Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[deepcolderwallet]

You are literally complaining that bitcoin is so successful than people other than internet nerds are becoming interested. This is Good News™.

Are you the new worst commenter on the forum?  The entire point of bitcoin is "decentralization".  To mine things like gold you have to go through the government itself and get permits and also deal with entities like the EPA, yet even with all that bureaucracy, gold and silver mining is still more decentralized than bitcoin mining is.  This is not a good thing when "decentralization" is it's entire selling point.

Welcome to the real world. Other people have Agendas. This was never not going to happen.

Please make a comment that makes some type of sense.  You first said I'm "complaining that others besides internet nerds are interested in bitcoin".  LOL, they are not interested in "bitcoin", they're interested in inserting themselves as middlemen and extracting usury and seigniorage fees from you.  The exact thing that bitcoin is supposed to prevent.  If bitcoin developers themselves can't even mine the coin they develop for and have to pay tribute to some cartel, I'm not sure there is much point in this because this thing has clearly gone off the rails.

THIS!!!
I could not put in words the actual state of Bitcoin better than you did.

[deepcolderwallet]

At the end of the day, the Chinese Mining farms will put BU into action should they so decide to. Regardless of how we all feel in here either way about it. If they did create the longer chain.... hence, to keep or have just one BTC coin only, do we really have a choice at that point other than to get onboard with it? ... just thinking lol

unless of course some want 2 coins   lol

I also don't think should the worst happen, it will be the end of Bitcoin either  

And here we can contemplate the voice of chinese miners!

NO, MY FRIEND!

I know you miners already started threatening and making a lot of noise, and I know you will do even more noise, but the truth is that WE ARE NOT TRADING OUR DIGNITY FOR PROFIT!
Bitcoin is far more an investment, a currency or whatever. Bitcoin is FREEDOM.

WE ARE NOT TAKING IT FROM CHINA! You can fork, you can have all your Buttcoin ruled by the greedy miners, this just WILL NOT BE OUR CURRENCY!

I prefer seeing Bitcoins Market Cap falling to less than 1 billion (that will never happen anymore, just saying) than having it in hands of people worse than my government.

[deepcolderwallet]

All these advocating for a hard fork are clueless, they have no idea how mercenary the miners are due to the amounts of money they are outlaying continuously on electricity and other costs. The profitability calculations includes chain difficulty and price.

Cut that bullshit, chinese miner! We all know how cheap it is to assemble an ASIC in china and how cheap is electricity there. Many steal power instead of paying. Go away with your disinformation!

[gembitz]

no more mr nice guy

active BU OR ELSE!

[MinermanNC]

no more mr nice guy

active BU OR ELSE!

I need cappuccino! for my BU 

[Killerpotleaf]

ETH collapsing bitcoin UP

[Fakhoury]

https://www.hackread.com/millions-of-accounts-from-hacked-bitcoin-on-dark-web/

[jbreher]

I'm sure I someone will come along and call me paranoid for having such views. Considering current events, I don't think a little paranoia is a bad thing. I prefer to look at it as being prepared. Erring on the side of decentralization is the prudent choice in my opinion.

I don't consider your 'paranoia' unwarranted. However, I think keeping the transaction processing capability down works against your stated goals.

It would seem to me that your stated goal for 'decentralization' is an increase in the number of non-mining nodes. I think we can likely agree that the only population that would have any interest whatsoever in being a non-mining node would be Bitcoiners. I reason from this that increasing the number of Bitcoiners would add the the population of people that may self-select in becoming non-mining nodes. Indeed, it would be my expectation that increasing the number of Bitcoiners will -- all else being equal -- lead to more non-mining nodes.

It seems axiomatic to me that making Bitcoin applicable to more use cases, or more usable for the use cases it has, or downright cheaper to use, will lead to more usage, and more Bitcoiners. And that increasing transaction capability and decreasing transaction cost both serve these aims.

Long story short, I believe making Bitcoin more capable -- even at some real increment of per-node operational cost -- will lead to an increase in the number of non-mining nodes. I realize others may differ. And creating a controlled experiment is likely out of the question.

Of course, I really don't think non-mining nodes add any value to the network. Only to their operators. Again, I realize opinions on this matter differ as well.

[PoolMinor]

Second of all, you are planting assumptions about my position based on information that I did not provide.

Wow, there is a statement of futility.
Also pot & kettle argument here.
Also-also no one likes you.

[JayJuanGee]

Second of all, you are planting assumptions about my position based on information that I did not provide.

Wow, there is a statement of futility.
Also pot & kettle argument here.

And there is a citing out of context coming from you, too.

Good job chiming in and proclaiming expert status.

[JayJuanGee]

[https://www.hackread.com/millions-of-accounts-from-hacked-bitcoin-on-dark-web/[/size][/b][/center]

Thanks Fakhoury.


My bitcoin talk account was hacked into in September (about the same time that Adam's account was hacked into). 

I made some changes, but based on your article, Fakhoury, I made a few more changes. 

If a hacker gets into another bitcoin related account that has value, it will take only a few minutes before you lose your bitcoin in that account.

And, even if the account does not allow them to withdraw for a few days, they can pretty much deplete your account within hours, just by pumping and dumping whatever value you  have in your account.

[Holliday]

It would seem to me that your stated goal for 'decentralization' is an increase in the number of non-mining nodes.

No.

The goal is to avoid drastic increases to the amount of information which peers are required to share between each other in order to keep the network operational along with retaining the ability to run a full node (which may be required to become a mining node (use your imagination)) on easily accessible consumer grade hardware.

I fully expect outright attacks on Bitcoin in the future. To me it seems like we've passed "peak freedom" in the civilized world, and Bitcoin is an extremely powerful tool for obtaining and maintaining individual freedom.

This is far more important to me than cheap, fast confirmations.

Besides, I have no problem with increasing transaction capacity and decreasing transaction costs through the implementations of a second layer(s) which is perfectly compatible with the above.

I'm not convinced that the people who complain about the cost of transactions (I think they are ridiculously cheap considering the utility the provide) are the type of people who care about the benefits a full node provides. The fact that comparisons are often made to centralized services (VISA, PayPal) which are nothing like Bitcoin is a prime example.

Also, I spent a lot of time and effort in the past warning about the problems that will arise due to mining pools, and did everything I could to promote p2pool, but it's pretty clear that ship has already sailed (p2pool still exists but it never got the type of support it needed to thrive). In my experience, miners hash rate providers are generally near-sighted, care little about the health of the network or the long term viability of Bitcoin, and are only there to make a quick buck in fiat profits. I'm not exactly keen on handing more control over to their bosses (actual miners, aka pool operators).

[Ted E. Bare]

Bitcoin back in uptrend?

[Killerpotleaf]

It would seem to me that your stated goal for 'decentralization' is an increase in the number of non-mining nodes.

No.

The goal is to avoid drastic increases to the amount of information which peers are required to share between each other in order to keep the network operational along with retaining the ability to run a full node (which may be required to become a mining node (use your imagination)) on easily accessible consumer grade hardware.

I fully expect outright attacks on Bitcoin in the future. To me it seems like we've passed "peak freedom" in the civilized world, and Bitcoin is an extremely powerful tool for obtaining and maintaining individual freedom.

This is far more important to me than cheap, fast confirmations.

Besides, I have no problem with increasing transaction capacity and decreasing transaction costs through the implementations of a second layer(s) which is perfectly compatible with the above.

I'm not convinced that the people who complain about the cost of transactions (I think they are ridiculously cheap considering the utility the provide) are the type of people who care about the benefits a full node provides. The fact that comparisons are often made to centralized services (VISA, PayPal) which are nothing like Bitcoin is a prime example.

Also, I spent a lot of time and effort in the past warning about the problems that will arise due to mining pools, and did everything I could to promote p2pool, but it's pretty clear that ship has already sailed (p2pool still exists but it never got the type of support it needed to thrive). In my experience, miners hash rate providers are generally near-sighted, care little about the health of the network or the long term viability of Bitcoin, and are only there to make a quick buck in fiat profits. I'm not exactly keen on handing more control over to their bosses (actual miners, aka pool operators).

only the newbies try to compare bitcoin to VISA ( and its understandable why they do, their newbies! i bet a lot of them end up thinking bitcoin sucks because paypal is better, can't blame them they dont "get it" )

I appreciate your point of view, me i'm very "selfish" and i want bitcoin to be very successful, so that i ( any all who joined recently ) may turn a profit(held in BTC of course )

LN is an unknown and so i want to stay away from it, or at least not bank on its successes.

when I discovered BU's EC blocksize, and I came up with the idea that  "a market driven limit will yield a highly efficient TX fee market"

what's good for miners is good for me, and honestly i'm not sure what we're going to do when subsidy runs out.... so IMO creating a fee market which will yield the most Fees total ( by carefully balancing blockspace to Fee-Paying-TX's demand ) is an absolutely vital piece to the puzzle, and i'm very excited to see what BU's EC will do to the fee market; will miner double total TX fees while halving TX cost!? I believe they can!

I dont think BU indented this, the BU guys seem to like my idea, but I think mostly they we're looking to bring the fee market back to where it was in 2011 and keep it there, with 2-4-6 ... MB blocks.

But with BU's model only a few nodes and miners need to see the profit in keeping blocks small to keep them small. so i'm doing my part running my node and setting my EB low.

the BU miners will have to kick my node away every time they try to incress the blocksize  

hopefully that + the idea that they will profit by keeping blocks small will keep blocks as small as they can be without hurting adoption.

[olseh]

[https://www.hackread.com/millions-of-accounts-from-hacked-bitcoin-on-dark-web/[/size][/b][/center]

Thanks Fakhoury.


My bitcoin talk account was hacked into in September (about the same time that Adam's account was hacked into). 

I made some changes, but based on your article, Fakhoury, I made a few more changes. 

If a hacker gets into another bitcoin related account that has value, it will take only a few minutes before you lose your bitcoin in that account.

And, even if the account does not allow them to withdraw for a few days, they can pretty much deplete your account within hours, just by pumping and dumping whatever value you  have in your account.

My account got done too, unfortunately I've not been able to get it back

[arklan]

[https://www.hackread.com/millions-of-accounts-from-hacked-bitcoin-on-dark-web/[/size][/b][/center]

Thanks Fakhoury.


My bitcoin talk account was hacked into in September (about the same time that Adam's account was hacked into). 

I made some changes, but based on your article, Fakhoury, I made a few more changes. 

If a hacker gets into another bitcoin related account that has value, it will take only a few minutes before you lose your bitcoin in that account.

And, even if the account does not allow them to withdraw for a few days, they can pretty much deplete your account within hours, just by pumping and dumping whatever value you  have in your account.

My account got done too, unfortunately I've not been able to get it back

oh, is that what happened to adam? what's he going by these days?

[Killerpotleaf]

who knows.

[JayJuanGee]

[https://www.hackread.com/millions-of-accounts-from-hacked-bitcoin-on-dark-web/[/size][/b][/center]

Thanks Fakhoury.


My bitcoin talk account was hacked into in September (about the same time that Adam's account was hacked into). 

I made some changes, but based on your article, Fakhoury, I made a few more changes. 

If a hacker gets into another bitcoin related account that has value, it will take only a few minutes before you lose your bitcoin in that account.

And, even if the account does not allow them to withdraw for a few days, they can pretty much deplete your account within hours, just by pumping and dumping whatever value you  have in your account.

My account got done too, unfortunately I've not been able to get it back

I got locked out of my bitcoin talk account twice.  The first time was in September due to a hacker and the second time was that I used the wrong feature to try to recover my password. 

Surprisingly, the first time was easier to get my account back, but I think it was mostly luck and to get some help from one of the mods.  The second time took over month to get me going again, and I was beginning to think that I was never going to get my account back.

These accounts are one thing of value in themselves (especially if you have built a pretty decent posting history), but yeah they could also be used for scamming too, if you do not realize it.. and then some of the information may also overlap with place in which you actually hold bitcoins, which can screw you even more to have your information compromised.

[arklan]

easy solution: make your account worthless! how? same as your identity! DEBT! YAY!

ahem. i believe i need to stop posting after 1 am...

[JayJuanGee]

[https://www.hackread.com/millions-of-accounts-from-hacked-bitcoin-on-dark-web/[/size][/b][/center]

Thanks Fakhoury.


My bitcoin talk account was hacked into in September (about the same time that Adam's account was hacked into). 

I made some changes, but based on your article, Fakhoury, I made a few more changes. 

If a hacker gets into another bitcoin related account that has value, it will take only a few minutes before you lose your bitcoin in that account.

And, even if the account does not allow them to withdraw for a few days, they can pretty much deplete your account within hours, just by pumping and dumping whatever value you  have in your account.

My account got done too, unfortunately I've not been able to get it back

oh, is that what happened to adam? what's he going by these days?

He goes by "who knows"   hahahaha