ChartBuddy
Magic Friend
- Dec 31, 2015
- 25,722
- 821
Wall Observer
- Thread starter Bagatell
- Start date
adamstgbit
Well-Known Member
- Mar 13, 2016
- 1,206
- 2,650
I see support for segwit falling apart...
Core is acting foolish thinking they can fool everyone.
price will be affected negatively, or, at best, simply not rise...
Core is acting foolish thinking they can fool everyone.
price will be affected negatively, or, at best, simply not rise...
Adam, You had previously been mentioning your support for Segwit and that you liked a lot of what it does. Has this viewpoint changed at all and/or are you changing your opinion then?
Did you see/read J777's(james discussion with Peiter Wieulle [bad spelling i know] which was very interesting. I start to tinfoil hat when I see that and the the timing of KNC's letter, Samson Mow's Letter, and Adam Back's letter/tweets about his support of mow. I think money has changed hands...
W/ Mow's letter, My understanding is that HK was a Conference, but was mow now described it as an informal meeting and classic developers were not invited. This starts to just get weird.
I like parts of Segwit but have issues understanding what is so bad about simply implementing an immediate 2mb hf, and then waiting with additional testing and subsequent SW implementation also as a hardfork.
So, is there a prise rise in the crystal ball for tomorrow? I feel moonish but think its too soon...
[doublepost=1458142075][/doublepost]Re: Chart Buddy, Is it possible to continue to show how full the blocks are? I REALLY enjoyed that. I recognize that it sound like there has been some trouble and added hassle of updating CB but was wondering if the space info could also continue to be presented. Thanks in advance? ^_^
Did you see/read J777's(james discussion with Peiter Wieulle [bad spelling i know] which was very interesting. I start to tinfoil hat when I see that and the the timing of KNC's letter, Samson Mow's Letter, and Adam Back's letter/tweets about his support of mow. I think money has changed hands...
W/ Mow's letter, My understanding is that HK was a Conference, but was mow now described it as an informal meeting and classic developers were not invited. This starts to just get weird.
I like parts of Segwit but have issues understanding what is so bad about simply implementing an immediate 2mb hf, and then waiting with additional testing and subsequent SW implementation also as a hardfork.
So, is there a prise rise in the crystal ball for tomorrow? I feel moonish but think its too soon...
[doublepost=1458142075][/doublepost]Re: Chart Buddy, Is it possible to continue to show how full the blocks are? I REALLY enjoyed that. I recognize that it sound like there has been some trouble and added hassle of updating CB but was wondering if the space info could also continue to be presented. Thanks in advance? ^_^
JimboToronto
Member
- Oct 2, 2015
- 75
- 90
Good morning Bitcoinland. Still grinding away sideways in the $415 range I see. Ho effing hum. Definitely a strong coffee morning.
adamstgbit
Well-Known Member
- Mar 13, 2016
- 1,206
- 2,650
I was focused on all the pros of segwit and was unaware of the cons.
I have always thought 2MB first was a better idea, but was willing to give core enough credit to make reasonable choices, i figured core had carefully weighed the consequences of segwit, the way i saw it segwit +2MB or 2MB + segwit, wasn't worth fighting over.
It is becoming clear that core will use whatever means are at their disposal to "trick" the community to agree with them, they call segwit a softfork, its not, they will release segwit as a minor update (0.12.x) RIDICULOUS!!!! and thats just the tip of the iceberg, the more in depth you take the conversation, the clearer there methods/intentions become, and it's not pretty...
They thought this through, and they did anticipate some objections, there mistake was thinking there trickery and half truths could fool everyone indefinitely.
Segwit is not only dangerous because the code is complex and can lead to bugs and unforeseen consequences, it's ultimately detrimental to the scaling of bitcoin, they understand the consequences of segwit (future scaling will be harder) but they dont care about that because it will benefit there plans to profit from bitcoins difficulty scaling. they figured no one would notice, and they could pass it off as an unforeseen consequence. ( OPS segwit did alot of good but it also hurt scaling, OH WELL to late now can't go back, i guess everyone will have to use LN sooner than later. muahahahhaa genius ! )
when i first read Coinbases open letter stating the core devs were high IQ but immature i didnt understand exactly what they meant , i'm starting to realize they meant "evil geniuses", as with most evil masterminds they underestimate the IQ of their enemies. the core will be exposed for what they truly are sooner or later, no amount of deleting post or banning poeple will stop this from coming out. and then suddenly nothing they say will carry any weight, segwit will be postponed and core dismantled.
TL;DR;
Core are evil geniuses, who underestimate the community.
Segwit is clearly not a scaling solution, but rather a hostile takeover designed to force poeple to use payment channels.
Core thinks they can explain away segwit's problems, and the community will be dumb enough to agree the pros of segwit outweigh the cons.
Core must die.
short term bearishness as this plays out, and confuses poeple.
I have always thought 2MB first was a better idea, but was willing to give core enough credit to make reasonable choices, i figured core had carefully weighed the consequences of segwit, the way i saw it segwit +2MB or 2MB + segwit, wasn't worth fighting over.
It is becoming clear that core will use whatever means are at their disposal to "trick" the community to agree with them, they call segwit a softfork, its not, they will release segwit as a minor update (0.12.x) RIDICULOUS!!!! and thats just the tip of the iceberg, the more in depth you take the conversation, the clearer there methods/intentions become, and it's not pretty...
They thought this through, and they did anticipate some objections, there mistake was thinking there trickery and half truths could fool everyone indefinitely.
Segwit is not only dangerous because the code is complex and can lead to bugs and unforeseen consequences, it's ultimately detrimental to the scaling of bitcoin, they understand the consequences of segwit (future scaling will be harder) but they dont care about that because it will benefit there plans to profit from bitcoins difficulty scaling. they figured no one would notice, and they could pass it off as an unforeseen consequence. ( OPS segwit did alot of good but it also hurt scaling, OH WELL to late now can't go back, i guess everyone will have to use LN sooner than later. muahahahhaa genius ! )
when i first read Coinbases open letter stating the core devs were high IQ but immature i didnt understand exactly what they meant , i'm starting to realize they meant "evil geniuses", as with most evil masterminds they underestimate the IQ of their enemies. the core will be exposed for what they truly are sooner or later, no amount of deleting post or banning poeple will stop this from coming out. and then suddenly nothing they say will carry any weight, segwit will be postponed and core dismantled.
TL;DR;
Core are evil geniuses, who underestimate the community.
Segwit is clearly not a scaling solution, but rather a hostile takeover designed to force poeple to use payment channels.
Core thinks they can explain away segwit's problems, and the community will be dumb enough to agree the pros of segwit outweigh the cons.
Core must die.
short term bearishness as this plays out, and confuses poeple.
Last edited:
Fatman3002
Active Member
- Sep 5, 2015
- 189
- 312
Now you're just being misogynistic.^^You do know those are traps, right?
adamstgbit
Well-Known Member
- Mar 13, 2016
- 1,206
- 2,650
I am merely speculating, and i see the crowd grabbing pitchforks and torches soon.
if my speculation that core will be exposed as "evil guinness" actually plays out, it's hard to say how this will affect market.
market could see avoiding core's roadmap as bullish as fuck
or
market could see core devs being discredited and rage quitting as the death of bitcoin.
i cannot be bothered to actually place money on this speculation either way, there is still too much unknown and highly speculative.
if my speculation that core will be exposed as "evil guinness" actually plays out, it's hard to say how this will affect market.
market could see avoiding core's roadmap as bullish as fuck
or
market could see core devs being discredited and rage quitting as the death of bitcoin.
i cannot be bothered to actually place money on this speculation either way, there is still too much unknown and highly speculative.
Fatman3002
Active Member
- Sep 5, 2015
- 189
- 312
67 speedqueen
Member
- Mar 13, 2016
- 40
- 19
Now you're just being gender-prescriptive. ~∀(Trap) : Grill, don't always identify selves as wimmins.
Oh, and no qualitative statement made re. traps; the negativity you read in is just your sexism showing.
So misanthropic? Maybe. Misogynistic? No.
adamstgbit
Well-Known Member
- Mar 13, 2016
- 1,206
- 2,650
- Aug 19, 2015
- 511
- 803
@Richy_T Some feedback about the charts. The formatting looks a little off on mobile (the 'coin' link particularly), and the explanation still links to Bct.
I think the issue is that SOME of the developers are evil geniuses and actively trying to take over the world, errr... ahem, I mean bitcoin. An interesting question would be, 'why?' I think others are just trying to keep their head down and make good code. Core lays claim to what, like 100 developers or something? However, when you start to look at those who are the most vocal... and those who have been making most of the recent commit changes that are controversial and that regardless have been implemented and you look at how those changes were accepted by the community and in what manner they were implemented... you start to see similarities between those paid by block-stream and working for core. Coincidence? Noooooooo, of course not. It's all in my head, that's why I have the finfoil. However, I think there are some actual bad apples and... they're rotten to the core and only have their own self-interests at heart.
Hey, I hear this is where the cool kids hang out.
60,000 coins bought with borrowed money on BFX. 10,000 borrowed coins sold. Blocks full. a service disruption could trigger a long squeeze.
60,000 coins bought with borrowed money on BFX. 10,000 borrowed coins sold. Blocks full. a service disruption could trigger a long squeeze.
ChartBuddy
Magic Friend
- Dec 31, 2015
- 25,722
- 821
adamstgbit
Well-Known Member
- Mar 13, 2016
- 1,206
- 2,650
WOOT WOOT billy found his way.
this longs to short ratio and amount is fairly typical, no?
Since the Mavrodi ponzi peak of $502, the long/short ratio has been roughly five to one., with a considerable amount of variation. The latest correction to $390 saw margin longs really spike from ~20MM to $28 million two million of which have since covered at a profit. I'm guessing as much as half of the 26MM left are underwater margin positions.
What's more relevant is what the ratio was the last time there was a long squeeze last August when we went all the way down to $162. I wish I was paying more attention back then so I could compare.
What's more relevant is what the ratio was the last time there was a long squeeze last August when we went all the way down to $162. I wish I was paying more attention back then so I could compare.
Fatman3002
Active Member
- Sep 5, 2015
- 189
- 312
@billyjoeallen Just set it to "all" and you should find what you're looking for.
https://bfxdata.com/combined/btc
https://bfxdata.com/combined/btc
adamstgbit
Well-Known Member
- Mar 13, 2016
- 1,206
- 2,650
it could be price is being held back by long's covering at a small profit at this level, while new longs build a new position, we could end the day with a spike up and repeat this, "long-the-hot-potato" indefinitely!
Richy_T
Well-Known Member
- Dec 27, 2015
- 1,085
- 2,741
That's OK. It looks off on regular too
New formatting is coming but first up is getting block info back in. I'll try and tweak it a bit as I go though.
Thanks, Fatman. Looking at the chart, it seems like an even stronger indicator historically than I thought. The long/short ratio is now very similar to where it was at the beginning of the long squeeze to $166. I'm guessing that a little more tension will need to build before we see any big price movements, but it could be a big opportunity for bears.
