Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

sickpig · Oct 7, 2015

@lunarboy @AdrianX Anthony Towns has just post a pretty good write-up about forks on btc dev ml. He defined teo different kind of soft-forks: safe and damaging.

In his opinion BIP65 with OP_CLTV and BIP112 with OP_CSV belong to the former category because:

"they both redefine a non-standard opcode and would not get relayed or mined by old, non-upgraded nodes, and are thus "safe soft forks" per above terminology"

link to the full message: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-October/011467.html

edit: another telling extract:

"*But* a soft fork that only forbids transactions that would previously not have been mined anyway should be the best of both worlds, as it automatically reduces the likelihood of old miners building newly invalid blocks to a vanishingly small probability; which means that upgraded bitcoin nodes, non-upgraded bitcoin nodes, /and/ SPV clients *all* continuing to work fine during the upgrade."

cypherdoc · Oct 7, 2015

ok, back in ZSL @ 99.10

Bloomie · Oct 7, 2015

sickpig said:
is there a quick way to resize an image ala bct? One last question what's the preferred way to deal with images: upload or link it through image button?

I'll have to log into BCT to see how images are resized there. The preferred way to deal with images is by using Imgur's dedicated Forums/BBCode link or the image button in the toolbar. See test thread here.

sickpig · Oct 7, 2015

@Bloomie I used IMG tag along with a width subtag

Code:

[img width=200] ... image link ... [/img]

cypherdoc · Oct 7, 2015

don't forget it's still October. interesting short term action going on. we actually have a short term buy signal. however, if i had to guess, we should shortly turn around and head lower to a new low; then start a multi month counter trend bounce. no guarantees however. remember, i haven't played stocks for years now and only do this out of interest in what's going on in the broader traditional fiat world since i think it correlates with Bitcoin behavior. i am however indirectly trading it by my shorts on metals via DZZ and ZSL. yeah, i know they're shitty trading instruments but i have my money in a mutual fund company that doesn't allow direct shorting. that's ok, i just do it for fun:

AdrianX · Oct 7, 2015

sickpig said:
@lunarboy @AdrianX Anthony Towns has just post a pretty good write-up about forks on btc dev ml. He defined teo different kind of soft-forks: safe and damaging.

In his opinion BIP65 with OP_CLTV and BIP112 with OP_CSV belong to the former category because:

"they both redefine a non-standard opcode and would not get relayed or mined by old, non-upgraded nodes, and are thus "safe soft forks" per above terminology"

link to the full message: http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-October/011467.html

edit: another telling extract:

"*But* a soft fork that only forbids transactions that would previously not have been mined anyway should be the best of both worlds, as it automatically reduces the likelihood of old miners building newly invalid blocks to a vanishingly small probability; which means that upgraded bitcoin nodes, non-upgraded bitcoin nodes, /and/ SPV clients *all* continuing to work fine during the upgrade."

Gavin also posted this on reddit:
A Comprehensive Study of Software Forks: Dates, Reasons and Outcomes.

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3ns1oy/a_comprehensive_study_of_software_forks_dates/

It looks like it needs some pier review and hopefully find its way into Ledger @Peter R .

edit: mybe not it's not Bitcoin but software they talking about :-( there is some correlation but considering Bitcoin is still Bitcoin regardless of the software used to run it I'm not sure how applicable this is.

cypherdoc · Oct 7, 2015

new stress test

AdrianX · Oct 7, 2015

Peter R said:
Heavy down-vote brigading against my Reddit submission. I saw it hit #5 for a while but recently it's been pushed down the first page, having fallen to only 62% up-voted.

I'ts called "consensus" if it fits the moderators agenda.

Peter R · Oct 7, 2015

The animated GIF has now been down-voted to nearly zero and is no longer on the front page.

In hindsight, I miscalculated how ingrained the cliche "correlation does not necessarily imply causation" is, such that it will be widely misused to attempt to discredit correlative findings even when one is not making a causal argument. While it's true that larger block sizes might not cause higher prices, or that higher prices might not cause larger block sizes, that wasn't really the point. The point was that these two quantities have historically grown together. Suggesting that the relationship may continue to hold in the future is perfectly reasonable.

If we can't make predictions about the future based on what happened in the past, how are we to make predictions about the future?

For the record, I would say that adoption is what causes both the block size and the price to increase.

cypherdoc · Oct 7, 2015

@Peter R

nvm that your suggestion is likely true.

humanitee · Oct 7, 2015

Mike's response on the mailing list to Venzen is cracking me up.

http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-October/011470.html

cypherdoc · Oct 7, 2015

humanitee · Oct 7, 2015

@cypherdoc

Damn, that's impressive. Who is wasting money this time?

cypherdoc · Oct 7, 2015

humanitee said:
Mike's response on the mailing list to Venzen is cracking me up.

http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-October/011470.html

is NMH MH?

humanitee · Oct 7, 2015

@cypherdoc

I was under the impression from previous posts that he was.

Peter R · Oct 7, 2015

Is it reasonable to expect the market cap to continue to grow if there's no room for more transactions?

humanitee · Oct 7, 2015

@Peter R, if you are a "digital gold" person, I believe that's exactly what they are expecting.

Thing is, I would never hold "digital gold" because what's the point of that stupid shit. I just can't see there being any market demand, because another crypto would supplant Bitcoin as a transactional currency. When this happens, that other crypto would also have the properties of digital gold, while also being a currency. So it would win, easily. That's what I don't understand about digital goldists.

cypherdoc · Oct 7, 2015

@Peter R

that's the graph you probably should've gone with on North Korea.

woohoo. never seen my nodes this stressed. look how little the bandwidth is utilized:

humanitee · Oct 7, 2015

Wow, this is a good one.

My mempool is 530308597 bytes, or 505.74169 MB. That's the highest mempool my node has ever had.

When did your bandwidth last rollover cypher?

edit: 5 minutes later we are now at 514.33767 MB.

edit: 40 minutes later we are now at 612.35891 MB, very impressive.

bitsko · Oct 7, 2015

"people who have more fearful disposition also tend to be more politically conservative"

I'm thinking that in the blocksize debate, fear of predicting future events accurately is a form of political conservatism.

Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Active Member