181–190 of 253 posts
"6 people called off the fork. Think about that." [0] A censorship resistant digital cash is being built, and it only took 6 small time CEOs to completely throw everyone off and almost derail the project. When someone like CME Group, who now has skin in the game, also starts pulling their weight, who knows if the bitcoin experiment will survive? [0] https://twitter.com/arronschaar/status/928316853092433920
So bitcoin went up because they were going to fork, and now it's going up again because they will not? k Edit: Otoh, looks like it's seeing a bit of a drop now, but I doubt it will hit the pre-anticipation levels.
What is interesting is that the BTC price went up on the email announcement and it started going down an hour later when coindesk released the news. I guess different type of investors/speculators read different news source ...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Market fundamentals seem non existant here. At least a few years ago, when there were bad news the prices would reflect that. Now, it seems to go up anytime bitcoin is mentioned at all, regardless whether the market understands the implications or not.
> At least a few years ago, when there were bad news the prices would reflect that. Even when the news were predictable or already known! Bitcoin has never been connected to any "market fundamentals", just hundreds of day traders trying to predict each others reaction to random scraps of news as they come by.
Don't have anything against those guys but what was that part about decentralized crypto-currency that no one agency or government oversights?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is why I got out of bitcoin trading. It used to correlate to the general attitude about it. Now the coins and miners are so centralized the real driving force of bitcoins price is the thousand wallets holding 95% of all BTC. Its like trying to predict market movements for a stock where 95% of the shares in a company are owned by one person. It isn't up to anyone else but that person where the price trends, becau…
Reposting this as pertinent: In economics, the Gini coefficient is the standard measure of how inequitable a society is. This is tricky to determine for Bitcoin, as it's not quiet a "society" in the Gini sense, one person may have multiple addresses and many addresses have been used only once or a few times. (The commonly-cited figure of 0.88 is based on one small exchange in 2011.) However, a Citigroup analysis from…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So where's the research of how expensive nodes are and how many nodes would be lost if an upgrade to 2MB would happen? How big of a loss would be acceptable? Ideally how many nodes should exist in the network for it to be sufficiently decentralized? How much bandwidth is needed? How long can we expect our storage to last? > There is no credible research done That's precisely my point. Contributors have shown that f…
The damage the 1MB limit has done and is doing to Bitcoin is far more than possibly a couple of lost nodes would mean after an upgrade to 2MB. This has been a problem for years . For example Gavin thought 16MB would be perfectly safe. There's research being done now examining 1GB blocks and how that would affect propagation time. A lousy 2MB is honestly laughable. Doing nothing isn't the pragmatic or sane approach, i…
As for the 1GB block research you're talking about, it was literally presented 5 days ago. S2X proposal started in May and the fork was planned for next week. The way we want this secure digital money thing to work is that proposals that are controversial or that may affect security are researched and the research is reviewed over many months or years.
I know you want to take the quick approach and just LOWER FEES NOW, but we know -- from experience -- that a cowboy attitude with blockchains makes it trivial to lose a lot of money [3].
[0] https://blog.bitpay.com/bitpay-growth-2017/
[1] https://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume-...
[2] https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin/#charts
[3] https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/08/accidental-bug-may-have-froz...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess what's weird is the idea that you could split two coins and the two coins price is greater than the original. That doesn't make any sense even though it happened with Bitcoin cash.
It's not that weird. It's like any exchange of goods, both parties can come out with an advantage by getting something they want. In the case of Bitcoin Cash, 2 sides of the community got what they wanted.
So bitcoin went up because they were going to fork, and now it's going up again because they will not? k Edit: Otoh, looks like it's seeing a bit of a drop now, but I doubt it will hit the pre-anticipation levels.
You must be new to this. Literally any change shows that bitcoin will win. Something bad for bitcoin? And it still can't stop it! Look at how resilient it is! Something good for bitcoin? TOLD YOU SO to the moon!
Not to use the B-word, but bubbles will continue to inflate as long as there are enough new people to put new money in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is why I got out of bitcoin trading. It used to correlate to the general attitude about it. Now the coins and miners are so centralized the real driving force of bitcoins price is the thousand wallets holding 95% of all BTC. Its like trying to predict market movements for a stock where 95% of the shares in a company are owned by one person. It isn't up to anyone else but that person where the price trends, becau…
where are you getting those false numbers from, this is the distribution https://bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-bitcoin-addresses.... Trading on attitude is not the best trading analysis strategy, I'm glad you sold before losing more money
The idea of “consensus” in the bitcoin network is interesting to me. The code expresses “consensus” mathematically, and there exists a binary truth of whether a consensus has been “reached.” That’s simple and straightforward. It’s easy to reason about what happens once a consensus has been tautologically reached. However, answering the question of “do we have a consensus yet?” is far less precise. Answering “what com…