, 2016, 03:16:09 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 25, 2016, 03:09:04 AM

Quote

The incident shows the necessity of an effective consensus process for the human actors in the Bitcoin ecosystem.

Collaboration between mining pools solved that one. I watched it in real time. Something tells me we will see miners collaborating towards achieving their mutual self interests again...

Quiet Stolfi

Of course I wasn't here then. But the article suggests it was central planning by developers that saved the day. Isn't it?

Simplified: It was gavin saying roll back to the old version... miners agreed and did it. He gave them some of the faucet coins for their orphaned blocks (probably unnecessary, but generous).

Wrong or you intentionally lie again to rewrite history. Gavin fucked up big time then (and has done at other times).

Gavin said "the longest chain wins" which at the time was the new version 0.8 leveldb with Mike Hearn's 'bug' that would have allowed for >1MByte blocks. ( I was in IRC at the time).

Luke-Jr realised how messed up that would become and coordinated quickly with mining pools (slush in particular had to be woken up) to get the pools on the 0.8 code to roll-back onto a 0.7 version or a 0.8 version that had db fixes in it.

Interestingly that incident whereby a highly suspicious block exploited an obscure unknown behaviour in Berkeley DB to sneak in a 'bad' block (it had many transactions that triggered the database lock limit but not the blocksize limit) which Mike Hearn wrote the code for, Gavin committed to the repo would have set a precedent for developers forking off the miners over a blocksize technicality. Sound familiar? ... these guys have been at this for years.

Fair enough, I wasn't in IRC for that, and I must have gotten the wrong impression from reading forum posts.

But you are saying that it was an intentional sabotage by Gavin and Hearn? Why weren't they thrown out and ostracized after it happened?

Edit: I noticed you danced over everything else I replied to you, feel free to include that response in your response to this.

Quote from: AlexGR on January 25, 2016, 04:01:46 AM

How exactly is the network bleeding utility? It's already accommodating all its transactions plus a ton of spam for free or near free, and the rates for urgent first block inclusion are at 3-4 cents and 2-5 blocks with 1-2 cents. How lower can you go? Free?

There is no network that can sustain free txs and bloat attacks. All competitive altcoins with low fees have these fees due to low usage. If you allow free txs AND you have large or frequent blocks, you are just inviting spammers to kill your coin for zero cost.

Again, we're back to talking about planning for today vs tomorrow. You realize a solution will take some time I hope. Look at the average tx volume graph and tell me it jumped right to 1MB (because free shit army) and will immediately jump to 2MB if we add that capacity.

We simply differ on who should decide which transactions get included. I think it should be miners, you think it should be Core.

Quote from: AlexGR on January 25, 2016, 04:36:31 AM

Tell me, what will change tomorrow if you are already at the limit?

The only thing that can change is the proportion of dust/spam/bloat txs to actual transactions.

But most bigblockers don't even want to admit the situation right now and why we have the paradox of "tremendous demand", "full blocks" and ...near zero fees. They don't want to admit it's all spam that should have been cut off in the first place.

Uh? You will continue pricing out more and more transactions as they all compete for a static 2.7tps. Bleeding use cases and utility.

Quote from: AlexGR on January 25, 2016, 04:36:31 AM

Technically speaking, the block size can go up any time the devs like and the miners / exchanges can sync - but users should definitely be warned a few months ahead.

If it was up to me, I would read the spirit of what satoshi meant by "need" in terms of future increases.

I don't get the sense that satoshi meant the "needs" of the spammers to bloat the blockchain. I don't get the sense from any of his late writings (when he had seen the network getting abused) that he wanted near-free txs, max block use for peanuts, leaving every spammer getting away with spamming for nothing etc. I don't get the sense that if he was running the show today that he would see a "need" to give spammers more space.

If satoshi proposed a BIP, I feel it would probably be along the lines of increasing recommended minimum fees to reduce spam and/or simultaneously increase the block size a little - having ensured though that the extra space isn't used for attacking the network and its functionality.

Miners determine what is spam and bloat. Satoshi gave his vision of a scaled network. You might have missed it:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=532.msg6306#msg6306

Quote from: AlexGR on January 25, 2016, 04:36:31 AM

It can jump wherever it wants if a spammer wants to spam you for peanuts and you aren't penalizing him for that, or if some miners are willing to process all the crap there is for peanuts.

Miners decide to penalize spam. Not the politburo. They have the incentives and the right to determine the size and fees contained in blocks they mine. Orphan(stale) risk is very real, and they won't risk 25 or 12.5 btc to include free bloat.

Quote from: AlexGR on January 25, 2016, 04:36:31 AM

No, you want the devs to do that for you.

If we see it technically, you are seeking for a fee bypass mechanism which is a free-market intervention.

Nope. The mechanism is still the miners.

Quote from: AlexGR on January 25, 2016, 04:36:31 AM

There are two ways to examine the network right now. One is "as is" and the other "as it should". In as-is configuration, we are seeing queues when there shouldn't be queues because the avg block is at 0.62mb instead of 1mb.

The as-it-should, would be an avg block of 0.99mb.

No, blocks shortly after the previous block will be coinbase only, distorting your metric, we will never see avg. 0.99MB with a 1MB limit.

Quote from: AlexGR on January 25, 2016, 04:36:31 AM

With the as-is method, there is an extra 50%+ capacity that isn't being used because some miners aren't even interested to raise the 750kb soft limiter or are mining 0-sized blocks. Economically speaking you could say that the fees are not incentivizing them to mine the txs. So instead of the market raising fees to incentivize them to mine, we open the relief-valve-bypass where we say "fuck the miners not mining txs to the limit of 1mb" and we create artificial ...supply of space.

Nope, they can/will still set their own limits. Just without a centrally decided upper bound of 1MB.

Quote from: AlexGR on January 25, 2016, 04:36:31 AM

Next thing you know, we are at 2-4-8, because propagation sucks and increases orphan risk, a lot of miners don't even care to mine anything and we have a situation where 10-20% of the miners mine full blocks, the others don't even care. What then? Will you still say "ohhh blocks are full we need 20mb"? Will you ask devs to force miners to mine txs?

Nope, if a hypothetical eloipool decides to mine 50KB blocks, that is their right. Central planning is to be avoided, and individual pool decisions are not centrally decided.

Quote from: AlexGR on January 25, 2016, 04:36:31 AM

If I am an outside actor (like government, banks etc) I can always find a social engineering vector to create friction:

If the miners are mining crap, I will blame them for mining crap and promote some new fork that "fixes" the problem.
If the miners aren't mining much, I will blame them for not mining much and promote some new fork that "fixes" the problem.

You can try to convince miners to act (or not act!) against their own self interest, my guess is that they will refuse.

Quote from: AlexGR on January 25, 2016, 04:36:31 AM

We've seen this already with the block size crap and I have the feeling we'll see it again. The solution will always be the same: United we stand, divided we fall.

I hope to be sending transactions in the same blocks you are, regardless of an anti DoS limit set in 2010.

Quote from: peonminer on January 25, 2016, 05:45:41 AM

Core supporters be like https://youtu.be/mXYgEjFmZDw

They should be holding up 5850's, 5970's, 6970's, 6990's, and lo! the refugees from altcoinin' with their 7950's and 2-3XX's!

Quote from: AlexGR on January 26, 2016, 09:38:33 PM

Quote from: bitebits on January 26, 2016, 09:00:36 PM

With this temporary general altcoin pump, I am wondering how it is funded.

-snip-
Altcoins can serve as an effective dumping mechanism. Even a guy like satoshi could dump his 1mn coin stash in BTCC by buying 5-10 alts, and then buying BTCs. With fiat he would have to pass through some type of verification though.
-snip-

[MySides.jpg]

Quote from: AlexGR on January 26, 2016, 10:55:38 PM

Quote from: sAt0sHiFanClub on January 26, 2016, 10:08:17 PM

Quote from: AlexGR on January 26, 2016, 09:38:33 PM

Even a guy like satoshi could dump his 1mn coin stash in BTCC by buying 5-10 alts, and then buying BTCs.

You really are worried about this, aren't you?

No I'm not worried the least about satoshi moving his coins. He's not here to daytrade etc. I'm just saying how it could go down between BTC < alts > BTCC with alts as a vehicle, without even needing to pass through $$$.

What's bizarre is that you are adding an extra step. Say miners choose to fork to classic's 2MB, Core changes the PoW and lowers difficulty through their own hard fork... What's preventing an altcoin exchange from listing CoreCoins with all the other alts? (Your argument actually presupposes that they do.) The step of buying some other crap just to buy CoreCoin doesn't make any sense, you'd just sell classic bitcoin for core bitcoin directly, no? No fiat/verification required.

Quote from: AlexGR on January 26, 2016, 11:51:37 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 26, 2016, 11:04:28 PM

Quote from: AlexGR on January 26, 2016, 10:55:38 PM

Quote from: sAt0sHiFanClub on January 26, 2016, 10:08:17 PM

Quote from: AlexGR on January 26, 2016, 09:38:33 PM

Even a guy like satoshi could dump his 1mn coin stash in BTCC by buying 5-10 alts, and then buying BTCs.

You really are worried about this, aren't you?

Actually I expect that in such a scenario most exchanges will not have dual trading but will rather use an event like that as an opportunity to confiscate BTCs as their own and replace them with BTCCs. Especially if they have political reasons of siding with BTCC. So you either find a reliable dual exchange that has both BTC and BTCC (which may be hard to find or even DDOSed), or you move with alts as a vehicle of +1 step.

First, your notation is confusing, difficult to determine if BTCC means Core (with new PoW) Bitcoin, or Classic (with larger capacity) Bitcoin.

Altcoin exchanges list almost anything, even coins with market caps = to that of a mid size car. I'm 99.999% sure that the 1MB4EVA group will be large enough encourage an exchange to list CoreBTC. The ones that will allow you to deposit 5-10 obscure alts will allow you to trade CoreBTC and ClassicBTC in the event of a PoW change enabled minority fork.

Also, holdings before the fork will be valid on both chains. I fully expect some unprecedented rage dumping if Core digs in their heels and miners fork away, but I'd rather have fiat sitting on the exchange (some don't require verification for coin in/coin out) to buy the panic vs buying bags full of (even more volatile) alts to ride out the storm.

Quote from: AlexGR on January 26, 2016, 09:38:33 PM

Let's hope we never find out.

Agreed, but every day without an inch of movement from Blockstream, increases the possibility. The fact that they start bringing up PoW changes when backed into a corner gives even more weight to the idea that they would rather go to war than compromise to 2MB.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on January 27, 2016, 12:23:16 AM

That was just Luke Jr.'s way of telling you to get right with the Lord. Were you listening?

Yeah, the only things sillier than Luke-Jr's musings on how miners are disconnected from the incentives of the larger Bitcoin economy are... well, his posts on just about anything else. See: posts today about renaming Bitcoin LJR... comedy gold with near unmatched purity.

Quote from: Richy_T on January 27, 2016, 12:05:24 AM

Quote from: rebuilder on January 26, 2016, 05:47:35 PM

Quote from: Richy_T on January 26, 2016, 05:37:09 PM

There are still miners out there with old versions of the software and running the defaults. Thus, if there's not too much of a backlog, it's quite possible zero fee transactions will get included.

So if zero fee transactions are actually a problem, perhaps it is better that we do have a bit of miner centralization so we have professional miners who actually pay attention to what they are doing instead of a bunch of amateurs not acting in their rational self-interest as was supposed to happen.

Don't amateurs mainly hash for pools? It seems hard to believe there's any significant hashrate operated by hobbyists who actually run their own bitcoind for mining.

Good point. And mainly so I think. In fact, some of the offenders seem to be large pools. Antpool and slush appear to be still mining with a 750000 soft limit so it would be interesting to see if they were mining 0 fee transactions also.

Antpool has two blocks over 900000 in the last hour so...

Also, priority hasn't been completely killed off yet.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 27, 2016, 02:20:25 AM

Quote from: Morecoin Freeman on January 27, 2016, 02:00:58 AM

Nothing is happening...

... time to load up again, I tell you this only once.

Never again marcus. Angry

If you can handle the sub-par production quality, the roundtable put on by BitFury in miami is worth a watch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJMI928Ihsc&t=11m22s

Hard to make investment decisions without knowing the overall lay of the land, and how that impacts our future travels.

Quote from: shmadz on January 28, 2016, 04:33:49 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on January 28, 2016, 04:01:02 AM

Who has been holding from $502, $475, $465, and $428?

When are you gonna sell? at $350? 300? 200?

Price can't go up because transaction volume can't go up. It's that simple, so unless you know about some secret deal between core, nodes and miners to increase capacity, enjoy watching the value of your holdings slowly deteriorate.

You're such a douche.

QED level retorts, in tha house. #R3KT

Quote from: JayJuanGee on January 28, 2016, 05:00:42 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on January 28, 2016, 04:01:02 AM

You are a fucking jerk when you spin and threaten with your exaggerations.

The price is up and down and up and down.. but mostly up, especially in the past year, and you remind me of some playground bully who is attempting to mislead with spin and trying to take away the marbles.

HODL your marbles people....

hahahahaha... Cheesy

Hodl and buy more marbles... dollar cost average, and things should continue to progress with bitcoin... in the meantime, including this year is likely going to be decent for BTC prices, whether you already had coins or if you are buying in the $300s, $400s or $500s.

Actually, I'm not sure if there are too many people who are newbies reading this thread... but just in case, HODL... and buy.

Quote from: Fatman3001 on January 28, 2016, 09:25:05 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on January 28, 2016, 09:16:23 AM

I'm smarter than you. If you don't agree, keep pumping and prove me wrong. If you can.

Yeap, that cold storage bag gettin' him a little agitated. Cheesy

Quote from: billyjoeallen on January 28, 2016, 09:36:57 AM

You mean the cold storage I bought @ $10? Yeah, I'm really agitated it's currently worth 3600% more than I paid for it.

I don't care if I'm the bad guy. Somebody has to be or the story is really boring. If it doesn't scale, my coins are for sale (at the right price, of course).

Opportunity cost... the frustration is not alien to me, ~~friend~~.

Edit: Your southern charm's a bit much. Undecided

♫ People don't fear the creeper. ♬

You hear that sucking sound?

You gonna let your lunch get eaten by... etherbutters??! Angry

Quote from: wachtwoord on January 31, 2016, 02:07:54 PM

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on January 31, 2016, 05:53:14 AM

The $7/tx subsidy only illustrates how ridiculous the coffees-on-the-blockchain idea is, and how critical it is that BTC become high-powered money rather than yet another retail payment rail.

Those four tps are the most precious rare things in existence. The ability to store and/or transfer value quickly, securely, and without permission is unprecedented. A gigawatt is a small price to pay for the provision of such a modern miracle.

It's adorable you think Honey Badger cares about ignorant Gavinista fuckwit ramblings and desires for a contentious hard fork and governance coup.

Please take your Negative Nancy 'zomg Bitcoin is GOING TO DIEEEEE WITHOUT 2MB RIGHT MEOW' bullshit over to BitcoinObituaries.com.

Posts like this give reminds me we have (some) intelligent people left on the forum. Thank you

Posts like this give reminds me why we have vastly fewer intelligent people left on ~~the~~ this forum.

The one island of intelligence, the old gold thread, was committed to the memory hole for grievous thought crimes� for your protection. Let's admit it, they just didn't jive with a forum filled with sig ad penny farmers, boot lickers, and budding central planners.

~The technical consens-o-tron begins to emit a soothing glow, its speaker crackles with static before a voice begins to come through�~

Grok.

Grok.

User, miner, business� have you begun to Grok the Ethos?
Things are desirable because they are expensive.
Central control is censorship resistance.
Meritorious Monarchy
Dissenting opinions are a sign of disloyalty and fragility.
1MB is a holy number. Changing it = Changing 21 million coins
Segwit is not a change, your node won't even know it happened.
Soft Fork = Safe Fork
Do you want loss of funds?
Do you Cypherpunk?
Do you write Code? [To have it promptly ignored/broken by Wizards]
Do you central plan?
Conflict of Interest is only a conflict if you won't shut up about it.
Stagnation = Growth
Competition is a Sin.
Altcoins do not exist.
Techno Experts are expert.
The price is rising, and will continue to rise as we ascend to the Moon at 2.7 tps.
Hub and Spoke [Peer 2 Peer]
Vaporware is Complete, and is already accepted by the market.
Have you REKT a Gavin today?

Trust Everyone�

~message repeats~

Quote from: liquidiser on January 31, 2016, 07:08:29 PM

The blocks are full again. I have been waiting a hell of a long time for a single confirmation. It took an hour to find one block, then the next few blocks afterwards were all full so my transaction's still in limbo. Until somebody fixes this I don't think the price will moon.

Shhhh, friend.

Sounds like you don't like the smell of sweet, sweet success and rapidly increasing competitive advantage.

Bitcoin is high powered Central Bank reserve monies. Poors may use dog-coin.

~Moderators are standing-by to provide assistance with your technical consens-o-tron.~

Quote from: Karartma1 on January 31, 2016, 07:41:37 PM

Blocks full with no stress test seem only good to me, I don't like the price movement lately. That's a concern.

Yeap, it's not a stress test now, it's just stress. Feels good man. Pay up suckas, and grok my ethos. When we get to $7 per tx we're golden, and that's a sure thing because no competition.

http://getmonero.org

Quote

Quote from: CuntChocula on February 01, 2016, 02:06:41 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 01, 2016, 12:50:26 AM

...
How does Participating in a signature campaign arise to the level of desparation? About two months ago I started participating in various signature campaigns, which seems to be very useful in obtaining a few bitcoins for free, and I really doubt that it has materially affected the contents of my posts.

Dunno. Has that sour stench of failure, that feel when a 90s shitbox (something burgundy, maybe a Taurus) pulls up next to you at a light, and the driver makes eye contact. With windows rolled down & Brian Adams playing on her shitty radio.
Know what I mean? Sorta? There's like maybe a some plushies on her rear window package shelf, or one of those orange cats stuck with suction cups to a side window? It's like equal measures of pity and and revulsion, you just feel so bad for her, so your day is ruined, basically.

I just feel sorry for the 3 partially soiled children jostling around the back seat. Having a certain confidence that they have fully acclimated to the aroma of decade old cherrios and cheetos remnants growing something in the carpet. Sad

And with a click, the light turns green.

Quote from: AlexGR on February 04, 2016, 04:03:02 AM

Quote from: aztecminer on February 04, 2016, 03:09:45 AM

don't forget everyone! BITCOIN CANNOT SCALE! until it does then it still doesn't ... its only been EIGHT MONTHS of arguing over it. #GimpedCoin

Technological progress actually ...ensures that bitcoin not only can scale, but will indeed scale. It's not a matter of if, only a matter of when.

1995 = Pentium 75-100MHz / 8-16MB ram / 1-2GB disks / 14.4kbps - 128kbps connections.
2015 = 4-8core CPUs at 4 GHz / 4-16GB ram / 1-4 TB disks / home connections in the mbps to gbps (for fiber).

Everything has gone upwards like 1000x in 20 years. Processing power, memory, storage, network connections etc. And I'm not counting processing breakthroughs in GPU power or storage speedup like SSDs.

If the trend continues, by 2035 the technology will allow >5000tx/sec, without even improving the software. If the software gets improved (and it constantly is getting scaling improvements), we are talking multiple that - so we'll be seeing VISA-like capabilities way before the 2030's.

Bitcoin is ...doomed to scale, except if some catastrophic failure of our civilization destroys the IT industry. And we won't have to wait for 2035 for scaling, that's just a number. There are incremental steps in hardware and network capabilities all the time. We just want too much, too fast. And that's good because scaling solutions will have to be devised faster. Although one thing will never be overcome: The necessity for fees. It is impossible to have near-zero cost txs AND protect the network for abuse at the same time.

Free txs = attack vector possible for free.
Near free txs = attack vector possible for peanuts.

Cool, so it's time to bump the DoS limit from 2010.

I see Blockstream tripling its War Chest has investors all hot and bothered up in here.

Quote from: alesx.onfire on February 08, 2016, 11:29:17 PM

bitcoin protocol compromised?

Nah, it's just been captured by a neckbearded junta of would-be technocrats and central planners. The centralized channels of communication have been sanitized in an effort to maintain imaginary control. As their grasp on the reins of illusory power tightens and the reins fray to the strength of a single thread... you will hear the staccato keyboard taps of their enablers reach a fevered pitch. They've gathered up a $76MM war chest, obtained by promises that they have everything well in hand. The best lie (and VC pitch) is the one you believe yourself.

Good news tho, the ones who solve the blocks that facilitate the whole shebang... are beginning to wise up to what's going on. They won't be ceding their future profits to their future competition.

The darkest hour is just before the dawn.

Segwit is more like 1.3MB equiv, to 1.75MB equiv in a rosy scenario. It also gives a heavy discount to signature heavy transactions like the vaporous LN. Most importantly, the "soft" fork method allows no room for protest at the node level.

It has the added "benefit" of leaving all non segwit nodes in a half broken state, not able to fully validate. All done without their request or permission.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 09, 2016, 12:05:48 AM

I know of at least 3 sidechain projects in the works. Do you think a sidechain will be worth less after a hard fork brings more capacity? Do you think Blockstream will be held legally accountable?

The hard fork itself doesn't bring the capacity, the miners deciding to mine bigger blocks does. Sidechains should be fine if they are able to compete on equal footing with native tx, there are likely many cases where they can be successful in that.

Blockstream will be held accountable by the market, the miners that process transactions, and the users/customers that pay for their product/service. I wish them success as long as it is attained by competitive, not coercive means.

Quote from: pa on February 09, 2016, 05:19:29 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on February 09, 2016, 03:49:53 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 09, 2016, 03:36:01 AM

Most downvoted comment in the whole thread. Woot?

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/44qvoz/has_blockstream_received_a_nsl/

pretty sure Gavin has been operating under the influence of a NSL since not long after his trip to the CIA ... his actions are sometimes directly opposite of what he says, his whole behaviour and demeanour screams like a warrant canary, it's like he's shaking his head and saying Yes! all the time.

This theory actually makes sense.

Yes, I think the zionists may be involved as well.

Quote from: hdbuck on February 10, 2016, 08:26:41 PM

Quote from: Adrian-x on February 10, 2016, 08:21:57 PM

Quote from: xslugx on February 10, 2016, 08:14:57 PM

Quote from: pearnapple on February 10, 2016, 08:11:48 PM

the price is getting to grow right now a little bit i wonder how will the classic release affect the price

Don't worry it won't ^^

There is no reason for the release of btc classic to affect the price!
Only the size issue will affect the price right now.

This ^^, and I'm relatively confident that lots of bitcoiners will buy back in when we successful hard fork away from the PwC partnership to limit Bitcoin block size. Once that blockade is broken the sky's the limit.

lol, now its PwC partnership that limit the blocksize? watta looser.

Something's definitely going to be looser after all this.

They're coming at you from all angles hdbuck:
Dramatic changes to the structure of blocks and making old nodes unable to validate segwit tx from one side...
A simple bump of the holy 1MB from the other side...

You always say "fork off", fork off to where!?!?? Maybe Moonero?

MOA: classic got released today and the price is $10 higher than yesterday... strange. Has the economic majority teamed up with the CIA/GCHQ just to fuck with our heads? Huh

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 10, 2016, 10:47:46 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 10, 2016, 05:10:22 PM

devs should all agree to 2MB blocks And segwit

that way classic and core can both coexist and we can 4x capacity

What about the internal governance issues in Classic?

Classic wouldn't exist if there weren't already serious internal governance issues in Core.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 10, 2016, 10:47:46 PM

Isn't there some resistance to classic by core because there are changes to internal governance?

See above.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 10, 2016, 10:47:46 PM

So in other words, Core could adopt the 2mb aspect of Classic without changes to internal governance (if it wants to continue to shun classic), no?

That would seem to be a perfectly reasonable course of action and easily secure a future in which Core remains the "reference" implementation. If Core had announced plans after Scaling HK for a 2MB HF followed by a fully tested segwit (with plenty of time for 3rd parties to accommodate it)... we wouldn't be having this debate.

Given all this, one has to wonder if gmax and his clique of wizards are dogmatically putting ego (and stock options?) before Bitcoin. Angry

Quote from: BitUsher on February 12, 2016, 09:51:46 PM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on February 12, 2016, 09:45:43 PM

Looks like you got your purge Bitusher.

I'm getting posts deleted east, west, left and right.

Congratulations!!!

I don't recommend or advocate for censorship.

lel

btw... did you correct your orgasmic announcement of the "Call for Pre-Consensus Consensus Letter" where you were woefully confused about what BitmainWarranty is?

It's true, 3 more weeks of stalemate is exactly what was needed. Time enough to get a lawyer to say some scary words that mean Bitcoin can never hardfork again! Hurray!

They just ain't got no scruples. Undecided

brb, gotta go work on my github attributions

Quote from: BitUsher on February 12, 2016, 11:17:18 PM

-snip-
...the fact that Classic is DOA with the mining and economic majority opposing them. Cheers friend.

-snip-

You read the letter as a resounding denunciation of Classic and a firm endorsement of Core, interesting.

Upon reading point 3...

Quote

In the next 3 weeks, we need the Bitcoin Core developers to work with us and clarify the roadmap with respect to a future hard-fork which includes an increase of the block size.

This is obviously asking Core to do what they have refused to do for a year now, and it gives a deadline.

Let's see if miners will grab the bone they might be thrown. My guess is that it will be a pinky promise for a HF sometime in 2017.

Now, because Core is immune to politics, and will only base decisions on their ~~enabling of future profitability~~ technical superiority... they simply cannot do this. To change Gregory's roadmap is to succumb to political pressure where a mouth breathing majority tramples the sacred rights of the enlightened minority, compromising at all would mean they have been lying all along about that point. Bit of a pickle there. Cheers Friend. Kiss

Let the purge begin! Bitcoin is a settlement tool for central banking, excelsior!
Any tips on how I can run a payment channel hub to siphon fees from miners?

Quote from: BitUsher on February 12, 2016, 11:51:43 PM

https://www.quora.com/What-does-the-White-House-think-of-cryptocurrencies-such-as-bitcoin

Ed Felten, Deputy U.S. Chief Technology Officer of The US gvt has keenly watching the debate as they are interested in the outcome.
Claims there is no participation.

The sooner we purge these CIA/GCHQ banksters, the better! Zionists... ur next! Cool

Quote from: BitUsher on February 13, 2016, 12:17:31 AM

I don't know all about that purge non-sense ... we shouldn't stoop to their level and use violence, torture, kidnapping, and murder to effect change when we can write code and peacefully opt out of funding various crimes against humanity.
-snip-

Whoa brother... I was thinking more of deleting their comments and banning them from subreddits... followed by a little gentle DDoSing, no need to go that far.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 11, 2016, 11:06:34 AM

To be fair ... The reality distortion field was high within their community because outside trolls and agent provocateurs where actively supporting Bitcoin Classic to create division in our community and because adopting that implementation would lead to centralization and dis-empower all the "evil" crypt-anarchists and cipher-punks.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 11, 2016, 11:06:34 AM

We shouldn't hold any grudges against most Classic supporters and welcome them back in as our temporarily lost brothers in an act of solidarity.

So if I admit I've been mislead by ~~Satoshi's white paper~~ outside trolls and agent provocateurs... will you cipher punks welcome me back into the agreeable hodler fold? I can't imagine how I would cope without JJG's insight and humor... Sure, a big ol' pile of stinkin' filthy fiat might help, but would leave me with a strange acrobat shaped hole in my heart. Cry

Quote from: BitUsher on February 13, 2016, 01:05:42 AM

-snip-
You and Me.... we should work together in solidarity to make it better.

P.S... I believe their are many genuine bitcoin advocates who support Classic(including some prominent anarchists like Ver and Janssens so this isn't about Statists vs Anarchists), and that the trolls and agent provocateurs aren't just representing the classic side but multiple groups for various reasons.
-snip-

Fair enough.

To the outside world, we're both idealists and weirdos. We're probably more alike than different, in terms of goals and motives. Subversive tactics have been employed by both sides, with each side probably thinking the other side did it much worse.

To me, this disagreement boils down to the method on which transactions are priced. One side views something as a decentralization retention dial, the other sees the same dial as an economic policy tool not unlike central economic planning. We disagree on that, and we'll see how it shakes out. It could end up with me quite a bit more financially diversified, I sincerely hope it doesn't, but we all have to act rationally (or attempt to) as things change.

To free minds, and free markets, cheers.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 13, 2016, 02:16:56 AM

We don't necessarily have to choose between either. Dipping in a fee market event if it proves harmful won't be disastrous as there are always temporary off the chain solutions to buffer the extra tx's (Ironically, those that support Classic), and it will merely sway miners and many other to support increasing the blocksize quickly.

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.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 13, 2016, 02:41:54 AM

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 Tongue

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

hahaha hate on buddy Grin

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

Quote from: gentlemand on February 13, 2016, 03:08:16 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 13, 2016, 03:01:38 AM

Quote from: gmaxwell

BlindMayorBitcorn, I can't help but observe that flooding a thread with tripe-- as you appear to be doing-- when it isn't going your way is literally straight out of the GCHQ public communication subversion playbook.

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

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.

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

Quote from: BitUsher on February 13, 2016, 03:10:28 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 13, 2016, 03:01:38 AM

Quote from: gmaxwell

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

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.

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

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 13, 2016, 03:05:51 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 13, 2016, 02:51:56 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 13, 2016, 02:41:54 AM

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

hahaha hate on buddy Grin

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

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).

Little too much grappling involved for my taste... but I think we could maybe do a fist bump or so. Cheesy

Quote from: shmadz on February 13, 2016, 09:04:40 AM

Holy crap! Monero just doubled!

Shocked

Oops, wrong thread

Almost 80 BTC traded on that euphoria candle... Shocked

All of iCE's hard work is finally paying off! Suckas.

Today, an entry level C class, tomorrow... Pagani. Excelsior!

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 15, 2016, 02:45:40 AM

if you know how much power the network is consuming (about a gigawatt or 1 million kilowatts)
and you know how much power costs ($0.10/kWh)
and you now how many transactions are being processed (~4TPS)
We can figure out how much each transaction really costs unsubsidized by speculators.

@ $0.10/kWh X (1,000,000 kilowatts)= $100,000/hr

4 transactions/sec X (3600seconds/hr) = 14,400 transactions/hr

$100,000/14400 transactions = $6.94 PER TRANSACTION

Feel free to check my math, but that's about how efficient the bitcoin network is currently at maximum capacity. If there are fewer transactions, it is even less efficient. Security and decentralization are very important factors, but this is not competitive with ACH and SWIFT, or even credit cards. The way to increase efficiency is by massively increasing the number of transactions while keeping the total power costs almost the same.

THAT is why we want to lift the blocksize limit. We have a very very expensive, inefficient network. Security is great, but too much armor on your armored truck will limit it's cargo capacity.

Your cost per kWh is a bit high (some farms in E Washington are getting 2.5-4 cents for hydro power, allegedly some chinese are getting it for near free), and your tx/s is also a bit high (2.7 or 2.8 from my observations), they balance out somewhat... you're in the ballpark.

Either fees paid go up, security goes down, or we spread the cost over more transactions with a capacity increase. If only satoshi would have considered this... smh. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1347.msg15366#msg15366)

These artificial scarcity jokers seem (pretend) to ignore the competitive advantages this bestows on altcoins/chains. Our good ol BTC isn't the only game in town, and it will only get worse unless we defend our competitive advantage and network effect vigorously.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 15, 2016, 03:33:31 AM

Wrong. The Toomim Bros in Eastern Washington charge $95/kilowattmonth which translates to $0.132/kWh with discounts if you buy for several months. Their cheapest package (for twelve months paid in advance) is $80 per kilowattmonth which is $0.111/kWh. If anything, I have been overly conservative in my cost calculations.
-snip-

You think the Toomims are running a business... or a charity?

I will eat my shoe if they're paying more than 5 cents.

They have a facility to run, power is only part of their costs.

Edit:

Thankfully I'll be eating sushi and not shoe leather tonight (PDF warning):
http://www.grantpud.org/component/edocman/1675-rate-schedule-14-2016/download

$ 0.01826 per kWh for the first 7,300,000 kWh
$ 0.03250 per kWh for all additional kWh

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 16, 2016, 02:46:41 AM

Quote from: BitUsher on February 16, 2016, 02:41:48 AM

Quote from: shmadz on February 16, 2016, 02:31:53 AM

The truth always comes out. When someone asks "When were you co-opted?" And you answer "a couple years ago" ...

How can you believe that Gavin has not been coerced when he openly admits it and - to my knowledge - has never explicitly denied it?

I would be overjoyed if Gavin were not compromised, he always seemed like "one of the good guys" -- if you could provide a link to a page where he explicitly denies any coercion I'd be grateful.

While I didn't like how Gavin used the misleading metaphor of different implementations (with contrary consensus rules) to browsers, His response to being co-opted is perfectly reasonable. Its a silly question to ask in the first place and he has been accused for years of this and denied it many times. It is rather rude to ask it in a serious manner and thus why it was asked in jest eliciting a joke in response.

It is almost impossible to know someone is a co-opted or an agent provocateur , and thus we should merely look at and review each others actions instead of assigning a likelihood. Hearn's actions are of high suspect, Gavin still appears to be genuine IMHO.

About this: Is there any actual evidence to suggest anybody (British Intelligence or otherwise Roll Eyes

) is actively infiltrating bitcoin discussion forums? Srsly. If not, the implication is sort of absurd and insulting. Innit?

After seeing others use the same arguments he's been using (Disagree with me = GCHQ super cereal secret agent), the embarrassment has finally hit 'im (kinda Undecided

).

They can't actually believe so many disagree with them, therefore... gubmint agents.

It would be insulting if it wasn't kinda cute... like crazy uncle Leo pointing out the chemtrails on a sunny afternoon at the family reunion in Tulsa.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on February 16, 2016, 03:05:26 AM

Wow. The explosion of puss, poison, and vitriol seems to suggest some kind of boil has been lanced.

Crassic has failed, what's next now on the maximally FUD bitcoin agenda I wonder?

Crassic keeps failing like this means it should be at 1500 nodes next week?

Meanwhile, Core 0.12 is around 300 nodes? Why don't you guys upgrade? If not for 5x faster validation and "on by default" opt in RBF... at least to throw a little cold water on these Crassic trolls and agents.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 16, 2016, 03:22:46 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 16, 2016, 03:15:31 AM

Crassic keeps failing like this means it should be at 1500 nodes next week?

There is a sybil attack occuring as we speak , and the sad thing is that many Classic supporters that are participating in the sybil attack have good intentions and not aware that they are weakening the security of our network. This isn't a Core vs Classic disagreement , because Core devs criticised when an exchange spun up 100 Core nodes... and rightfully so.

The intentions of the person spinning up nodes is only is half the problem. If one person or company spins up many nodes that is indeed a sybil attack and weakens the security of our network regardless of their intentions. It centralizes nodes, gives a false signal to the network that its healthier and more decentralized than it actually is, an can be used as an attack vector if that individual is compromised(even if their intentions are well founded) . This has nothing to do with the implementation debate and everything to do with understanding the potential security implications of an individual spinning up more than one node. This should always be discouraged regardless of it being a core node, XT, node, Classic node, ect... 1 node per economic agent- whether it be a company, SPV wallet, individual, miner, ect.... 1 node each. There is no way of stopping someone creating more but this practice should be discouraged as it weakens bitcoin and is indeed a type of Sybil attack.

It's a good thing NMN (non-mining-nodes) have nothing to do with network security, talk about a wide open vulnerability...

Consequently, it's nice that the network's security isn't dependent on you "discouraging" people from running more than 1 node.

Quote from: shmadz on February 16, 2016, 03:36:59 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 16, 2016, 03:22:40 AM

Did you see my earlier post on the topic that I linked for ease of reference?

No. I pretty much ignore anything you have to say.

It's unfortunate. I'm sure sometimes you say something worth reading, but I've done the calculations; the massive amount of meaningless text that you spew is simply not worth the time to read.

Now here's an opportunity for some non-contentious consensus.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 16, 2016, 03:52:05 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 16, 2016, 03:33:32 AM

Quoted to lock in the fact that you are unaware of the importance of non-mining-nodes with security and the role they play. Please research this topic before spreading more misinformation. You are ignoring the fact that new nodes have to bootstrap from existing nodes and also ignoring the fact that SPV nodes that are dependent upon full nodes, also ignoring the fact that Juking the numbers gives us a false representation of how decentralized are the nodes we have, plus the fact that not having an economic agent on the other side of each of those nodes doesn't give developers crucial feedback to any potential bugs that are experienced to be reported... ect...

So... new nodes get bad data from a malicious NMN, they accept it?

SPV nodes also just accept data from any random (possibly malicious) node on the network?

Sounds like some serious security concerns here...

Got any others?

Quote from: BitUsher on February 16, 2016, 03:52:05 AM

-snip-
Juking the numbers gives us a false representation of how decentralized are the nodes we have, plus the fact that not having an economic agent on the other side of each of those nodes doesn't give developers crucial feedback to any potential bugs that are experienced to be reported... ect...

I was going to leave these be... but as you'll probably complain...

This is just what you "wish was true". Fact is, a state actor with with the budget of a thursday office party could spin up a huge amount of malicious nodes... does that mean we're doomed?

Quote from: BitUsher on February 16, 2016, 04:12:57 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 16, 2016, 04:04:11 AM

This is just what you "wish was true". Fact is, a state actor with with the budget of a thursday office party could spin up a huge amount of malicious nodes... does that mean we're doomed?

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 16, 2016, 03:57:16 AM

So... new nodes get bad data from a malicious NMN, they accept it?

New nodes bootstrap ~randomly from multiple peers, therefore it is important for us to maximize honest and decentralized nodes (1 unique node per economic agent) as much as possible to reduce the probability of this attack vector.

They drop/ban the peer after getting bad data... the horror. Er, wait, no... just working as designed. Next.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 16, 2016, 04:12:57 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 16, 2016, 03:57:16 AM

SPV nodes also just accept data from any random (possibly malicious) node on the network?

It more complicated than this because different SPV wallets handle security differently. SPV wallets do not accept nodes randomly, but an SPV wallet can be convinced or tricked into trusting the wrong full node or the an attacker can compromise the full node the SPV wallet depends upon... but it is more complicated than this as I said ... we really need to start discussing the individual wallets themselves to proceed further in the discussion.

Now we've meandered off into the security profiles of third party SPV wallets, the responsibility of their respective developers and users... not relevant to Bitcoin network security, the original focus of this discussion.

NMN are important for the security of their users, not the network.

You better talk to your buddies at BTCC about the whole 1 node per economic agent ~~letter to santa~~ principle.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 16, 2016, 04:35:17 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 16, 2016, 04:26:33 AM

You better talk to your buddies at BTCC about the whole 1 node per economic agent ~~letter to santa~~ principle.

Yes , Todd, Back , and others like myself criticized them for spinning up 100 bitcoin core nodes. I already cited this... It doesn't matter who is doing it , it isn't a good idea and reflects a deep misunderstanding why we need individual humans on the other end of full nodes in a decentralized manner. Please don't take my word for it, ask someone you trust like Gavin if its a good idea for one person to spin up 100s of full nodes or not.

I never said it was a "good" or "bad" idea, just largely irrelevant to network security, which works via PoW. Good thing, that.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 16, 2016, 04:44:51 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 16, 2016, 04:42:46 AM

Quote from: BitUsher on February 16, 2016, 04:35:17 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 16, 2016, 04:26:33 AM

You better talk to your buddies at BTCC about the whole 1 node per economic agent ~~letter to santa~~ principle.

I never said it was a "good" or "bad" idea, just largely irrelevant to network security, which works via PoW. Good thing, that.

Users are part of the network. Many of these attacks are coordinated. Thus a compromised or malicious mining node coordinating with a pool of NMN could attack a user, or a malicious pool of NMN could coordinate a 0 conf attack, ect....There are many edge cases and fringe attacks that you aren't considering at all.... in network security you need to prepare for the edge cases (even if they are unlikely ) because an attacker will use an assortment of them or a specific one that is tailored to an attack during a vulnerable moment.

Additionally, you are ignoring the critical role a human plays in using the wallet, whether they know it or not they are playing the role or a "debugger" or "tester" to report problems to a developer. If you spin up 100 nodes that simultaneously gives a false sense of security and less people testing the software.
-snip-

We aren't talking about malicious mining nodes (much more dangerous, even all by themselves, somewhat safe tho because incentives), we are talking about malicious NMN. The careful reader will see you have, as yet, not presented the relevant security hole. 0 conf is already understood to be insecure, and is about to be officially and fully deprecated. You do understand that a full node verifies signatures? It will not accept false blocks, even from all 8 connected peers. So the worst case scenario is that it has to drop/ban several malicious peers before it finds a good one.

If malicious NMN can break the system... it's only a (short) matter of time until it's broken. Therefore... it's a very good thing they can only be an annoyance, and not an actual threat to network security.

Of course I think it is a huge asset to have the ledger widely replicated, and administered by a diverse and global group of individuals... but I fear the comparative importance of NMN to the security of the network is being somewhat overstated in this debate.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 16, 2016, 05:28:05 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 16, 2016, 05:13:00 AM

I was giving a list of problems malicious NMN can have with regards to attack vectors. If a NMN has a valid blockchain boostrapped they will reject a malicious mining node block. Thus a NMN matters specifically because this attack can occur in a coordinated fashion. They are dependent upon each other.

So nodes receiving their first block ever, right at the moment this dastardly attack occurs... might be vulnerable to downloading a fake ledger, with replicated signatures and pow? And... a malicious miner is mining blocks valid to that chain? Kinda off into the weeds, no?

Quote from: BitUsher on February 16, 2016, 05:28:05 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 16, 2016, 05:13:00 AM

0 conf is already understood to be insecure, and is about to be officially and fully deprecated.

Yet most tx's are 0 conf... Until people start using payment channels this will continue to be a problem. This is wht segwit needs to be deployed ASAP, to fix most of the problems with malleability so payment channels can mature.

Yes, I know you want payment channels to be accepted into the market, I do too actually (once that whole routing issue is solved). Not against a form of segwit going forward either. We disagree on the part where Core devs should become central planners setting tx prices for miners, to pseudo-economically favor second layer solutions that compete with miners for fees.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 16, 2016, 05:28:05 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 16, 2016, 05:13:00 AM

You do understand that a full node verifies signatures? It will not accept false blocks, even from all 8 connected peers. So the worst case scenario is that it has to drop/ban several malicious peers before it finds a good one.

If the full node is bootstrapped from a pool of malicious nodes it can verify a false block. There is a good reason outbound is restricted to one IP address per /16 .

See above, care to hazard a guess on the number of brand new nodes receiving their first block today?

Such timing on the Sybil attack topic!

/PseudoNode:0.11.2/ is here.

One of the first ones... gone now, was more interesting than the rest...

https://archive.is/JEav8

Aaaaaaaand, they're all gone...

Did I just single-handedly thwart a Sybil attack? Cool

Quote from: Fatman3001 on February 16, 2016, 10:49:54 PM

That does not compute.

Advancements in asics does not equal higher value.

Silly fat man. New chip deployment = mewn... k?

Meanwhile...

Come on in panicking global economy! The mempool's fine!

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 17, 2016, 12:28:52 AM

-snip-
Bitmain is the only company selling retail mining equipment and their miners are shitty, overpriced and inefficient. 21 could compete with them profitably without much effort, but they are too greedy, wanting to keep the miners for their own micropayments channel. Bitfury is doing the same thing overseas. They are not investing in a distributed network. They are investing in making it less distributed.

You got maybe one out of three there, overpriced.

Aside from the S2... all my bitmain gear has been rock solid [s1 through s5]. They even supported the S1 well longer than expected by offering safely packed upgrade hashing boards/controllers to convert to S3 on the old frames, heatsinks, and fans.

The S7 is pretty efficient, and got to the retail market for this gen well before a bunch of the other's chips were even fabbed. Of course they were/are priced high, pretty much the only game in town for joe retail. Hopefully that will change once the big guys have their own mines humming, probably after the halving, amirite?

Bitmain/Antpool mined the first classic block by a major pool today... that alone is a big + in my book.

Jihan Wu, co-founder, seems to get it:
https://twitter.com/JihanWu/with_replies

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 17, 2016, 04:01:17 AM

You're crazy. You think a S7 28nm can compete with 14nm chips? You're eating what? 1,293 watts? Unless you're getting free electricity, it will take you a year just to recoup the cost of purchase, and by then who knows what the difficulty will be? We know for sure the block reward will be halved.

You have to speculate that the price will go up to compensate, but if you're doing that anyway, why not just buy coins? It's a much more liquid asset than mining gear.

Look, I like Bitmain. I just wish they had some competition. It seems like free money for chipmakers, but those greedy bastards wont sell to the public.

You combative malcontent... Cheesy

Timing is everything. Sure, the stuff just hitting from others is 33% more efficient, but the S7's have been running for months and months, before the difficulty went absolute bonkers. I repeat... timing is everything, you've lost that 33% easily in diff increases. It's one big race to earn it back before you go negative...

Quote from: tex99 on February 17, 2016, 04:14:14 AM

In twenty minutes the next Gox creditors meeting starts and according to this reddit thread some kraken users have already had their Gox claims approved through it. One post in that reddit thread says all claims are in JPY. Does that mean the Gox coins will be auctioned or sold to pay the creditors in JPY?

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4648wk/mtgox_bankruptcy_claims_the_trustee_has_approved/

Will all this Gox crap move the price?

Another huge uncertainty about to go away. Without the block size ring in the nose... this bull would be primed to go wild.

Awww, isn't that cute.

Chief Scientist, Viacoin [Peter Todd] doesn't want any increase at all... but would be willing to "compromise" with this totally straightforward ~~hack~~ solution called SegWitSoftFork. A situation that would give a 75% fee discount to signature heavy LN transactions, potentially the bandwidth equivalent of 4MB blocks... for 1.3 to 1.7x the amount of transactions... Creating a large number of zombie nodes that don't understand or validate segwit tx is just a bonus.

This is what we are asked to adopt instead of changing a 1 to a 2:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7404

He's also so principled that he would create an altcoin rather than work on a Bitcoin that HF'd to 2MB through classic.

His arrogance just oozes out, whatever the medium, that interview this week... his twattering...

LN will definitely create centralizing hubs for payment channels, if it is adopted at all... but the "decentralization at any cost" crew is pushing it like their livelihood depends on it. Sure glad we are sacrificing our competitive advantage for these visionaries. Undecided

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 18, 2016, 10:57:59 PM

That's the great thing about soft forks, they can be very contentious�... but rammed through all the same.

If we can't hard fork while a minority disagrees, we will never hard fork again = exactly what they want. Any change desired by the politburo can be soft forked in with enough ~~hacking~~ creativity.

Quote from: rocks on February 18, 2016, 11:06:47 PM

This is why they are pushing SegWit first. They know that if 2MB blocks happen, once everyone sees how easy it was it will become more difficult push SegWit onto the ecosystem. SegWit is a major overhaul and I could see many more miners and nodes dragging their feet on SegWit once they know the next 4MB change is easy too.

Nailed it.

They are not afraid of 2MB max blocks at all. They are afraid that when the sky doesn't fall... miners won't accept hot wiring Bitcoin into a settlement layer. They also fear the precedent that miners are in charge (a correct and good thing), not them.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 18, 2016, 11:49:01 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 18, 2016, 11:46:24 PM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 18, 2016, 11:42:42 PM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 18, 2016, 11:37:43 PM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 18, 2016, 11:05:07 PM

Wall Street doesn't give a toss about decentralization. If it turns out the market doesn't either, eventually a competing hard fork will take Core's place.

Smallblockers want to maintain node decentralization by centralizing code development.

I don't see any way to decentralize code development. Competing protocols doesn't seem to be the answer.

everyone codes whatever feather they want

miners vote on the feathers they are ready and willing to accept

once >90% of miners are all accepting a specific feather it is turned on.

core is going to start using this method soon.

But even if 90% of the miners are mining something, it's the nodes that determine the longest valid chain. That's why they can't just fork off at will. Isn't it?

When you want to use Bitcoin but your non mining wallet node doesn't work anymore... are you going to start mining your own blocks? Or are you going to simply upgrade your client?

Similar with segwit. Even if I hate it (as a SF that changes fee economics), I am required to upgrade if I want to keep validating all transactions on the network. Unlike a HF, someone not paying attention won't even be aware that such a dramatic change has been pushed through.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 19, 2016, 12:26:14 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 18, 2016, 11:21:06 PM

Todd implied a one line change in his interview

ANOTHER LIE?

You sure have a funny way of reading between the lines. I didn't hear those insinuations at all.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 18, 2016, 11:07:33 PM

That's the great thing about soft forks, they can be very contentious�... but rammed through all the same.

Funny how you insinuate soft forks at a 95% threshold that don't boot anyone from the network is an imposition but a hardfork with a 75% threshold that does reject users upon activation is ok ...

I thought that miners can't make a change that a meaningful % of nodes don't want... with SFSW, they can. So we're back to defining contentious.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 19, 2016, 12:26:14 AM

Soft Forks cannot be contentious as core requires a 95 % threshold to activate. Soft Forks don't reject users from the network that don't want to update either. They can continue using bitcoin as normal with their old distro.

Let me clarify a few things :

1) User can still get the latest patches and releases and do not need to accept segwit ever .... Core is open source and another dev can pick and choose what they like out of future releases. In fact that is what classic has done and plans to do. So users can still be secure and never adopt segwit ever if they don't want its benefits.

2) Users who choose not to upgrade to segwit still validate not segwit transactions like normal... therefore nothing changes and them and their friends can continue to send txs to each other and fully validate all non segwit signatures. Older implementations that choose not to upgrade have absolutely no right to force those of us who do upgrade to give us our signatures of validation. If you don't like it than I suggest you reject our txs. By upgrading we acknowledge that we will only be relaying signatures for validation to upgraded nodes. There is no secret here , thats the way its designed.

Well, thanks for clearing that up. So long as no one sends me a segwit tx (which is now incentivized by being cheaper), nothing changes.

Look, here's the difference:

If miners decide to implement segwit, I go along with them by upgrading to a segwit capable full node.

If miners decide to implement 2MB max_block_size with a HF, your crew throws their toys out of the pram and creates an altcoin.

I leave it up to the reader to decide who is being more reasonable.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 19, 2016, 12:48:07 AM

It is surprisingly small ... He elaborates the number of lines of changes in the original XT proposal exceed Segwit changes .
This is a fair comparison because most of the XT supporters are now classic supporters insinuating that Segwit is a massive change when they were will to accept (in some regards- loc) a larger change before.

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 19, 2016, 12:28:25 AM

he says that its safer to do segwit then change the MAXBLOCKSIZE define

trud manure, every word, trud manure

In many ways(not all) segwit is indeed safer than simply increasing maxBlockSize. It doesn't involve a contentious hardfork(99% of people support segwit in itself ) , it allows for signature pruning which reduces costs on the network = safer , Fixes most Malleability issues= safer, creates a Linear scaling of sighash operations = safer, allows for safer deployment of softforks in future, Reduces UTXO growth , ect....

This is the changeset for SegWit:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7404

I seriously encourage anyone to have a little browse after being told this is the safer, simpler option.

A form of segwit could/would have tangible benefits, but it's being sold in an underhanded way. As a carrot when the network needs more capacity... and in current form, is designed in a way that applies economic favoritism at the protocol level with fee discounts.

If a small increase of maxblocksize was implemented first as a HF, or if they were hardforked together, nearly all of my concerns would be assuaged. I would still argue against favoritism in the fee economics... but I would instantly become much more agreeable generally. As long as a HF is slated way off into 2017... if at all (Gregory's current roadmap), I will remain distrustful of Core's leadership and their conflicted interest in forcing the settlement layer architecture.

If things have changed and a hard date for a hard fork is promised in 2016... our disagreement is much closer to resolution.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 19, 2016, 01:35:50 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 19, 2016, 01:26:59 AM

I would still argue against favoritism in the fee economics..

The reason this was done is 2 fold.. incentivize adoption to segwit and more importantly Reduce UTXO growth.

Mhmmm, it would also directly discount LN settlement transactions when/if they arrive. Apparently some transactions are more equal than others. Encouraging reduction of UTXO is the sales carrot again.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 19, 2016, 01:35:50 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 19, 2016, 01:26:59 AM

I will remain distrustful of Core's leadership and their conflicted interest in forcing the settlement layer architecture.

How will bitcoin scale to the mainstream if it didn't act as a settlement layer for the main chain? It certainly cant get far by continually increasing the block side.

I know you've had a long day, so I've bolded the important part.

You know I want second layer solutions too, just with them playing on an even (not artificially slanted) field of competition. Both a segwit discount, and dogmatically limiting native capacity... serve to slant the field in their favor.

We're averaging 2.8-3 tps at the moment...

https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin/

Only so many seats on this train... time to pay up suckas.

Poors may use dog-coin. Cool

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 19, 2016, 02:38:24 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 19, 2016, 02:17:27 AM

I don't see what is wrong... bitcoin is in a pretty decent place right now, no?

the only real problem right now is all the uneducated complaining about scalability. makes us look very conflicted... but in reality we are all ready to say "I prefer X but Y is good too".

segwit in may, and then we go and push for a HF 2MB again when blocks become full again.

People are complaining because the solution was already stated quite simply:

Quote from: satoshi on October 04, 2010, 07:48:40 PM

For years, after getting involved in 2011, I thought it was a no brainer that we would gracefully upgrade.

Years later, gmax's theory that Bitcoin was inherently broken led him to form a company to fix it... and he's been given the power to bend the protocol to his will. His email literally becomes the Core roadmap. It's frustrating.

@BMB your flip flopping is only slightly less frustrating. Marcus might have the correct view on that. Angry

Edit: I don't think satoshi used 115,000 purely at random, important to note we are approaching block 400,000(!) with long strings of 900k+ blocks.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 19, 2016, 03:11:18 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 19, 2016, 02:52:27 AM

@BMB your flip flopping is only slightly less frustrating. Marcus might have the correct view on that. Angry

That one hurt. Cry

It ain't cut and dry. Just look at Adam! He freaked out! But he got better.

IDK.

You do the dialectical method, and not without result...

Forgive me, (nerd)war makes monsters out of men.

Quote from: sAt0sHiFanClub on February 19, 2016, 04:38:14 PM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 19, 2016, 03:50:17 PM

Epic copy-pasta!

Quote

A Call for Consensus

James Hilliard
Pool/Farm Admin
BitmainWarranty

Poolboy more like. FFS.

Hey, that name looks familiar. Nice of them to include such a srs businessman, and near the top too.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 16, 2016, 09:15:14 AM

Such timing on the Sybil attack topic!

/PseudoNode:0.11.2/ is here.

One of the first ones... gone now, was more interesting than the rest...

https://archive.is/JEav8

Quote from: hdbuck on February 19, 2016, 06:37:17 PM

fork off already.

Welcome to 1984... citizen.

Are you a suppressive person?

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on February 20, 2016, 06:34:59 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 20, 2016, 05:45:09 AM

That is a beautiful slide. Occident and Orient meeting on the common grounds of knowledge and wisdom. Cry

5,000 year old high culture + liberation technology = WINNING.

So much for the bigoted notion that Bitcoiners in China ("Chinese Bitcoiners") are too subservient, stupid, and greedy to resist the siren song of The Blockchain Alliance Inc's putative authority.

Pervert it all you'd like iCE, it won't be Bitcoin when you're done with it. For monero... that's bullish AF.

This slide speaks to the Chinese as if they're absolute idiots... like they don't even know what they are deciding. The one positive... the outcome will give me a clear answer as to the level of risk I'm willing to place on this experiment... possibly forced diversification, as it were... pulling the cords after/during the "no fork" relief rally of course.

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on February 20, 2016, 08:05:09 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 20, 2016, 06:45:13 AM

Pervert it all you'd like iCE, it won't be Bitcoin when you're done with it. Cry

Thanks for posting that wonderful slide, it's like the Rosetta Stone of Bitcoin's Great Schism.

How do you imagine I'm going to cause some radical change in our beloved phlegmatic Honey Badger?

I'm flattered you believe it's within my powers to transmute Bitcoin into some perverted form (via inaction no less!), but can't fathom the internal logic of such a fanciful delusion.

The truth is Honey Badger really doesn't give a shit what I (or you) do (or don't do).

Bitcoin will only stop being Bitcoin if it ceases to be immune to the populist nonsense and moral hazard insisted upon by Gavinista quasi-majoritarians.

Gavincoin's 75% threshold is three wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.

Bitcoin is never going to sacrifice its critical consensus for your high time preference.

The max block size will increase eventually but Sorry, Not Tonight Dear.

If you want to use a democratically elected political currency try the USD, EUR, or CNY. Wink

I'm aware that you're impotent, personally, but those that you endorse and enable are not...

Truth is... Core Power Rangers have been given an ultimatum... now we anxiously await an answer.

It's not about votes granted by breathing... it's about votes granted by quadrillions of hashes... Kiss

Unlike you? I'm willing to accept their decision.

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on February 20, 2016, 08:41:02 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 20, 2016, 08:20:18 AM

Unlike you? I'm willing to accept their decision.

You honestly expect Honey Badger to respond to ultimatums (ie threats)?

If X gives a shit about ultimatums and threats, X is not Honey Badger.

As for the [impressively large number of] hashes, their function is to act as well-paid security guards, not executives.

If the security guards start demanding a vote in the boardroom they protect, the board will simply fire and replace them with new rent-a-cops.

There is nothing indispensable about sha256, and if the centralized miner tail tries to wag the distributed socioeconomic majority dog we will simply change to another PoW.

Have fun with your altcoin... may it be more exciting than monero.

Quote from: brg444 on February 20, 2016, 05:22:34 PM

Quote from: hdbuck on February 20, 2016, 05:16:00 PM

Quote

If there is strong community support, the hard-fork activation will likely happen around July 2017.

~not tonight dear... Grin

Blockstream is never to be underestimated. They literally didn't move an inch and everyone is circle jerking "the great compromise"... incredible. What a wet noodle the miners turned out to be... so much for that childish delusion I used to hold.

Watching fatty lose his principles for a ~~$20~~ $19 relief rally was the hardest part. Cry

GG guys... GG

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 21, 2016, 10:50:19 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 21, 2016, 03:03:35 AM

make note of anyone loudly expressing frustration with this agreement and actively trying to stop it

its likely they are stupid.

FFS

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1372397.0

strongly recommend moving your BTC out of coinbase
do not trust these spot light loving restarts, and show them your disuse for actively trying to stop what little progress we FINALLY have made, by leaving them.
if you leave coins on coinbase, you are supporting, another year of bitching and nothing getting done while bitcoin bleeds.

I checkid my coinbase app on my iPad to see price has raised sence community has reached uncotinshous concentsus. Then I red that CEO brian is trying to kill bit coins with more capacity before late 2017. Quickly, I moved my millis to my blockchain wallet, phew, thanks Adam, that guy is evil for real, tries to kill the bit coin concentsus.

This honey marmot don't care about capashity, price raised to $1000 in 2013 with 1MB, and wheel do again in 2016. Cheers, we can't loose.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 22, 2016, 01:07:44 AM

Business actors are leeches. Bitcoin ain't for Wall Street. It never was. Lardo, you surprise me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PaoLy7PHwk

*clicks link to subversive ballad*

*Pre-roll ad for Wells Fargo plays* Undecided

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 22, 2016, 01:52:20 AM

We have recently become aware that your username [Brg444] is inconsistant with documentation you submitted upon registering. Your account with us has been locked pending authentication of your identity.

In the space provided, please type in your ~~IP address, Mother's maiden~~ name, ~~date of birth, place~~ of ~~residence, current combined annual household income, and shirt size.~~ employer.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 22, 2016, 02:14:06 AM

Competing implementations that didn't threaten to break the protocol would be nice.

Am I asking too much?

Shouldn't we just call them ~~competing~~ deferential to The One True Consensus implementations, then?

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 22, 2016, 02:36:14 AM

the devs have little choice but cater to the miners, and the miners have little choice to cater to the users.

I used to hold dear that delusion too, till it got dashed against the rock. Undecided

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 20, 2016, 05:34:28 PM

Quote from: brg444 on February 20, 2016, 05:22:34 PM

Quote from: hdbuck on February 20, 2016, 05:16:00 PM

Quote

If there is strong community support, the hard-fork activation will likely happen around July 2017.

~not tonight dear... Grin

GG guys... GG

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 22, 2016, 02:51:44 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 22, 2016, 02:49:54 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 20, 2016, 05:34:28 PM

Quote from: brg444 on February 20, 2016, 05:22:34 PM

Quote from: hdbuck on February 20, 2016, 05:16:00 PM

Quote

If there is strong community support, the hard-fork activation will likely happen around July 2017.

~not tonight dear... Grin

Blockstream is never to be underestimated. They literally didn't move an inch and everyone is circle jerking "the great compromise"... incredible. What a wet noodle the miners turned out to be... so much for that childish delusion I used to hold.

Watching fatty lose his principles for a ~~$20~~ ~~$19~~ $15 relief rally was the hardest part. Cry

GG guys... GG

This is the company that tried to patent Hot Wallet for heaven's sake!

No, wait. Wrong company. My mistake. Embarrassed

You misunderstand me. I could give a shit less what Brian Armstrong and Coinbase do. They have a $10,000 "Balance limit" on their exchange... seriously??

Thankfully they haven't captured Bitcoin, and aren't dictating its roadmap. Rest assured I would concern troll them just as vigorously if they did.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on February 22, 2016, 02:58:53 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 22, 2016, 02:48:49 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 22, 2016, 02:45:57 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 22, 2016, 02:39:36 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 22, 2016, 02:38:45 AM

We've been getting full blocks all day. Armstrong may be right that a HF in 2017 is too little too late.

wheres brg444 when you need him

full blocks != end of the world

I agree, but it could = the end of this rally. Or every rally from here on out.

so long as the full blocks are temporary so is this effect
and speculation that it's only temporary should further reduce this effect.

the blocks are full, full of crap ... or else fees would be rising, crap doesn't crap for fees.

blocksize will go up when the technology allows for it.

Reader, open this site:
https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin/

Watch the Latest Transactions for while...:
Come back and tell me those are crap. Also, tell me we have no competition in this arena.

The technology allows for it today.

(If you're me: Gently weep at the difference in post quality from the Marcus of yesteryear.)

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 22, 2016, 03:25:18 AM

look here https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin/tx/1955f713c09279da01e71c169d9888d8d03aaf4814a4324acbb515b5e8a33f0c

this one like most, has 2 outputs

when you send 0.1BTC from a 10BTC address, the 1 TX generally goes like: send 0.1BTC out, and 9.9BTC back to an address i own, and that shows up as a TX totaling 10BTC.

its mostly "spam" aka poeple gambling on dice games and such.

They paid 44 sats/byte. Better than most.

Fees are paid on size, not value.

The adoption that was supposed to be subsidized by the block reward is being squeezed to our competitors. You may be willing to bet the farm on (currently not here) second layer solutions fixing everything... I'm less confident about that.

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 22, 2016, 04:00:23 AM

ONE more time for good luck

Sounds great until the whole July 2017 (maybe, pinky promise) ~~just in time for~~ one year later than the halving, part.

Quote from: cbeast on February 22, 2016, 05:03:45 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 22, 2016, 04:27:15 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 22, 2016, 04:00:23 AM

ONE more time for good luck

Sounds great until the whole July 2017 (maybe, pinky promise) ~~just in time for~~ one year later than the halving, part.

I suspect another player will soon jump in and steal away all their best devs. Blockstream will go bankrupt by years end.

Not a chance. They just sold their original roadmap as a compromise... and the miners bought it, completely. If anything, they all deserve bonuses, big ones.

Quote from: cbeast on February 22, 2016, 05:48:07 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 22, 2016, 05:40:28 AM

Quote from: cbeast on February 22, 2016, 05:03:45 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 22, 2016, 04:27:15 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 22, 2016, 04:00:23 AM

ONE more time for good luck

Sounds great until the whole July 2017 (maybe, pinky promise) ~~just in time for~~ one year later than the halving, part.

I suspect another player will soon jump in and steal away all their best devs. Blockstream will go bankrupt by years end.

Not a chance. They just sold their original roadmap as a compromise... and the miners bought it, completely. If anything, they all deserve bonuses, big ones.

Only until the Chinese figure out they got duped, dump their coins, and shut down the miners after the halving leaving a full mempool that won't ever be confirmed.

Nah, that's a BJA fullblockpocalypse scenario... I don't buy it. The marginal transactions drop off/growth stalls before that point. He argues that the car will blow up... I argue that it'll maybe be on half the cylinders, but still be rolling just fine. Wouldn't be an absolute survival situation for another 2 halvings or so... but we're talking about potential... and competition.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on February 22, 2016, 05:49:03 AM

... or assuming good faith, they just figured out through an intensive analysis session by a group of the technically most-qualified adversarial minds bashing together, the most likely best-practice, secure and expedient way to increase transaction capacity of the bitcoin system for the foreseeable future.

But spin it how you like, you have with everything else.

Marcus defers to gmax, dr back, blue matt... and independent contractor luke jr. And in good faith, determines that this is simply as fast as we can technically go... safely... fine.

I have a hard time squaring that with their interest in an off-chain provider Blockstream... we can agree to disagree.

Look, I know that we're basically locked in till mid-late 2017 now. Let me get it out of my system. I won't drone on about this for the next 18 months. I'm not married to these coins, and hell, the ones I hold on to may go up in value all the same. My sales/buys and these words are my only influence in this market... neither are earth shaking.

Allow me my catharsis... Embarrassed

♫"I'm Waiting For The Blocks"♪

I'm waiting for my blocks
Not enough dollars in my hand
Up to Lexington, 125
Feel sick and dirty, more dead than alive
I'm waiting for my blocks
Hey, white boy, what you doin' uptown?
Hey, white boy, you chasin' our marmot around?
Oh pardon me sir, it's the furthest from my mind
I'm just lookin' for a dear, dear friend of mine
I'm waiting for my blocks
Here he comes, he's all dressed in black
Beat up shoes and a big straw hat
He's never early, he's always late
First thing you learn is you always gotta wait I'm waiting for my blocks
Up to a Brownstone, up three flights of stairs
Everybody's pinned you, but nobody cares
He's got the bids, gives you sweet taste
Ah then you gotta split because you got no time to waste
I'm waiting for my blocks
Baby don't you holler, darlin' don't you bawl and shout
I'm feeling good, you know I'm gonna work it on out
I'm feeling good, I'm feeling oh so fine
Until tomorrow, but that's just some other time
♫I'm waiting for my blocks♩

Quote from: mainpmf on February 22, 2016, 10:59:42 AM

Can't we make a thread called "let everyone one fight over bitcoins issues and developments" and let this one for TA and graphs about speculation? Sad

You go first. Or was that it? Huh

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 22, 2016, 02:49:54 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 20, 2016, 05:34:28 PM

Quote from: brg444 on February 20, 2016, 05:22:34 PM

Quote from: hdbuck on February 20, 2016, 05:16:00 PM

Quote

If there is strong community support, the hard-fork activation will likely happen around July 2017.

~not tonight dear... Grin

Blockstream is never to be underestimated. They literally didn't move an inch and everyone is circle jerking "the great compromise"... incredible. What a wet noodle the miners turned out to be... so much for that childish delusion I used to hold.

Watching [name redacted to protect the repentant] lose his principles for a ~~$20~~ ~~$19~~ ~~$15~~ $1.93 relief rally was the hardest part. Cry

GG guys... GG

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on February 23, 2016, 10:15:12 PM

signs of war in the heavens ... or is it the blockapocalypse?

Repent!

pm luke-jr for further instructions

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 23, 2016, 10:19:18 PM

That's fullblocalypse^TM

Hodl me?

Quote from: Fatman3001 on February 23, 2016, 10:32:47 PM

A piece of toast with a picture of my art teacher from school!!!

Bet he couldn't paint an analogy like this, tho.

Quote from: JimboToronto on February 23, 2016, 10:48:05 PM

Is that "religious artifact" embedded in polymethyl methacrylate?

What a great idea. I wonder how long before the toasted-in image begins to fade. Long enough to sell 'em on eBay I'd think.

Better yet, make an unlimited supply (just like the federal reserve). Wink

http://www.amazon.com/Burnt-Impressions-The-Jesus-Toaster/dp/B0042QRYO8

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 23, 2016, 11:57:09 PM

I have another question for smallblockers: Won't higher fees make it harder to mix coins and remain anonymous?

You think smallblockers spend their high powered central bank settlement monies?

Bitcoin is to have, to HODL.

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 24, 2016, 12:41:44 AM

if i was bitcoins CEO
I'd sell all of you a "second layer solution"
but the second layer would be centralized.

LN naturally gravitates to the hub and spoke model due to economic and convenience incentives...

tl;dr

You're late, highly technical minds beat you to the punch.

Quote from: becoin on February 24, 2016, 12:54:19 AM

Big blocktards troll fest round the clock... Who's paying?

It's a Green Beret op, involving a number of sleeper agents that hung around these fora for years. We "activated" when blocks started being regularly full.

To answer your question:
The checks say DoD

I heard rumors about GCHQ having a sister op, but can't confirm.

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 24, 2016, 01:43:03 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 24, 2016, 02:39:08 AM

Quote from: spooderman on February 24, 2016, 02:26:55 AM

should html do everything? or should javascript exist?

dont get me started about how poorly thought out all these internet techs are.

these techs all evolved in there own way, and where all smashed to together to give us the internet we have today

html5 is trying hard to consolidate the horrific mess that was created

I worked as a web dev, trust me its a hell of a mess out there

JS php flash etc its all crap!

whats really amazing is that it works! unless you use IE then your shit out of luck.

I think that was an attempt at metaphorical profundity adam, or maybe the chicken bones fell funny for me. A better metaphor in my mind would be the transportation system of a major city.

You have highways, and you have busses that (more efficiently) use that highway.

It's unlikely, but say the roads are toll roads, operated by a group of companies. The busses are also private, but run by one company, however, they are willing to freely offer the basis of their model to other companies.

Here's where it gets really weird. The bus company are also the civil engineers for the road system. The toll road company builds and maintains them, but the bus company draws up the plans.

Bus company just finished a meeting with the toll road operators, and convinced them that 1 lane (each way) highway is the solution, for now, and maybe in 18 months... 2.5 (motorcycles?) lanes will be acceptable to the ecological health of the area around the current 1 lane highway.

The whole thing somewhat breaks down when competing road systems and transport systems enter the fray without the same barriers of the physical world (see adam's ether).� Even without them, we've already tangled ourselves in a whole nest of crossed incentives and pitfalls�

Something tells me the toll road operators will wake up eventually, but timing is everything, and they risk a competing operator eating their lunch as tolls rise, traffic waits go up, and people flee to other systems.

@bargainbin
next thing you know they'll be mining classic blocks with reckless abandon

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 24, 2016, 05:23:13 AM

im buying another 2000$ worth tomorrow if price still low, and my bids dont fill overnight.
just saying...

F2Pool defects from the Blockstream-Suicide-Pact... bitcoin UP.

Quote from: Tzupy on February 24, 2016, 11:37:34 PM

Bitcoin Community On Brink Of Insanity: Kiss

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-community-on-brink-of-insanity/

Good ol' insightful Bram...

Dude's ego dismissed it at single digits. Now he wants to join forces with BS to control it at $430...

What a douche.

Quote from: gentlemand on February 25, 2016, 02:28:12 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 25, 2016, 02:22:50 AM

Are all zero fee transactions included in Litecoin, Dash, monero, etherium? Bitcoin is losing market share because competitors are underpricing us.

I'm sure they'd be ever so excited to receive any actual transactions regardless of fees.

Whell, at least they got a monero logo placed on the top thread of both r/btc and r/bitcoin for most of today... nice work iCE. Undecided

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 25, 2016, 03:59:13 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on February 25, 2016, 03:54:42 AM

Quote

I've said that all along. It's the people who could point guns at the miners any time they want. That's what censorship is

... and then what, they shoot the blockchain into pieces?! omg bitcoin doomed

Shut them down if they are stupid, but they aren't stupid. The Chinese have a higher average IQ than Europeans and Americans. They would do what the Chinese do: they would manipulate the currency. 51% attacks, double spends or merely threaten to do so.

This is the part where we change the PoW� just like some are threatening to do if 75% of the blocks start voting for 2MB.

The important difference� it would be unanimous in the case of chinese govt takeover of mines, far from it with a simple upgrade to 2MB max blocks with miners using soft limits along their supply curve.

15000, and a big delete buffer Cool

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 25, 2016, 04:24:54 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 25, 2016, 04:14:46 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 25, 2016, 03:59:13 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on February 25, 2016, 03:54:42 AM

Quote

I've said that all along. It's the people who could point guns at the miners any time they want. That's what censorship is

... and then what, they shoot the blockchain into pieces?! omg bitcoin doomed

How long would that take? How soon could we agree on a different hashing algorithm? How much hashpower would secure the new fork? Face it, the ChiComs could damage Bitcoin beyond repair, or at least destroy our firstmover advantage and crash the price to pennies.

It'd be a nightmare for sure, but not insurmountable I think. As gmax likes to say, the candidate code is ready. The chances of you seeing it are probably much higher than a hostile takeover by the PRC.

Aaaand... the debate has risen to the tenor of "accusations of cockgobbling"

Way to go Samson Mow, COO (edited) of BTCC

Bobby Lee must be proud.

This might help clear out some of the cobwebs of your confusion adam... Kiss

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 25, 2016, 05:10:25 AM

idk the guy, he's chinese i assumed he was a big blocker.

peter todd shouldn't be allowed to have friends.

Samson is the guy who basically spearheaded the "Great Consensus" event last weekend, I heard the letter turned medium blog post with fancy changing titles was written on his laptop.

That explains his flurry of twittering during and following the event, I think.

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on February 25, 2016, 05:56:11 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 25, 2016, 05:10:25 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 25, 2016, 05:05:20 AM

This might help clear out some of the cobwebs of your confusion adam... Kiss

idk the guy, he's chinese i assumed he was a big blocker.

peter todd shouldn't be allowed to have friends.

Samson Mow is the best comedian working in the Bitcoin space. And FYI he's Canadian.

Can we get him to write a sitcom about Peter Todd and Luke Jr as an odd couple that somehow gets locked in a room together in every episode?

I'm picturing a sort of Peep Show meets Big Bang Theory angsty geekfest of feisty mutual loathing with occasional rapport and reconciliation. Grin

Richard Ayoade as The Todd. David Mitchell as Luke? Benedict Wong can play Samson when they break the fourth wall. Tongue

You're much funnier when you're high on illusory confidence.

This is just� lame. Undecided

Imagining iCEBREAKER, kicking back after a long day of R3KTing gavinista lolcows... finds relaxation in crappy sitcoms, now that's funny.

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 25, 2016, 06:13:08 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 25, 2016, 05:46:46 AM

from 90% to 84% percent market share in two months! If Bitcoin was a corporation, it would be extraordinary for the CEO NOT to get sacked by the Board of Directors. That is a stunning loss of market share in so little of time. It took IBM, Microsoft, Yahoo! years to lose that much. Not sure about MySpace though.

the sad news is these altcoins even ETH is no safe haven from what's happening here in bitcoin land, if bitcoin can't do it no one can.
and if everyone ( or a few to many poeple) goes of to doge maid eth etc
the whole crypto world is going to come crashing down.
i can't quite put my finger on why exactly
but i have a feeling if bitcoiners get all divided up into 10 - 20 different cryptos, it's a big fat FAIL, for all.

Bitcoin not being able to do it is their raison d'�tre. See monero.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on February 25, 2016, 06:26:01 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 25, 2016, 06:13:08 AM

the sad news is these altcoins even ETH is no safe haven from what's happening here in bitcoin land, if bitcoin can't do it no one can.
and if everyone ( or a few to many poeple) goes of to doge maid eth etc
the whole crypto world is going to come crashing down.
i can't quite put my finger on why exactly
but i have a feeling if bitcoiners get all divided up into 10 - 20 different cryptos, it's a big fat FAIL, for all.

some guys who thought they were in charge and puffed up in their suits of self-importance found out they were actually just wind-bags and in fact noone is in charge, just as it said on the tin ... so yeah if they want to break away and form FailCoin they are welcome ... or they can stop stabbing everyone else in the back and start pulling in the same direction again?

Like the guy furiously tweeting away like his entire reputation depended on it right now?

https://twitter.com/Excellion

Quote from: AlexGR on February 25, 2016, 06:52:18 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 24, 2016, 06:50:23 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 24, 2016, 06:47:14 PM

i just send 1$ to 1LBHYYEbd8eqrfi9PiSEkj35e9vM3iZEFm with a 1cent fee

lets see what happens...

sending it now...

https://blockchain.info/address/1LBHYYEbd8eqrfi9PiSEkj35e9vM3iZEFm

if this dont work ill send it with a 5cent fee.

current block height 399867

Took a while but:

Included In Blocks 399923

Even with near-zero fees at 0.01$ you got in, with lower priority, despite "blocks are full".

Well, now that we know where we are today... let the stagnation and competitive advantage erosion begin!

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 25, 2016, 07:22:20 AM

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on February 25, 2016, 07:07:43 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 25, 2016, 01:42:48 AM

What a douche.

Yes, HostFat has really lost it over "ZOMG RITE MEOW" blocksize drama.

He seems to be in shellshock from the utter loss of XT, and may never recover (especially given how Classic is floundering). Undecided

No, it's Bitcoin that is foundering (not floundering). Losing market share. There is all something very Catholic/Protestant about this fight. The One True Bitcoin vs. these upstart individualists. I'd be interested to see from an anthropological study if there is any correlation between church affiliation and blocksize affiliation.

Do me a favor and ask the rest of the counter-reformation goon squad where they go on Sundays, will you?

A single data point, but a funny one.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 23, 2016, 10:45:43 PM

Quote from: Fatman3001 on February 23, 2016, 10:32:47 PM

A piece of toast with a picture of my art teacher from school!!!

Bet he couldn't paint an analogy like this, tho.

And Lo! The poutrage intensifies!

[I fucking hate twitter]

Quote from: BitUsher on February 25, 2016, 07:56:55 PM

Quote from: blunderer on February 25, 2016, 07:48:58 PM

owait, that happened in 2013... nvrmnd.

Many of us still mine at home , and even profitably because we have free electricity from Sunk costs (microhydro,solar)

There is also hope/expectations that products will start to be released in the future to recycle heat from ASICs, that will than incentivize more mining at home.

Which is unrelated to your concern as your stratum connection to the pool requires minimal bandwidth... or you are solo mining at home?

Here's kano's opinion...

Quote from: kano on February 25, 2016, 12:59:56 PM

Quote from: macbook-air on February 24, 2016, 01:02:11 PM

Announcement: We will withdraw support from February 21�s roundtable consensus, unless Adam Back gives us a reasonable explanation why he quietly changed his title from Blockstream President to Individual at the very last moment � without anybody noticed. We feel we�ve been cheated. I don�t know how we can trust Blockstream anymore in the future.

Hmm, couldn't all the pools just go with 2MB and tell the devs who think they control everything to stop trying to make themselves feel important?

Bitcoin is by design controlled by the consensus of the miners, not by centralised control.
It would seem that there are all sorts of parties trying to control bitcoin and I guess they all simply fail to understand the design.

Doesn't really matter how important devs think they are, if they want to be a relevant part of the blockchain decisions then they need to be miners.

...

BlockStream/Sidechains/SegWit all sounds a lot like trying pointlessly to control altcoins and make something like a partial SPV ... to me.

Knock it off adam. Censorship is lame, and petty... no need to stoop to their level with superior ideas on your side.

The ragequit + keccak (candidate code is ready) PoW change can't come soon enough. 1MB4EVA will be plenty for their "censorship" free, rasb pi & LJR internet compatible settlement coin...

[I hope everyone noticed that BitUsher didn't come back to expound on his complete lack of knowledge about how mining works today...]

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 26, 2016, 02:29:58 AM

Interestingly, through these posts I've discovered all my deleted posts have NOT [that's 4U JJG] been deleted by adam... so far. Too bad the only indication I have of the culprit is:

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator.

Undecided

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on February 26, 2016, 03:07:57 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 26, 2016, 01:07:14 AM

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/47luh3/f2pool_is_under_ddos_attack/

of course they are.

It's not an "attack." Core supporters are merely voting with their packets.

If that happens to disturb f2pool's existing datagram consensus with a more contentious version, well too bad.

Majoritarian Democracy > Nork Sensor Ships

I'm sure Wang Chun views it the same way, you lot are a charming bunch.

Quote from: smooth on February 26, 2016, 03:20:27 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 26, 2016, 03:16:15 AM

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on February 26, 2016, 03:07:57 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 26, 2016, 01:07:14 AM

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/47luh3/f2pool_is_under_ddos_attack/

of course they are.

I'm sure Wang Chun views it the same way, you lot are a charming bunch.

Charming or not, the world is as it is, and it doesn't owe Wang Chun a living.

I'm not supporting "voting with their packets" but the way the internet operates, it can't be prevented in practice and needs to be accepted as reality if one would like to engage in realistic decision making.

Absolutely...

To continue in the same vein, Core isn't owed his blocks. A fact that I'm sure is a little clearer today.

Quote from: AlexGR on February 26, 2016, 03:32:42 AM

Quote from: harrymmmm on February 25, 2016, 10:01:57 PM

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 25, 2016, 09:47:18 PM

if you small blocker truly believe the shit you say you should from a group that wishes to lower block limit to 0.5MB.

you'll get more decentralization and security, for everything else there's the Lighting Network promiseland.

I know that you know that most people want bigger blocks - sooner or later.
Why keep saying stuff like this?

Indeed.

Core makes BTC much faster (helps scaling) and resilient with 0.12, fixes malleability bug / introduces Segwit in a couple of months (1.7MB capacity) and commits to future blocksize increase that puts capacity at >2mb which classic provides. And we are still discussing "small blockers"? Why?

The amount of stirring shit for the lolz, resurrecting 5-10-20 day posts from the garbage, creating fictitious drama and "problems", saying that the end is coming because "blocks are full" when even 1c or even 4 tenths of one cent fee txs go in in a few hours despite "blocks are full" and backlogs, saying people can't be anonymous with bitcoin because with high fees there can't be no mixing (when fees are at practically zero cost AND the fact that cheap mixing is USELESS mixing due to the sybil attack vector where other parties can pretend to be mixing with you just to unmask you - I mean, if they pay almost zero fees, they can be pretending to be mixing coins all day so that they can see who else mixes with them), pretending there is some official camp that wants 1MB forevah and intentionally creating friction out of nowhere when there is no such camp (everyone is doing scaling work)....wtf? Are you all retarded and/or paid shills?

Blockstream/Core NEEDS segwit for their future plans. It fixes malleability, which could be fixed in a multitude of ways, but is CRITICAL for LN type scrip systems. Importantly, it gives a 75% fee discount to signature heavy transactions, economic favoritism for the settlement network. Most importantly, it only needs miners to soft fork it in, not nodes... non-upgraded nodes are left blissfully unable to verify segwit transactions (a "nice" bifurcation of the full node structure)... no node level referendum on Core's dominance. 1.7MB equiv is a rosy view... a slower uptake from outside developers integrating the changes into their apps means more like 1.3MB. They dangled the carrot of a HF in July 2017, just to get the miners to go along.

Fees aren't prohibitively expensive today... but that means we have near 0 potential for growth... it's not a coincidence that the exponential uptrend in price has been thoroughly broken. Also, no coincidence that alts are exploding (lucky iCE), taking massive share from BTC.

It's obvious to everyone after 6 months of debating that Blockstream wants a constrained on-chain environment to artificially incentivize off-chain solutions... which (totally incidentally) will siphon off miner fees to hub operators. How the fuck do you think Blockstream is gonna get an ROI on $76mm of loot?

Look... I'm not against a form of seg-wit in principle, nor off chain solutions... but they need to compete on a level playing field. I'm sick and tired of scare mongering, DDoS, and censorship being employed to steer this boat in the most favorable direction for Blockstream. It may be going there despite my protestations, but I'm not going to just shut up and get steamrolled without complaining loudly about it.

Quote from: Patel on February 26, 2016, 04:05:59 AM

Damn Adam,

I'm surprised you let this thread turn into another cesspool of debate.

Yeah, sig ad penny farmers, artists with an affinity for straight lines, highly specialized tea leaf readers... the place was actually tolerable back when block sizes were being decided by miners, not devs.

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 26, 2016, 04:17:19 AM

Quote from: Patel on February 26, 2016, 04:05:59 AM

Damn Adam,

I'm surprised you let this thread turn into another cesspool of debate.

lol i was adding fuel to the fire b4.

the idea that blockstream was going to "veto" the roundtable consensus, and core had no intention of having a 2MB blockchain, had everyone going ape shit, including me...

it wouldn't have been the first time an agreement on this debate failed to stick.

i don't think we are out of the woods.

i bet blockstream guys are very reluctant to sign, but rumor has it they will follow suit... let's see how long this lasts.

Adam changed his attribution yesterday, fwiw. I guess that settles it, then.

lel

Quote from: DieJohnny on February 26, 2016, 05:07:11 AM

anyone else completely bored and tired of hearing about block size, blockstream, and scalability?

i wish this thread moderator would simply announce a ban on the topics. For the record though, corruption is everywhere Bitcoin is no different, regardless of which side you are on.

Thanks for your non-blockstream-size-scalability contribution. Undecided

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 26, 2016, 05:20:39 AM

There's complaining and then there's running a classic node. I'm at step 2.
-snip-

I compiled a classic node from source, back before the binaries... cause my body is ready "right meow!"

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 26, 2016, 05:35:39 AM

Quote from: adamstgBit on February 26, 2016, 05:20:14 AM

segwit +2MB agreement is OK by me. for now...

But we are not getting 2mb "for now".

we are only getting seg wit "for now."

the 2mb is contingent on several factors and still to be determined.

It doesn't matter if a bunch of people are whining and throwing hissy fits and saying we have to get 2mb... we are not getting 2mb.. now and probably at the earliest a year from now... .. the powers that be are within the status quo, and none of them are going to agree that 2mb is needed now, and a large number are putting off any kind of exact commitment to 2mb... while agreeing that "some time in the future" 2mb will likely be needed (whether that is at the earliest a year from now or sometime other uncertain time down the road of a few years from now... gotta see how everything plays out).

So, why do people want to make losing propositions and to insist and to say I want to get 2mb "now," and it has already been decided that 2mb is NOT necessary at the moment because seg wit will take care of all of the essentials for at least several months into the future

and 2mb is not off of the table but it will be 1) "considered" 2) "researched" and 3) "to be determined" depending on how things go... blah blah blah.

To me, it makes little to no sense to set oneself up for nearly inevitable failure by insisting and insisting and insisting on something that just is not happening "now"... When anybody insists on something that is not happening, they get their emotions worked up and just fail to see positives and continue to FOCUS on what they are NOT getting.... Seems a bit ridiculous to me... to think that way and to even to attempt to negotiate from such a position.... and in that regard, the status quo is not convinced that 2mb is needed now, and therefore, the burden has not been met.. and therefore.. 1mb until such time as conditions change...

The guy that bought at $1200... ladies and gentlemen.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 26, 2016, 05:46:30 AM

What the fuck are you talking about?

Is your point, anyhow related to the substance of anything I said in the post?

or are you just striving for some quasi-off-topic and irrelevant dig (which by the way would classify pretty strongly as an ad hominem attack, because there is no there, there in your assertion.?

Surely, BTC prices are relevant in this thread, but in that particular post that I just made, the topic was responding to adam's asserted agreement about segwit and 2mb blocksize limits "now".

Yes, this is one instance where you can correctly hoist the ad hom flag.

Same reason I view a blind man as incapable of performing a delicate surgery on my heart.

You've made it clear you're the agreeable type, fine. You have an innate deference to authority figures, swell. Others see the incentives laid out clearly before them, and will call a spade a spade. Miners may be just as agreeable as you are, I guess we'll find out.

Quote from: AlexGR on February 26, 2016, 05:53:59 AM

...

All of this presumes that Bitcoin has a monopoly.

Hint: It doesn't, and the market will punish you until you figure that out.

Quote from: AlexGR on February 26, 2016, 06:05:11 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 26, 2016, 06:01:26 AM

Quote from: AlexGR on February 26, 2016, 05:53:59 AM

...

All of this presumes that Bitcoin has a monopoly.

Hint: It doesn't, and the market will punish you until you figure that out.

There is no altcoin that has efficiently solved the issue of scaling, near zero cost txs and and near zero cost abuse. If anything, they have worse of a problem due to being forced to go low-fee mode (to increase their adoption) at the expense of getting abused.

Dear guy who uses a fake satoshi email from 2015 as a signature,

Satoshi thought it was a no-brainer that we'd gracefully scale up after 5 years of tech improvement...

Quote from: satoshi on October 04, 2010, 07:48:40 PM

Not quotable for "reasons"... but here's what he thought of your raspberry pi middle men:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=532.msg6306#msg6306

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 26, 2016, 06:26:03 AM

...

My hands just drop.

Quote from: AlexGR on February 26, 2016, 08:22:07 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 26, 2016, 04:01:09 AM

Fees aren't prohibitively expensive today... but that means we have near 0 potential for growth... it's not a coincidence that the exponential uptrend in price has been thoroughly broken. Also, no coincidence that alts are exploding (lucky iCE), taking massive share from BTC.

Massive share in what? The transactions conducted in other blockchains are few. Actually these blockchains SHOULD be used more, especially by applications that are currently spamming the BTC blockchain.

Price movement of altcoins is mostly irrelevant as it doesn't deal with fundamentals. For example Ethereum scales worse than BTC and will definitely not run for free / near-zero-cost, otherwise it is a completely broken system. So what exactly is the market "rewarding" in Ethereum? It's superior scaling or finding solutions that don't exist in bitcoin? No.

The fee structures in general in altcoins, are typically worse than BTC. Ethereum, for example, considers the low fee model of bitcoin as broken in terms of dealing with abuse and bloating/centralization.

Monero has been extensively abused by bloat attacks that almost killed them and had to raise fees.

Litecoin has in place certain anti-spam fees that aren't in Bitcoin.

DASH has various fees in place as abuse disincentives in its subsystems.

Near free txs = Near free abuse. For anonymous coins => near free txs = near free sybil attack vector to unmask mixing parties, plus near free bloat for the lolz by the mixing which multiply hard disk use.

You see the recent past as a reliable indicator of the future, fine.

Quote from: AlexGR on February 26, 2016, 08:22:07 AM

Quote

It's obvious to everyone after 6 months of debating that Blockstream wants a constrained on-chain environment to artificially incentivize off-chain solutions...

Satoshi put the 1MB in place. Not "Blockstream".

The offchain solutions or sidechains, are just a necessity to deal with the technological problem of scaling. When even at 2MB blocks - if you leave the code as it is, you can get validation times of >10 minutes, that's not blockstream's fault. When even if you "deal" with the quadratic explosion by crippling some stuff, you still hit similar hurdles if you go to higher block size numbers, in terms of propagation times, that's not blockstream's fault.

If the internet had 100TBps lines instead of 100GBps, and CPUs were way faster, and disks were way bigger, we might be laughing at all this right now - as will people of the future reading us. But right now the problem is real - there is nothing artificial about it. And the only people doing work to fix it are core devs (see, for example, validation time improvements to help it scale).

As for ROI, I don't know how many Bitcoins they actually own, but even if a portion of this money has been invested in Bitcoin, and Bitcoin goes way higher in price as a result of proper development work being conducted, then it's not impossible to see very impressive ROIs.

Yes, he did, when the actual traffic was a tiny fraction of the max, previously intended to be an anti DoS limit, not an economic policy tool. Guess what, it didn't immediately peg 1MB and stay there becuz spammerz...

Your >10min validation time threat has already been dealt with in classic, rtfm, the possibility is no greater with classic at 2MB vs core at 1MB. Not even a big problem if it hadn't, because no sane miner would sit there with their thumb up their ass verifying a malicious block, it'd become stale, and be replaced by a longer chain.

This conflict goes deeper than the safety of 1MB vs 2MB... it goes to the very heart of the incentive mechanisms of the network. One side advocates economic central planning with their grubby little fingers on the miner's supply curve. The other side recognizes that miners are incentivized to use soft limits to regulate their block sizes, and set their own fee prices... It's pretty simple really: A battle of the technocratic central planners and the capitalists. History has shown, we can't be sure of who will win. Important to keep in mind... digital competition moves freely... no Berlin Walls here... tick tock.

[You think investors in Blockstream�, led by Reid Hoffman, Khosla Ventures and Real Ventures, with investments from Nicolas Berggruen, Crypto Currency Partners, Future\Perfect Ventures, Danny Hillis, Eric Schmidt�s Innovation Endeavors, Max Levchin, Mosaic Ventures, Ray Ozzie, Ribbit Capital, Jerry Yang�s AME Cloud Ventures and several others gave millions to them just because they might own some bitscoins... lel]

Quote from: sAt0sHiFanClub on February 26, 2016, 09:31:05 AM

Quote from: kano on February 25, 2016, 12:59:56 PM

Moments of Lucidity are Lucid.

kano's a legend

Dude was elbow deep looong before any of these 2013 bubble joiners read their first article. Before Adam Back realized his "hashcash extended with inflation control" might just be a thing.

As the discussion has been split, and moved, here's the link to his actual comment:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1377560.msg14005202#msg14005202

Quote from: toknormal on February 26, 2016, 11:53:11 PM

Main engine ignition. All charts clear.

Say goodbye to sub $400 Bitcoin.
Forever.

GORF crossing awaits over the next few weeks.

Say hello to the 4th time I get to sell some above 440 in three months?

Gentlemen!

You call this follow through volume? Snap out of it, you saw the jpg, BUY! Mewn is next.

lol at china volume painting

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 27, 2016, 01:08:15 AM

Quote from: BitUsher on February 27, 2016, 12:02:34 AM

Amazing development work from Sean Bowe, Pieter Wuille, Gregory Maxwell, and Madars Virza.

First successful Zero-Knowledge Contingent Payment (ZKCP) on Bitcoin network=

https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/02/26/zero-knowledge-contingent-payments-announcement/

Who needs the competing zerocoin token when we can build CT , zk-SNARKs, and ZKCP's in Bitcoin directly?

Bullish!

Bullish!*

*(Don't hurt me, Fatman)

It's nice work, to be sure.

Can you provide an example of how you would use it in a practical application? Entirely hypothetical of course, it doesn't have to be you.

Maybe also explain how that application might lead a meaningful increase in the demand for quantities of BTC? [the bullish part]

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 27, 2016, 01:29:22 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 27, 2016, 01:17:28 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 27, 2016, 01:08:15 AM

Quote from: BitUsher on February 27, 2016, 12:02:34 AM

Bullish!*

*(Don't hurt me, Fatman)

My name is Jeff. My life is an open book. But sometimes people like to do private financial things. IDK. Anything to keep them away from XMR is fine with me.

The linked article describes the execution of a sort of smart contract.

I'll settle for an explanation of how this allows Monero-like transactions [for totally not drug deals ofc], using BTC as a currency.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 27, 2016, 01:43:15 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 27, 2016, 01:17:28 AM

ELI5 : An Individual can prove the authenticity of a digital item without disclosing the details to insure privacy or prove they actually have the information without giving away information before a agreement or sale is made.

Some applications off the top of my head:

ZK-payment trustless* mixing without the need for third parties
Removing many required escrow agents from the sale of digital goods or information

More secure trustless* and verifiable auditing

Proof of registered assets or properties that can independently be audited(property titles) without disclosing details (location) that could compromise privacy

Smart contracts that can independently be audited for veracity but without disclosing the details therein for privacy

Example of use case from article--

"An example application would be the owners of a particular make of e-book reader cooperating to purchase the DRM master keys from a failing manufacturer, so that they could load their own documents on their readers after the vendor�s servers go offline. This type of sale is inherently irreversible, potentially crosses multiple jurisdictions, and involves parties whose financial stability is uncertain�meaning that both parties either take a great deal of risk or have to make difficult arrangement. Using a ZKCP avoids the significant transactional costs involved in a sale which can otherwise easily go wrong."

* Trustless within the constraints to a secure trust minimized block chain like bitcoin. Nothing is completely trustless.

I read the article.

I was just hoping for there to be some kind of untapped demand that would be served here, maybe you've described it...

Onwards and upwards! To registered assets that can be independently be audited(property titles) without disclosing details (location) that could compromise privacy(!)

[An update on the solar solo mine would be groovy too.]

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 27, 2016, 01:51:25 AM

3rd party mixing services have got to go. How would this mixing work exactly?

It's all very technical Mr. Corn. Imagine, if you will, coins moving, but the reason that they moved from here to there is somewhat obfuscated, secured by a small smart contract, with little identifying information between the contract and the coins moving...

You can imagine the amount of exchange accounts being registered right now, to take advantage of this break through.

Mewn boys, mewn.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 27, 2016, 02:23:22 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 27, 2016, 01:50:27 AM

[An update on the solar solo mine would be groovy too.]

When building a Solar power grid or using microhydro one must plan for peak electrical use. I prefer Microhydro, but the cost of solar is getting much cheaper every year. Normally, one would float charge batteries and than burn off extra electricity to heat water , but I find that solar water heaters are better suited for this task, and excess electricity that would normally be discarded is used to mine bitcoin.

What would be the best of all worlds is using those ASICs to heat water as well to close the loop and recycle the waste heat.

So you're actually doing this, or just describing it? Antminers? How many kW?

Solo mining was the important part.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 27, 2016, 02:21:34 AM

Criminal smart contracts is so bullish.

It's puff, puff, pass. Mr Corn.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 27, 2016, 02:37:47 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 27, 2016, 02:26:49 AM

So you're actually doing this, or just describing it? Antminers? How many kW?

Solo mining was the important part.

I haven't started recycling the waste heat yet... thinking of trapping heat with an intercooler in a bath of Novec but need more time to test the efficiency of several designs.

Disclosing capacity details or ones exact location isn't advisable for miners in general as there are many security considerations to be aware of, so lets stick to the more abstract reasons why I mentioned how one can compete with large industrial miners and still remain profitable.

There are many other incentives we can discuss which increase profitability of solo/p2pool miners as well I can discuss...

Wow, Novec baths are in the development plan. I understand that it's all very super cereal secret stuff. Say no more.

Quote from: arklan on February 27, 2016, 02:45:39 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 27, 2016, 02:43:56 AM

The large man with numbers after his name got me thinking more about decentralization and nodes.

All we need to protect ourselves from this cataclysmic event [drop in full nodes] is to have some slightly above average dedicated Bitcoin nutters. A quick look at the WO thread tells me we're safe for now.

BitUsher is clearly one. (No offence.) How many nutters are enough? Srs question.

full node here. i got a terabyte of space and a 60 mb connection. *shrug* why not.

Yeap, looking like the month will end with about 290 GB of traffic. Didn't even notice it going. Gbps fiber has been laid through the hood, but I'm still on cable for the time being.

Quote from: BitUsher on February 27, 2016, 02:48:46 AM

One reason solominers have an incentive over large miners deals with security. Having a few miners (or many) that use excess free waste electricity in a private domicile can be more secure than a large warehouse which has added risks from theft , fire hazard, acts of nature destroying the investment, tax authorities looking to steal profits, ect,...

Right now many industrial miners are enjoying a brief window of calm besides a warehouse or 2 burning down on occasion... But what happens when the Chinese government starts looking into the secret agreements those miners are making for discounted hydro power and what happens when the tax authorities start auditing these mining companies?

The bottom line is no one knows for sure if the trend towards mining centralization will continue or not and their are incentives either way ... but some of us haven't given up on bitcoin and still exploring solutions.

One large disadvantage for a solominer is variance... especially if you are less than petahashes, and those mines are not hidden.

Like it or not, these huge, known, warehouses run the security of the Bitcoin network... which is why the extreme reluctance to allow 2MB blocks is extra silly. Why not just switch to keccak already, if censorship resistance is #1 goal?

Hint: it's not, and on-chain scarcity subsidizing rube goldberg styled "solutions" is the real gameplan

Quote from: BitUsher on February 27, 2016, 03:02:44 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 27, 2016, 02:59:23 AM

One large disadvantage for a solominer is variance... especially if you are less than petahashes, and those mines are not hidden.

We are working on making p2pool better.

You and jtoomim?

EDIT: yes, I will keep in mind you are using free electricity Cheesy

Quote from: aminorex on February 27, 2016, 04:40:29 AM

Quote from: chesthing on February 27, 2016, 04:16:08 AM

The only way bitcoin will ever come close to 32k is through honest to goodness mainsteam adoption

It would not require "mainstream" adoption, merely greater penetration of specific use-cases. Suppose reserve demand is 90% of the float, and the remainder is liquidity demand, with 15% of a 2tn gdp black market turning over at v=5. That would imply a 600bn mcap, and 32k usd bitcoin.

If you look closely, you can see the fingerprint of the 2tn black mkt...

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 27, 2016, 05:05:01 AM

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1378318.msg14022868#msg14022868

Him accusing you of being GCHQ really kicked off a little stockholm syndrome, eh?

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 27, 2016, 05:17:40 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 27, 2016, 05:11:58 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on February 27, 2016, 05:05:01 AM

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1378318.msg14022868#msg14022868

Him accusing you of being GCHQ really kicked off a little stockholm syndrome, eh?

LOL. Well, let's just say I'm trying harder to see both sides of the field. Don't forget: I'm not as clever as some of u guise.

Also I'm Canadian. So I have that going against me. Undecided

Check out Soluvox, they're canadian too, and pay well afaict.

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on February 27, 2016, 05:25:37 AM

Quote from: toknormal on February 27, 2016, 12:57:42 AM

Quote from: yefi on February 27, 2016, 12:19:13 AM

The gorf is a new technical indicator to me Tongue

There is pent up worldwide demand for bitcoin. We may be imminently headed for $6000 BTC.

I'm not joking. Lets see.

Bitcoin has had a battering from the media for the best part of 6-7 years. Plenty know about it now. It has been superseded technologically and none of those assets even made a dent in its marketcap.

It has been superseded institutionally because we now know that banks all over the world have been running their own blockchains. But none of them even made a dent in Bitcoin's marketcap.

It has been superceeded strategically because we now have smart-contract based blockchains galore, yet, even none of those blockchains even made a dent in bitcoin's marketcap.

What will banks do when they discover that the value isn't blockchain, it's bitcoin ? What will they do when they discover that blockchain is dirt cheap, can be reproduced a million times over and actually isn't much more useful technologically than an SQL server worth $1000 bucks ? What will they do when they discover that bitcoin isn't dirt cheap, can't be replicated, can't be bought, can't be regulated and can't even be matched for hashpower with the combined budgets of all the world's banks put together ?

Bitcoin is going to be in demand by $7 billion people. Not for technological reasons, for monetary reasons. It is a perfected token both monetarily and sociologically. It is beginning to successfully conclude its "rights of passage" phase and just shortly, $400 now is going to look like $1 did back in 2010.

Interesting that no one had a thing to say about this text, amongst your squabbles. Good stuff for the win of the decade and then the gift keeps on giving.

Bid it up to 440, then, pls.

B..b.b..but I thought Gregory Maxwell had bullish smart contracts that were going to revolutionize the auditing and verification of assets without knowing the owner of those assets? Grandma was gonna use SNARKS and CT's without even knowing it!

This wasn't predictable at all! Cry

Anybody else wondering if Mr. Mavrodi is just fucking with our heads? Shocked

Bring back the barely audible Charlie Lee. This conversation is going nowhere.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on February 28, 2016, 05:46:46 PM

all I see is $25 million in leveraged longs compared to 12K BTC shorts. That's money for the taking for anyone with a big enough bankroll.

How's swampnode classic holding up?

Looks like we've moved on to "they fight you" stage.

AMA with Jihan Wu/Bitmain, Adam Back/~~Individual~~ Blockstream, Samson Mow/BTCC

http://8btc.com/thread-29594-3-1.html

AMA with someone who claims to be behind the ddos'ing of ip's running classic nodes for the last 24 hrs. Can confirm the attacks are real, but this guy specifically, could be bluffing.

https://www.reddit.com/user/botneko-chan

Strong support on stamp.

A rabble rouser chimes in:

Stability, collaboration, and unity... through humorous tweets.

Quote from: bitebits on February 29, 2016, 06:34:35 AM

Wouldn't this DDOS attack on the Bitcoin Classic nodes cause a Streisand-effect? It gives Classic more attention, the opposit of what the attacker(s) try to achieve I assume. Not to mention the effect that the internal Bitcoin rebel in me is triggered to fire up another high bandwidth Classic node.

I think it has two effects, it does impact those who thought they were just having a little voice without confidence, they may choose their netflix over a classic vote. It has the opposite effect on the more committed group, hardening their resolve. You don't have to be that hard to change your ip with your isp (a changed mac address on my router does it every time).

Quote from: brg444 on February 29, 2016, 07:22:01 PM

Quote from: Adrian-x on February 29, 2016, 07:20:25 PM

Quote from: brg444 on February 29, 2016, 07:17:16 PM

Spam limit working as intended Cool

no the transactions centralized control deemed undesirable were not written to the blockchain but bloated the Mempool, something that was not supposed to happen.

Mempool bloat? Meh, just another spam attack. Honeybadger eats those for lunch.

$0.06 to get in the next block! Who's buying?

AlexGR was happy to remind us it was $0.04 (we should be using sat/byte btw) a week ago. So... 50% growth in a week boys! Can you smell that predictability and competitive advantage? Mewn sewn!

An aside: You, BitUsher, AlexGR, and hdbuck all joined the forum around the same time... can you guess who was first? Cheesy

Quote from: BitUsher on February 29, 2016, 07:11:34 PM

https://twitter.com/lopp/status/703769346921930757/photo/1

Bitter Big blocker spamming the network?

That was the crawler used by the DDoSer that nailed all the classic ip's this weekend.

Quote from: becoin on February 29, 2016, 06:22:42 PM

Quote from: rebuilder on February 29, 2016, 05:26:49 PM

Quote from: becoin on February 29, 2016, 05:18:39 PM

Quote from: rebuilder on February 29, 2016, 05:08:44 PM

Who should decide what the fair price of a tx is?

Competition between miners.

Sounds good to me! The old supply/demand dynamic, right?

Now, who should decide how much demand there is for tx?
Who should decide what the supply of tx is?

Demand is demand. Supply is supply. Free market is balancing supply and demand.
Every miner decides which is the lowest tx fee (cut-off level) for every particular block.
If tx fee for extended period is too low miners will go out of this business.
If tx fee for extended period is too high new miners will enter this business.
What don't you understand?

So much fail...

Do you even supply curve, broh? Do you even central plan?

Quote from: AlexGR on February 29, 2016, 08:34:03 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 29, 2016, 08:02:15 PM

Quote from: brg444 on February 29, 2016, 07:22:01 PM

Quote from: Adrian-x on February 29, 2016, 07:20:25 PM

Quote from: brg444 on February 29, 2016, 07:17:16 PM

Spam limit working as intended Cool

no the transactions centralized control deemed undesirable were not written to the blockchain but bloated the Mempool, something that was not supposed to happen.

Mempool bloat? Meh, just another spam attack. Honeybadger eats those for lunch.

$0.06 to get in the next block! Who's buying?

AlexGR was happy to remind us it was $0.04 (we should be using sat/byte btw) a week ago. So... 50% growth in a week boys! Can you smell that predictability and competitive advantage? Mewn sewn!

The situation from 40satoshi upwards is pretty similar.

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

31-40 satoshi per byte (1-9 blocks wait)
41-50 satoshi per byte (0-2 blocks wait)
51-60 satoshi per byte (0-1 blocks wait)
61-70 satoshi per byte (0 blocks wait)

Guarantees for 0-1-2 blocks or 10-20-30 minutes don't exist anyway, as the next block could be empty. Same for time. Next block could be issued in an hour due to variance, or you could have 3-4 blocks found in 20 minutes.

Quoted for future reference.

Also, if we consider that 90% of the transactions are spam, blocks are currently 10% full. Cool

Preach it brothers. Fuggin spammers.

These guise just don't get it. Without Core, Bitcoin will also fail.

Quote from: AlexGR on February 29, 2016, 10:27:59 PM

Technically speaking, he is right although all that has happened have created a spin on the events that if we don't include cheap spam in the blockchain then ...bitcoin won't grow... Like bitcoin needs spam growth and not legit tx growth.

There are a lot of actors in the forum, twitters, news etc, proclaiming the fullblockalypse, but the reality of the matter is that there is no fullblockalypse due to the fact that actual blockchain use is low and the rest of the free space is topped off with spam. That's why fees don't rise. If every tx was legitimate, and there was an actual crowding of txs competing for the limited space, fees would have gone through the roof.

Anyway, instead of NACK, he could say "ACK with the condition that default min fees also rise to combat spam".

Yes, I know you believe people using the network are spammers. You believe in the Core developers ~~becoming~~ being economic central planners... setting max production quotas. Only in the name of keeping you ~~safe from terrorism~~ decentralized tho.

A proponent of free market economics would say this is a decision to be left to the producers of block space... the miners.

In a sense, by 80% of them leaving their future to be decided by Blockstream... they have. Undecided

As brg444 likes to say, we have voice and exit...

Quote from: AlexGR on February 29, 2016, 10:54:33 PM

You do realize that bitcoin transactions are near-zero-cost, don't you? What central planning and quotas are you telling me about? What protection from decentralization or spam? We are at almost 70gb, with most of it being crap.

Uh, really? The malicious miner DoS protection limit set in 2010 turned central economic policy tool.

At what point is it not near-zero-cost? How much competitive advantage do you want to sacrifice at 25BTC per block reward? Why do we have a block reward at all if not to subsidize growth in the early phase of the network?

I know (to you) the transactions are spam and the blockchain is crap, we went over that part already.

Quote from: brg444 on February 29, 2016, 11:10:42 PM

v.0.12.0 has only been out for a week!

Is this the same variety of math where segwit = 2MB max_block_size?

Quote from: AlexGR on February 29, 2016, 11:27:39 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 29, 2016, 11:05:24 PM

Quote from: AlexGR on February 29, 2016, 10:54:33 PM

Uh, really? The malicious miner DoS protection limit set in 2010 turned central economic policy tool.

Again: we are at practically zero-cost-txs with 1c-2c-5c etc. This is bullshit.

You keep saying these cents numbers as if they're relevant. Use sat/byte pls. And tell me what a non-near-zero fee will be, thx. I'm obviously not asking for an objectively correct number here, that's not possible ("near" is not an objective descriptor), just your personal opinion will suffice.

Quote from: AlexGR on February 29, 2016, 11:27:39 PM

Quote

At what point is it not near-zero-cost?

There is not a single point where extremely cheap suddenly stops being extremely cheap. At least not if you have 0.01 usd increments. You can't say 0.05 is cheap and 0.06 stops being cheap. That doesn't work.

See above, you are the one saying they are near-zero fee. I am politely asking you, the budding central planner, what level you think that stops being the case.

Quote from: AlexGR on February 29, 2016, 11:27:39 PM

Quote

How much competitive advantage do you want to sacrifice at 25BTC per block reward?

As I demonstrated BTC is not losing anything to its competitors.

We have a "blocks are full" situation. Who is getting BTC traffic due to our "disadvantage"? Competitors blockchains are empty ghost-towns.

The competitive advantage rationale could also be applied for block times and have people asking for "urgent" cutting to 2.5m or 1m blocks etc. "Ohhh our opponent has faster blocks, quick, let's make our block fast too because we'll be very slow compared to them and we'll lose clients".

2-3-5 years after the introduction of faster currencies, BTC is still king despite it's competitive "disadvantage". Why?

A sure sign of a true businessman, "competition doesn't exist today, therefore it won't, ever, pay up suckas".

Quote from: BitUsher on February 29, 2016, 11:13:48 PM

Quote from: Lauda on February 29, 2016, 10:50:29 PM

Quote from: Adrian-x on February 29, 2016, 10:35:20 PM

Quote from: hdbuck on February 29, 2016, 10:27:06 PM

mmmnope

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/48bvjy/in_may_2015_gavin_calculated_that_blocks_will_be/

Bitcoin is under attack, and I'm not sure you see it as your salary probably is dependent on this very state.

it startes with this PR war.

Correct. The sudden influx of transactions today means that somebody is trying 'to make' Gavin look like his prediction was accurate when it fact it wasn't. There is a claim from 'experts' (albeit exact information not available I think) from the roundtable that only 40% of the blocks are actually full (if you exclude the spam). The mempool was ~1.5k 2 days ago (this says a lot). However, it also seems like the price doesn't really care.

Interesting ... and there is indeed evidence to back up your claim -

https://twitter.com/lopp/status/703769346921930757

The "evidence" you present is evidence of the crawler that was identifying ip's running classic for attack.

So now you know.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin_Classic/comments/47zglz/ddos_started_again_have_a_nice_day_guys/d0gl9ao?context=10000

fwiw, I do think there is some mempool spamming going on too, possibly in retaliation.

Back in the day, I would buy a sandwich with BTC every week. Fellow customers were impressed when I scanned a qr code with my phone and hit send. The vendor smiled when it popped up on their tablet 1.5 seconds later, the future had arrived.

Little did I know... I was bloating the blockchain with spam, filling in bytes in people's hard drives that should have been used for uncensorable payments to "freedom fighters", payment channel hub settlements, central bank reserve settlements, maybe a life-saving international drug transaction, or two. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

Amazingly, the vendor trusted my 0 conf transaction and let me walk away with the grub... every time. They hadn't met Peter Todd yet. Maybe they've got a lightning channel open to handle the "new normal", I should ask... or not.

Memories... We were young(er), scaling up the blocksize � la satoshi's post seemed a no-brainer, Blockstream hadn't been founded yet... the future was bright and full of possibilities. Cry

Pump it above 450 guise, please.

Quote from: BitUsher on March 01, 2016, 02:57:10 AM

Quote from: jbreher on March 01, 2016, 02:17:20 AM

Quote from: AlexGR on February 29, 2016, 10:27:59 PM

...actual blockchain use is low and the rest of the free space is topped off with spam. That's why fees don't rise. If every tx was legitimate...

What are the objective criteria by which any given transaction can be classified as being either: a) spam; or b) legitimate?

I have been asking this for months of many who like to kick around the term 'spam'. Many of them repeatedly. Perhaps even you? But to date, I have received exactly zero responsive replies.

Spam includes any unwanted or unnecessary transactions which impose a burden upon the network.

Unwanted and Unnecessary can be defined as tx which are deliberately made to attack the network and hold no purpose other than to cause disruption or bloat. Spam is also defined as any tx that pays far below the necessary threshold of fees that would be considered the norm during a given moment. This can change with time but is always quite distinguishable as seen here:

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/#delay

In the chart above you can see :

21-40 Satoshi's Per Byte is arguable
0-20 Satoshi's Per Byte is clearly spam

Now it is not for us to decide for a miner if they want to subsidize or process spam on the network regardless of any externalities it imposes upon all full nodes permanently and the network as a whole. One goal of a fee market is to eventually incentivize miners to begin to slowly value tx fees rather than merely the block reward which means tx fees need to increase to 5-10 usd per tx eventually once block reward is practically non-existent. Simply increasing the blocksize will never produce enough volume to compensate for these fees as it doesn't scale like payment channels do which can than pass on really high tx fees onto miners for a large set of aggregated txs as a settlement.

What the actual... That's exactly what you're advocating tho. If miners were setting soft limits and the malicious miner DoS limit was well above actual tx's [like it was for 5 years(!)]... we wouldn't be arguing about anything, the fee market would be determined along miner's actual supply curve. Core Devs have morphed into economic Central Planners with their stalling... and not for no reason, they want to sell the medicine for our "disease".

Looks like the HK meeting might not be the 80% mining monolith we thought it was... cat fights on tweeters.

Quote from: BitUsher on March 01, 2016, 03:19:59 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 01, 2016, 03:06:07 AM

There needs to be a balance between the mining "central planners" with the developer "central planners" with the user "central planners" and the... ect... with defining the constraints to insure our network is secure and robust rather than remove all constraints and allow any individual group of "central planners" to have too much control. Thus miners should have some choice and control , but not complete control as there is a dynamic and overlapping consensus structure here.

Now you can see how the term "central planners" isn't very appropriate to use when I describe the balance of power dynamics.

No.

The miners are economic competitors, with each other, to serve their customers (users), with a product (blockspace). The mines are their factories. A bigger mine means more potential blockspace will be theirs to sell.

Dev teams create software that may be chosen, and used by miners, or it may not be. They compete with other dev teams. They are not an infallible priesthood, and if they make decisions that harm the best interests of the miners, they will be routed around [eventually...].

Miners must weigh all variables when deciding how much blockspace to produce... will it damage the decentralized nature of the network? Will this huge block become stale when a chain of smaller blocks supplants it? Will enough customers want to pay my minimum fee?

Satoshi designed the system based on free market incentives, the consensus mechanism is here:

As it stands, Core devs have their mitts on a lever... they are deciding a production quota. That's central planning. Something that used to be a good deal less popular around these parts.

Your solo solar mine, and now this, leads me to question how much you really understand about markets, economics, and Bitcoin.

Quote from: bargainbin on March 01, 2016, 04:24:09 AM

Quote from: BitUsher on March 01, 2016, 04:10:19 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 01, 2016, 03:44:53 AM

The miners are economic competitors, with each other, to serve their customers (users), with a product (blockspace). The mines are their factories. A bigger mine means more potential blockspace will be theirs to sell.

No , users are not miners customers and blockspace is certainly not a product. There is a power dynamic between Users , miners, merchants, exchanges and developers. Your analogy is a horrible one as it ignores that the "product" isn't something that is created by miners in a "factory" but something created by the combined efforts of users , developers, and miners. Remember, Bitcoin is the longest valid PoW chain and developers and users (using economic full nodes) define what is and isn't valid, and not directly the act of mining. (although miners are users themselves so fill 2 roles)

So by requiring their tx confirmed, users contribute to this great product we call the Bitcoine ecosystem (alternate spelling: echo system).
I'm starting to understand... Let me try!

The butcher's customers aren't customers, that's a horrible analogy. The butcher, the cow, the guy that drives a bolt through the cow's brain at the slaughterhouse, and the woman that gives the captive bolt guy head -- they all interact in this complex interrelated power dynamic, thus creating the product -- that is to say, the market itself.
Am I doing it rite?

I was grudgingly about to bang out this whole thing about God, the chapel organist, and a landscaping company... thanks.

Quote from: hdbuck on March 01, 2016, 07:00:51 AM

yeah baby, 2,5 million BTC in memepool with a total fee of 6 BTC!

https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin/

forkers gotta derp.

Yo hdbuck,

You finally get some success in building The Realest Bitcoin (client)?

They totally weren't making fun of you after you left neither...

Quote from: billyjoeallen on March 01, 2016, 07:39:15 AM

-snip-
Because Bitcoin is a public good, and because the Law of Marginal Utility applies to money just like any other commodity, an artificial fee market amounts to a regressive tax. You've turned Bitcoin into just another tool of oppression.

Bitcoin isn't a public good. It is not provided without profit to all members of society...

Space to include your transaction is a product/service, and it is provided by private companies, for a profit, either directly or indirectly.

I get the gist of where you're trying to go, but it's just not working, try again.

Quote from: Fatman3001 on March 01, 2016, 08:18:23 AM

3.5million BTC stuck in mempool.

All spam

Of course it's not all spam. But >1/5 of all BTC waiting for a block? Nah, you know about tx based on unconfirmed inputs...

If I had to hazard a guess... this is the big blocker version of nuking the ip's of classic nodes.

[OR... if your lead foil is thick enough... the small blockers doing exactly the opposite of what you'd think they'd do after seeing the big blockers ddos themselves.]

Quote from: billyjoeallen on March 01, 2016, 08:32:07 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 01, 2016, 08:01:54 AM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on March 01, 2016, 07:39:15 AM

Bitcoin isn't a public good. It is not provided without profit to all members of society...

Space to include your transaction is a product, and it is provided by private companies, for a profit, either directly or indirectly.

I get the gist of where you're trying to go, but it's just not working, try again.

There is no direct profit in running a node. It is a concentrated cost for which there is a distributed benefit.
Satoshi didn't sell the white paper. He gave it to us. We do not pay the code developers. They are volunteers.

Non-mining-nodes are not charities, they are a secure and somewhat private method to interact with the network. Some are also run because the admin has an interest in the overall health of the network and its potential peers. Self-interested participants, not volunteers at the Children's Hospital. I won't be so uncharitable as to say that their main role is that of a dude standing at the toll booth, deciding whether or not to pass your toll to the toll collector... but there's an element of that.

Mark my words, miners will employ their own developers, just like Blockstream, who beat them to the punch...

Quote from: billyjoeallen on March 01, 2016, 08:32:07 AM

A public square is a public good, no matter how many hotdog and snow cone vendors operate there. Miners are in it for profits, just like the construction company that is contracted to build a public road. Doesn't negate the fact that the road is a public good. Neither does commercial traffic on the road. This is just a definition in economics.

Miners aren't construction companies, their job isn't done after laying the 'crete. They are toll road operators, they (should) choose the toll prices and provide security along the road on which you're a travellin'.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on March 01, 2016, 08:32:07 AM

Space to include your transaction is a resource, like water, that may or may not be a commodity depending on the circumstances.

Blockspace is a commodity, there are other providers of somewhat similar commodities that you may choose to satisfy your needs and desires, but this not public square here for you to urinate in, unless they let you.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on March 01, 2016, 09:31:01 AM

Everybody is self-interested, even charity hospital volunteers and philanthropists. The discipline of economics uses very specific definitions, precisely so economists won't waste time in stupid arguments like this but can move on to more substantive things. You are not making an economic argument. You are making a philosophical argument. I am not even remotely interested in engaging in that. I don't want to re-invent the wheel or take the time to learn some Objectivist secret code words.

An open-source, permissionless network is a public good, regardless of who pays for it or who profits from it. This isn't my opinion. This is simply a classification in the field of political economy. It's not a classification category I just made up or tweaked the definition for my own ends. If you don't like the terms economists use, then don't use them, but you can't say that they are wrong. A term means what people agree it means, what people use it to mean. You can try an tell a biologist that an elephant isn't a mammal because it has a trunk and he'll just look at you funny. It's not even coherent enough to be wrong.

I think you are using the definition of "public good" incorrectly. Otherwise, we aren't in violent disagreement, going further would be time better spent fending off and dismantling the arguments of the budding central planners... tomorrow.

Quote

pub�lic good
noun
1.
ECONOMICS
a commodity or service that is provided without profit to all members of a society, either by the government or a private individual or organization.
"a conviction that library informational services are a public good, not a commercial commodity"

Satoshi's idea and code is a public good... its implementation and function, is not.

Quote from: BitUsher on March 01, 2016, 10:02:12 PM

-snip-

Embrace , Extend, Extinguish.

It is their usual policy. It isn't evil, but smart and cutthroat. I am not attacking them, just waking up some naive investors into the likely outcome. If Ethereum is to succeed they need to expect to compete with MSFT eventually. If Bitcoin is to succeed , it will have to compete with at least some fiat currencies. (unlikely to dominate over fiat ever or anytime soon )

Blockstream also is a profit motivated company. The employees have set up the corporation differently however to insure their motivations are aligned with Bitcoin by locking up their large holdings of BTC. This doesn't mean that their vision or plans are necessarily correct.(I believe they do have a better roadmap, but time will tell) . This also doesn't mean they aren't also motivated to make tons of profit from selling consulting services and other sidechain products. We should be on guard with this and support many implementations (Bitcore, libbitcoin, ect...) and be very careful there are multiple payment channel solutions that are open source and equally accessible to all users. This means Bitpay needs to immediately finish developing "impulse" channel and WTF is coinbase doing without at least investigating a payment channel solution, and sitting by allowing people to steal from them with their weak 0 conf algo's that are easily defeatable.

Embrace , Extend, Ensnare, Enrich.

I hear this bandied about, mainly by themselves, but now by their defenders. Do you have any specific information about the "locking up their large holdings of BTC", part? I question whether it is sufficient to ensure that their incentives align with the success of BTC, the token and native network, vs Blockstream, the Corporation.

Blockstream is a for profit corporation, now with $76MM of outside equity in the company. I will eat my shoe if their "time locked BTC compensation" is one twentieth of the amount of stock equity the founders now possess. Assuming this� I'm not convinced, at all, that they would refuse to hamper the utility of transacting on-chain in order to economically favor the solutions they are working hard to provide. Years ago, a bearish gmax famously claimed that Bitcoin was fundamentally broken, Adam Back ignored it until the bubble of 2013 (familiar?), I believe this is their effort to fix it. In that sense, I don't think they are being totally dishonest about their intentions or motivations, getting filthy rich is not their main goal, just a happy side effect of "fixing" a "broken" Bitcoin.

You mention side chains, and consulting, but you omit the possibility of them operating large, well funded, and highly connected lightning hubs, why? Simply because it will be open source and Joe Blow will have a fancy hub? Both of the changes they are pushing hard lately, Replace-By-Fee and Segregated Witness, are mandatory for these products to function. SW as currently designed gives signature heavy settlement transactions a 75% fee discount. Directly changing the economics of the system with hardly a debate about it� (the discount specifically).

Less listening and swallowing what they say... more watching what they do (and don't in the case of on-chain capacity) pls.

* Cconvert2G36 adjusts green beret for marcus

Quote from: BitUsher on March 01, 2016, 11:20:28 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 01, 2016, 11:04:21 PM

Less listening and swallowing what they say... more watching what they do (and don't in the case of on-chain capacity) pls.

My advice applies if they have ill intentions or not. We need to have a healthy amount of skepticism for coinbase/Bitpay's motivation, Garzik's Bloq, and Blockstream. One has to assume that any one of these groups can either unintentionally or intentionally cause harm to our ecosystem. The appropriate solution is to support the development of alternative implementations with separate teams of developers who aren't trying to attack the network with a contentious hardfork, and to support many payment channels developed and maintained by various organizations with a sense of coopertition. Wasting your time mudslinging or creating conspiracy theories won't get us anywhere.... assume the worst outcome is possible from blockstream , but not just them , but all of the other companies and organizations in our ecosystem and prepare and guard against these concerns.

Bloq, Bitpay, and Coinbase aren't getting everything they want, their way, from Core. If they were, I would complain just as loudly against it, especially if sacrifices were being made to make it happen.

As Core is the reference implementation, and, as you say, any implementation that diverts from their "consensus" rules is an attack... No change is actually possible in Bitcoin, unless it comes from them. And then, it can be soft forked in without old nodes even realizing it had happened. This is not the way the system is described in the white paper, and as long as you keep convincing the newbs and rubes that any contention is very scary and dangerous, I will continue to argue against what I view as your false premise.

Quote from: BitUsher on March 01, 2016, 11:20:28 PM

What one shouldn't entertain is the fanciful and delusional notion that Bitcoin can scale without it becoming a settlement network. Just do the math and even If I grant you the best possible numbers you will realize that scaling completely on the chain is impossible and will leave bitcoin stunted and centralized.

You are painting a false narrative here about my position, fine, let me correct you. I never said that all transactions could and should be crammed into the blockchain! I welcome payment networks, and side chains, and I think a revised and economically neutral segwit offers many benefits. I don't welcome slanting the economic playing field in their favor.

You don't realize it, but you are advocating economic favoritism and central planning, exercised by an infallible and unimpeachable (no "contentious" implementations allowed) priesthood of Core devs (that already have an obvious and flagrant Conflict of Interest). I will argue vigorously against any and all attempts to steer and control Bitcoin by anything other than Nakamoto Consensus.

Adam Back floats the idea of changing the coin distribution method... with a soft fork. Seriously??

The stuff he is willing to offer without a full node referendum is truly frightening to me.

Quote from: AlexGR on March 02, 2016, 12:27:32 AM

Quote

"But for now, bitcoin users are reporting transactions taking hours upon hours to be confirmed�that is, to complete�and requiring high transaction fees in order to have their transactions included in a block."

He makes it sound like one has to pay serious money. "High fees" my ass.... 0.05 - 0.06$ for a high prio tx.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on March 02, 2016, 12:28:41 AM

Quote from: AlexGR on March 02, 2016, 12:27:32 AM

Quote

He makes it sound like one has to pay serious money. "High fees" my ass.... 0.05 - 0.06$ for a high prio tx.

It's true, their coverage of Bitcoin isn't the best. I had a tx included in the first block today for 4 cents.

Stop using pseudo-metrics bereft of meaning, sat/byte pls.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on March 02, 2016, 12:34:05 AM

It ain't English much, but if it helps.
Size 225 (bytes)
Fee Rate 0.00044444444444444447 BTC per kB

Thanks, so 44 sat/byte.

It frustrates me because I semi-regularly send multi kB transactions, that now, require fees that definitely aren't measured in single cents. Following best practices and not reusing addresses has an associated cost.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on March 02, 2016, 12:43:05 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 02, 2016, 12:39:54 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on March 02, 2016, 12:34:05 AM

It ain't English much, but if it helps.
Size 225 (bytes)
Fee Rate 0.00044444444444444447 BTC per kB

Hope you don't mind yet another dumb question, but: What are multi kB txs? Multisig?

Nah, just a bunch of inputs from separate addresses.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on March 02, 2016, 12:53:07 AM

^Sounds complicated. Is this a usual thing for people to do? Huh

Not complicated at all, your wallet will do it all in the background.

Say you're going to receive 0.1 BTC. You have it sent to an address. For the next payment you receive, you generate another address. Do it a total of 20 times... your wallet now has 2 BTC in 20 different addresses. Now, you send that 2 BTC from your wallet somewhere else... behind the scenes, your wallet makes a transaction that has 20 inputs and one output (the destination address)... boom, you've made a fairly large transaction.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on March 02, 2016, 01:14:05 AM

One of them new fangled HD wallets. I get it now. Thanks!
Following best practices and not reusing addresses has an associated cost.

This and HD wallets are somewhat different issues. The regular non-HD wallets offer multiple addresses in the same wallet too. You just hit create new address, which also creates a corresponding private key in your wallet.dat.

HD or Hierarchical Deterministic means that any address and corresponding private key can be restored from the same initial seed, so if you have that seed safely written down/stored away... you can create new addresses and keys at will, they will all be available to you as long as you have the seed.

With Non-HD, like Classic or Core, any addresses you created after you backed up your wallet.dat... wouldn't have their keys saved in your formerly backed up wallet.dat. You'd need to backup the wallet.dat again to have redundant access to the keys for the new addresses.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on March 02, 2016, 01:44:27 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 02, 2016, 01:37:28 AM

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on March 02, 2016, 01:14:05 AM

One of them new fangled HD wallets. I get it now. Thanks!
Following best practices and not reusing addresses has an associated cost.

I just didn't know they were costing you extra behind the scenes. It makes sense, just never really considered it.

I heard if the transaction isn't confirmed in 72 hours it's dropped from the mempool now. Was this protocol-wide? Or are some wallets doing their own thing in this respect?

https://twitter.com/jgarzik/status/656853984511172609

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on March 02, 2016, 02:13:00 AM

Quote from: theymos on February 19, 2016, 05:01:49 PM

Another nice thing about 0.12 in this area is that mempool transactions will by default expire after 72 hours. Previously they'd stick around until the node was restarted, which made it difficult to predict when the network had forgotten about the unconfirmed transaction and it was time to resend it or create a conflicting one with a higher fee.

The guy who's managed to make non-conforming ideas drop out of the idea-pool of r/bitcoin considerably faster... instantly, in some cases. Tongue

Quote from: DoktorKopf on March 02, 2016, 03:09:50 PM

@oda.krell - Thank you

@NLC / BMB - Well done then, go claim your bonus.

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on March 02, 2016, 02:52:16 PM

Each post getting better...

Green Berets don't do it for the money... they do it for love of God and country. Cool

Quote from: jbreher on March 02, 2016, 07:44:34 PM

Quote from: bargainbin on March 02, 2016, 06:42:07 PM

http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-March/012489.html

Quote from: LukeJr

We are coming up on the subsidy halving this July, and there have been some
concerns raised that a non-trivial number of miners could potentially drop off
the network. This would result in a significantly longer block interval, which
also means a higher per-block transaction volume, which could cause the block
size limit to legitimately be hit much sooner than expected.
[...]
To alleviate this risk, it seems reasonable to propose a hardfork to the
difficulty adjustment algorithm so it can adapt quicker to such a significant
drop in mining rate. BtcDrak tells me he has well-tested code for this in his
altcoin

Hahahaha

Go go Core!

In all truthfulness, I have always wondered the reason for the 2016-block difficulty adjustment. A finer-grained adjustment seems just natural to me. Though I've never looked into it. What are the arguments against a more continuous adjustment?

(The four-year halving always seemed funny to me too. Done merely for simplicity of implementation?)

It could help a minority chain fork get some blocks solved while they're rolling out their PoW change...

Quote from: jbreher on March 02, 2016, 07:58:56 PM

Sorry - not following. Expanded explanation available?

Incidentally, the irony of Core calling for HF changes to the actual* consensus mechanism is not lost on me.

*I do not consider block size to be part of the fundamental consensus mechanism.

Say 75% of the miners agree with you, and begin using software that allows a larger max block size... Because the difficulty does not adjust immediately, whatever stragglers are left mining on the 1MB max chain will be at an extreme disadvantage, their blocks will come very slowly, if at all (I expect 75% quickly becomes 99.5-100%, before activation). Consequently, their difficulty adjustment would take a verrrrry long time. The minority side of the fork would be basically frozen, and not processing transactions.

If the difficulty adjusted very quickly or continuously, the minority side have a better chance of solving some blocks and keeping their chain somewhat functional while they roll out software that changes POW and reboots difficulty (if needed after this idea).

Given this, the somewhat long adjustment interval is a strong incentive for the miners to reach nakamoto consensus, and quickly, with dire consequences if they don't.

Of course a PoW change would be needed to prevent being attacked relentlessly by the SHA256 majority... but this may buy precious time at a critical moment.

The halving schedule is pretty extreme, at the beginning. It becomes less and less extreme quite quickly as the number of transactions scales up with their accompanying fees...

Wait... we're supposed to be scaling up the number of transactions!!?!

Quote from: Callahan on March 02, 2016, 08:55:14 PM

Somebody could explain me? :

Quote

I believe one way or another "second layer solution" or otherwise, bitcoin will scale

Don't worry about it too much, it's just another in a long line of adam's vague and internally contradictory polls without meaningful conclusion.

The "second layer solution" means payment channels and hubs, I think. Or altcoins.

Quote from: bargainbin on March 02, 2016, 09:07:10 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 02, 2016, 08:37:11 PM

Yeah, just have a hard time rationalizing why it had to be *halving* -- why not 10percenting, but more often?

Obviously I don't know, but my guess is that it is to front load the distribution... for subsidizing the growth of transactions hard and early, attracting the most amount of mining power at the most vulnerable time for the network, the beginning. Giving outsized rewards to those who recognized and supported the network before there was big money involved. Having it be smoothed or stepped is another question, I'm not as sure about that one, just that it becomes exponentially less important over time.

As long as I'm making guesses, his decision to leave us with the 1MB hard coded max block size limit is his test to see if we're fit for survival without him. Cheesy

Quote from: jbreher on March 02, 2016, 09:26:27 PM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 02, 2016, 09:22:04 PM

Right, but that could still be done while also ...

Quote

Having it be smoothed or stepped

I'm not all that concerned about it, that's why the difficulty adjusts. In a free market, the price of the (now more costly to produce) commodity could rise to compensate as well. The 1MB cap exacerbates the potential problem in the intervening 1000 blocks or so. Maybe that'll give our "benevolent" central planners a kick to the teeth.

Edit: The people who run PH/s of mining power have seen this coming from miles out. It's not like they'll just flip the breaker on their multi megawatt facility at block 420,000.

Quote from: bargainbin on March 02, 2016, 09:42:30 PM

^Yeah, this is just a tangent, not related to the Core/Classic drama. Just something that seems intuitively ...wrong.
But could be missing something, so just asking.

The entire thing seems intuitively wrong to you...

The big mines with the latest gear running at <4 cents kWh (a huge portion of the network now), won't be unprofitable at all.

It'll be the smaller guys with more expensive power that hit the switch, and continued expansion by the majors will suck up their exit if there is profit to be had.

Edit: btw I agree with both of you that there aren't huge negatives to a smoothed function. If non-granularity is a negative, it should be largely negated by a company's incentive to plan for the future, which is known in the case of coins per block. Planning for a price that can fluctuate between $1200 and $150 in the space of a couple years is tougher than this.

Quote from: bargainbin on March 02, 2016, 10:07:59 PM

^You're just making it seem intuitively wronger. Wait, dumbening isn't even a word...

>it should be largely negated by a company's incentive to plan for the future
But you got sort of a prisoner's dilemma thing happening -- let's say 3 major megamines, and it only makes sense to scale down if *others don't*. You don't know what others will do, so?
*it might be reasonable to keep mining at a loss, hoping that competition runs out of $$$ faster than you, it might make sense to make backroom deals & cooperate, so many different possibilities...

Replace megamine with any other business. You just try your best to make rational decisions that net you the most profit over the longest amount of time. If rational economic behavior is innately irrational, we're all doomed. Hardcore collusion could get a keccak response, all variables in this mess of an equation.

Look, I know I'm never going to convince you this bird'll fly. I'm having a hard enough time convincing myself these days... Undecided

Quote from: bargainbin on March 02, 2016, 10:34:20 PM

>Replace megamine with any other business.

Any other business suddenly losing half of its revenue? Shocked

Like the auto industry suddenly being able to sell only half as many cars? (hoping against hope that the cars it does sell will somehow double in price)?
Not finding anything readily analogous & rekindling hope at the same time Sad

The block reward subsidy was not the intended revenue stream for mining in the long term. A rare metal with the easiest to find surface quantities already found may be loosely analogous. But the analogy breaks down when...

The real product the miners end up producing and relying on for revenue is blockspace. Inflation subsidy is just supposed to pay the bills while we scale up the ~~number of~~ fees paid per transactions. Undecided

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 02, 2016, 09:22:04 PM

-snip-
Having it [block reward] be smoothed or stepped is another question, I'm not as sure about that one, just that it becomes exponentially less important over time.
-snip-

Quote from: bargainbin on March 02, 2016, 11:29:52 PM

-snip-
We're disagreeing only about *how* the miners should be weened off the block reward -- via a halvening, or gradually.
-snip-

We're not really disagreeing. If we were, it would only be because changing such an important parameter now (not like 1MB DoS limit from 2010) could potentially damage confidence in the supposed immutability of the coin distribution schedule. The psychological damage to the market could be worse than the potential "ease of planning" benefit brought by the smoothing...

To your other points, both fees per and raw number of tx rising are likely necessary to replace the subsidy, and we are central planning one of those out of the equation, for now.

Where is dev? Huh

It's gonna take some pain to wake up these miners to the fact that they may be relying on their main competitor to plan their own future.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on March 03, 2016, 01:14:43 AM

Quote from: ImI on March 03, 2016, 01:13:06 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on March 03, 2016, 01:12:08 AM

doom, lower, lower, lower ... the divide and conquer appears to be working.

and it could have been avoided so easily....

I don't think so ... Gavin is one stubborn SOB aussie

You're kidding us, right??!

From 20 to 8 to fuggin' 2� and he's stubborn because he told us about this problem a year ago, and now the blocks are full. Yes, of all that fee paying spam.

You have to fundamentally distrust miners' economic incentives to use soft limits and keep blocks at reasonable sizes. You trust all the other economic incentives towards correct miner behavior, but not this one. Bizarre.

It can be done, while maintaining a healthy level of decentralization. Sigops can be soft capped at the protocol level and by miners with their own soft limits for their own blocks. The malicious miner anti-Dos cap from 2010... where the founder described the manner in which it would be lifted... is being used as an economic policy tool... and your free thinking, free market oriented mind is ok with this?!

The BS conflict of interest is the problem here, and the evidence is piling up. Maybe, the market will have to inform the miners� many here would hope that is not the case. It would be pretty reckless to not have prepared for that eventuality at this juncture tho.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on January 30, 2016, 03:43:39 AM

♫ People don't fear the creeper. ♬

You hear that sucking sound?

You gonna let your lunch get eaten by... etherbutters??! Angry

I don't often quote my own calls... but when the glove fits like this!

Quote from: BlindMayorBitcorn on March 03, 2016, 02:28:12 AM

r/Bitcoin going full r/Buttcoin today!

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/48p1bk/somebody_sent_a_transaction_with_a_15btc_fee/

Truth.

Luke [Canonical] Jr in full damage control post mode today...

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on March 03, 2016, 05:38:01 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 03, 2016, 05:26:13 AM

Imitation, flattery, and all that.

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on February 25, 2016, 04:46:51 AM

Aaaand... the debate has risen to the tenor of "accusations of cockgobbling"

Way to go Samson Mow, COO (edited) of BTCC

Bobby Lee must be proud.

My hands just drop.
flattery, again.

Whell, the segwit testnet had a chain fork, we're not really sure why... It's much safer than changing a one to a two tho, and will give us (maybe) 75% of the capacity of the alternative while completely changing the fee economics (75% cheaper) for LN tx.

I think the best idea would be to rush it out as a capacity fix ASAP on a $6 billion monetary network. Undecided

Bullish.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on March 03, 2016, 11:06:44 PM

What is a make believe profits?

Make-believe profits; adjective - noun [plural]; Investor's shrewd investment is worth less now vs when he made the investment. A complete fucking lack of profits.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on March 03, 2016, 11:06:44 PM

What's the status of your portfolio?

None of your business.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on March 03, 2016, 11:06:44 PM

Have you ever provided any details in your BTC history in order to attempt to engage in a meaningful dialogue rather than vague pussified indirect innuendos?

No, see above. Meaningful dialogue without pointless bloviation, sounds refreshing.

@BMB - Next month, because soft fork = safe fork.

Quote from: notme on March 03, 2016, 11:43:58 PM

How safe is it if it caused a hard fork on testnet? How safe is it when the transactions created using the new features can be spent by anybody using the old rules. That sounds like a s5rong incentive to lie about what you support to trigger activation and then sweep up a bunch of BTC as the transactions start coming in.

Sorry, BMB and the regulars around here know my posts are about 89.7% sarcasm.

The first issue you raise is a concern, especially considering they are under the gun to release in April as promised.

The second one seems less of/not a concern. Miners will all have to be running segwit nodes and making segwit blocks to work, it's a hard fork for them. The zombie consumer/wallet nodes that don't understand segwit at all are deemed a bonus by the Team, and they won't be able to spend any one else's coins.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on March 04, 2016, 12:17:15 AM

If SegWit is going to be shelved then we'd want a 4 MB hardfork ASAP, just imho.

Nah, if we just have to shelve segwit (which they won't, ever), 1.75MB oughtta cover it.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on March 04, 2016, 01:03:28 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 04, 2016, 12:21:35 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on March 04, 2016, 12:17:15 AM

If SegWit is going to be shelved then we'd want a 4 MB hardfork ASAP, just imho.

Nah, if we just have to shelve segwit (which they won't, ever), 1.75MB oughtta cover it.

A can kick hard fork to buy time should be put at the maximum possible limit so we are not tediously going through all this derp molasses again next year.

I can agree with you there [feels weird], miners would soft limit below the hard limit anyway, like they did before we hit the 1MB ceiling. I'm for a fee market, just one determined by the producers, not the planners.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on March 04, 2016, 02:19:12 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 04, 2016, 01:19:37 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on March 04, 2016, 01:03:28 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 04, 2016, 12:21:35 AM

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on March 04, 2016, 12:17:15 AM

If SegWit is going to be shelved then we'd want a 4 MB hardfork ASAP, just imho.

Nah, if we just have to shelve segwit (which they won't, ever), 1.75MB oughtta cover it.

A can kick hard fork to buy time should be put at the maximum possible limit so we are not tediously going through all this derp molasses again next year.

... you need to break your mind free of the Classic groupthink newspeak rhetoric, there are no "planners" just developers providing code that the nodes choose (or not) to run. Attempts at vilification through framing the debate and/or agenda via language (spin) is a sure sign that you are the subject of an attempt to manipulate your opinions and influence your previously independent thought processes.

You typed that with a straight face?

newspeak rhetoric: there are no "planners" just developers

nodes choose (or not) to run: while enduring/absorbing ddos and after being shown scary slides in 18hr meetings that include (not so) subtle threats

Attempts at vilification through framing the debate: The echochamber ruled with an iron fist by herr theymos. Sort by controversial. Talk of node options deemed altcoins and poster banned.

agenda via language (spin): Toomimcoin, Gavincoin R3KT [child-like glee], Hard Fork=Dangerous, Soft Fork=Safe Fork, No Contention, Always Consensus

attempt to manipulate your opinions and influence your previously independent thought processes: See above(!)

We [sometimes] disagree on an important issue... and that's ok. But please, your description of why I think the way I do, strains credulity.

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on March 04, 2016, 03:25:10 AM

admit it .. .the whole "blockstream core planners" spiel/spin is lame.

you just choked up your groupthink vomit all over the place trying to justify using such lame language.

[Politely nods.]

If you can't see a conflict of interest glaring you in the face ['cause you chat with the nice fellows in irc], and don't see that conflict manifesting in how this has all gone down over the last year... I really just can't help you, sorry.

Honestly, I'd rather just be posting memes and gifs while celebrating the halving, confident about growth after having added some modest capacity...

WRT Blockstream... it wasn't until after Scaling HK, when gmax's email to the mailing list literally became the Core roadmap, with no hard fork increase in sight, that the pieces began clicking into place. Others had already described the whole thing as a charade and a stalling tactic, but I was actually hoping for some kind of unifying plan, I should and do feel silly for that now.

Soft fork segwit as a "scaling solution" bifurcates the capabilities of full nodes without their knowledge or permission, completely changes fee economics with favoritism to settlement transactions, and apparently is having mysterious chain forks on its testnet a month before deployment... while being sold as the safe and "ready" option. [Shrugs] The pieces certainly haven't stopped fitting yet.

Quote from: arklan on March 04, 2016, 05:08:58 AM

Quote from: Cconvert2G36 on March 04, 2016, 04:21:12 AM

well, they can't exactly force us to upgrade our clients. i'm very much a "wait a see" kind of guy. if the release of segwit comes and things go kaboom, there will still be a record of how things were before that. if it's really bad, it's technically possible to revert to the pre-forked version and carry on, i think.

of course, "technically possible" and "easy" or even "kinda doable" are vastly different things, and frankly i might be talking total bullshit anyway. i'm not totally clear on the whole "soft fork" thing.

Unless we plan on keeping the 1MB cap always and forever... any HF to increase it will "force" you to upgrade your client, as it will reject any blocks from miners over 1MB. Soft fork segwit doesn't require anyone to upgrade, but it means your formerly full node client will not be verifying segwit tx signatures, as they would now be in the witness portion of the block, which your client doesn't understand. It becomes a sort of half-node. In the case of segwit tx, it sees them, but can't verify the sigs itself. If you hadn't been paying attention, you might not even know it had happened. In the case of a HF, you know, it's unambiguous that it's time to upgrade.

Segwit itself is actually a pretty cool idea, it has the big positive of ridding us of tx malleability problems altogether. I'm not against a version of the idea at all. I argue against aspects of it, like the soft fork deployment, the fee discount for sig heavy settlement tx, and that it's a fairly complex change to the system possibly being rushed and inadequately tested. I worry that the additional capacity it could bring is being dangled like a carrot to get us to turn a blind eye to the economic favoritism it carries, and it could stall out a HF blocksize increase way out to mid or late next year.