Wall Observer

[WestDogg]

Long time lurker of the original thread. It would be fun as shit if Adam closed the Bct version and sent everybody here, but those fucker moderators would probably open it back up without his permission.

 

[ChartBuddy]

Coin Explanation

 

[adamstgbit]

Long time lurker of the original thread. It would be fun as shit if Adam closed the Bct version and sent everybody here, but those fucker moderators would probably open it back up without his permission.

hehehehe
don't worry i'll think of somthing epicly entertaining to do on BTC once i get unbanned.

 

[JayJuanGee]

i'm not sure....i'm not sure what i will do once my ban is up.
i guess poeple are expecting somthing entertaining, i wouldn't want to disappoint poeple. lol.

Part of your "wild and crazy guy" persona (not to steal anything from Steve Martin), seem to be expectingly to employ the unexpected.... so why show your cards... especially if they haven't been dealt yet.

Maybe prices will be in the $32k territory within 5 days or so, then many of us will be too busy ordering our Yahts, and private jets to give a shit about anything else....
[doublepost=1458674896][/doublepost]

are you talking about the idea of letting miners vote on incresing the blocksize
"dynamic blocksize"

I think its in the miners best interest to have block size at just the right size.
they will want to keep some fee pressure, to ensure everyone pays a small fee,
and at the same time they will want enough space in each block to include as many fees as possible.

IMO they are the perfect canadiens to determine blocksize.

 

[adamstgbit]

consider this.

the 2mB Vs segwit or Classic Vs Core debate is on everyone's minds it is the hottest topic in bitcoin at the moment, but the mods told me my thread 2MB pros and cons would get moved to altcoin discussion should I talk about Classic.

there was a thread they moved to the altcoin section that i couldn't believe they did. it was about classic or somthing. ... found it the title was "Bitcoin Classic Roadmap annonced" BOOM move to altcoin.

but when there is a thread bashing classic or somehow discrediting ganvin for some silly reason, THAT'S OK. that will stay on the mainboard.

sure they will let you say wtf you want, but they will make sure there sock puppets give you a hard time, and if you're too much of a bother you'll get banned.

it not like they can flat out delete what poeple say that they disagree with, altho its been known to happen.

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3hhj3v/bitcointalk_has_been_broken_by_censorship/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3ddqje/theymos_rbitcoin_mod_and_bitcointalkorg_owner/
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010566.html

They deleted and banned the long thread " Gold Collapsing Bitcoin Up " when @cypherdoc
became too vocal about bigger blocks.

 

[adamstgbit]

Anyway...
[doublepost=1458677825][/doublepost]I see a spike UP coming very soon!

we just popped over 416 resistance

again to 420, this time it'll stick!
[doublepost=1458678135][/doublepost]its interesting to note that on bitstamps 416 was resistance and on bitfinex 416 was support.

in anycase it looks like we are about to break up.
[doublepost=1458678544,1458677744][/doublepost]

 

[ChartBuddy]

Coin Explanation

 

[solex]

Maybe prices will be in the $32k territory ...

I'll explain why that's impossible the way Core Dev are headed.

In 7 years Bitcoin handled 100 million transactions, (this includes all the junk like SatoshiDice betbot noise). At the end of the 7 years its "market cap" rested at $7 billion. That is $70 per transaction, and what is more is the market cap is forward looking, seeking future value. All those past txns are just blockchain history. If no more were to get done then its value would drift to zero.

Because Bitcoin has survived 7 years the odds are good that it will survive another 7 years as a reasonably well used payment system. That means another 100 million transactions or $70 per txn at current value.
Of course 100 million is nowhere near enough to justify this price level, so the market is expecting something like 1000 times txn volume to get this ratio down to a sensible level like 7 cents per txn*. If Bitcoin can't scale then its market-cap should be closer to $7 million than $7 billion.

1MB+SegWit does nothing for this. The network needs serious main-chain scaling like BIP101 allows with or without LN-type solutions.

The difference is that main-chain scaling keeps all the BTC value in the BTC market cap. If LN-type solutions take off and absorb most of the volume then the owners and providers of those services will get most of the market cap increase. The Blockstreamers are likely having wet dreams about being the next Page, Brin or Bezos sitting on a $50 billion shareholding. If they succeed then that is money which should be in the BTC value, enriching long-term holders, not translated into BS bank accounts.

*(the extra is SoV which is still nascent and relying on the payment system network effect)

 

[adamstgbit]

@solex

You are over stating LN's effect of sucking value out of bitcoin. LN TX will still be based on BTC.
having a Huge amount of BTC TX on LN, would be comparable to having huge amounts TX happening internally on bitcoin casino sites or the like.

weather or not the expected TX grow appears onchain or offchain won't make much difference.

its also worth noting that a big group of poeple place very little value on bitcoin as a TX processor, but rather as a value store, to them TX groth should have 0 impact on their willingness to hodl.

What i am most worried about is if TX happens ofchain then TX fee might never be able to support the level of security we have now, hashing power could drop significantly as reward drops and TX fee are never able to fill the void.

 

[solex]

@adamstgbit
I think that what you are worried about is the other side of the same coin. If miners are not getting all the fee-value of tx which route through LN, then they will lose income, less will be spent on ASICs etc, security must suffer. The question is where has some of the fee-income gone? Answer: to LN providers.

 

[adamstgbit]

@solex

agreed, but if a TX happens on LN or on the mainchain, doesn't make a HUGE dif... BTC was used in the TX, weather it happens onchain or offchain it don't make much difference in bitcoins uses as money. but ya it will decrease miner revenue which WILL impact security which WILL impact price.
but its not as tho all the economic value of a LN TX is lost.

however!
In reality we cannot expect all of the excess TX volume being forced off chain to perfectly fall onto LN.
I would speculate a large % of this excess TX volume will find its way to ETH or some other shitcoins!
by not pushing BTC TX on chain volume to its absolute limit we are opening the door to shitcoins outperform bitcoin.
[doublepost=1458687156][/doublepost]there is a not bad chance of the fallow scenario to take place.

1) Core implements segwit
2) ETH value drops significantly as a result of the "blocksize" debate appearing to be resolved.
3) I move a large % of my BTC to ETH
4) the premature introduction of BTC second layer scaling solution begins to hurt minner revenue and the BTC system starts to implode in on itself.
5) ETH is once again seen as a safe haven, but not only to new users but new miners too!
6) KABOOM ETH wins the crypto currency wars, and bitcoin is deemed a failed experiment, its value now only supported by collectors of ancient relics

 

[adamstgbit]

the daily candle is about to close,
i expect a huge move to come right after today's candle closing.

 

[adamstgbit]

 

[ChartBuddy]

Coin Explanation

 

[spiderbrain]

@solex
]there is a not bad chance of the fallow scenario to take place.

1) Core implements segwit
2) ETH value drops significantly as a result of the "blocksize" debate appearing to be resolved.
3) I move a large % of my BTC to ETH
4) the premature introduction of BTC second layer scaling solution begins to hurt minner revenue and the BTC system starts to implode in on itself.
5) ETH is once again seen as a safe haven, but not only to new users but new miners too!
6) KABOOM ETH wins the crypto currency wars, and bitcoin is deemed a failed experiment, its value now only supported by collectors of ancient relics

Sigh, one cannot just HODL like one used to. Complicated times. I have been quite embarrassed of late by the bitcoin community's behaviour compared to many other, more functional, open source projects.

 

[adamstgbit]

who's buying??
i mean i can't imagine poeple are going around telling friends " there is a huge debate going on, blockstream is taking over, BTC can't scale, its a bandaid solution, BUY BUY BUY!!!!!!!! "

so if fresh fiat isn't buying... and older timers in the thick of things are losing faith. then who's buying!?

it's gata be speculators, but what are they speculating? segwit + second layer will allow bitcoin to scale, and mining revenues will be just fine, because often second layer payments will hit the blockchain when a dispute happens and pay huge fees.
[doublepost=1458693080][/doublepost]all in before everything turns out alright.

 

[AdrianX]

who's buying??

 

[JayJuanGee]

I'll explain why that's impossible the way Core Dev are headed.

In 7 years Bitcoin handled 100 million transactions, (this includes all the junk like SatoshiDice betbot noise). At the end of the 7 years its "market cap" rested at $7 billion. That is $70 per transaction, and what is more is the market cap is forward looking, seeking future value. All those past txns are just blockchain history. If no more were to get done then its value would drift to zero.

Because Bitcoin has survived 7 years the odds are good that it will survive another 7 years as a reasonably well used payment system. That means another 100 million transactions or $70 per txn at current value.
Of course 100 million is nowhere near enough to justify this price level, so the market is expecting something like 1000 times txn volume to get this ratio down to a sensible level like 7 cents per txn*. If Bitcoin can't scale then its market-cap should be closer to $7 million than $7 billion.

1MB+SegWit does nothing for this. The network needs serious main-chain scaling like BIP101 allows with or without LN-type solutions.

The difference is that main-chain scaling keeps all the BTC value in the BTC market cap. If LN-type solutions take off and absorb most of the volume then the owners and providers of those services will get most of the market cap increase. The Blockstreamers are likely having wet dreams about being the next Page, Brin or Bezos sitting on a $50 billion shareholding. If they succeed then that is money which should be in the BTC value, enriching long-term holders, not translated into BS bank accounts.

*(the extra is SoV which is still nascent and relying on the payment system network effect)

In my earlier post, I was exaggerating a little bit, when I suggested that we could be shopping for yahts and private jets within 5 days...

Surely you lay out a decent case that potentially sums up historical bitcoin, and I will give you the benefit of the doubt regarding the total transactions at 100 million for the life of bitcoin.

I doubt that it is very accurate to sum up bitcoin's future 7 years as being somehow at a similar level as it's first 7 years. Yeah, it is possible that we may see some leveling off and some slower periods of growth (less than exponential); nonetheless, bitcoin is likely to continue to be advantaged and see benefits of various network effects in consumption, merchants, speculation, wall street entrance, etc, and I believe it would be fair to wager that in the next 7 years, there is likely going to be at minimum 10 times more transactions and possibly even exponential growth in the average value per transaction as well.

I am likely in no place to speculate exactly regarding how those future 7 years are going to turn out, but your presentation of stagnation and migration of value to lightning network and other off chain solutions, seems quite the dire and even improbable outcome. Merely because currently core seems to be playing a bit of hardball in failing/refusing to increase the blocksize limit at this particular time, doesn't really seem to mean that there are not going to be ongoing and continuous resolutions and blocksize limit increases in the future, as those will likely become more necessary with the passage of time and likely more necessary because of likely increased adoption.

 

[AdrianX]

this is the video I was looking for it's watchers of this stuff I think are buying in.

 

[theZerg]

also could be actual users buying in... the other cryptos remain entirely speculative.