Quote from: billyjoeallen on March 20, 2016, 10:56:44 PM

Quote from: DaRude on March 20, 2016, 10:34:35 PM

Quote from: billyjoeallen on March 20, 2016, 09:53:07 PM

Quote from: DaRude on March 20, 2016, 09:03:50 PM

Quote from: European Central Bank on March 20, 2016, 01:11:29 PM

Quote from: deadpoolx on March 20, 2016, 12:46:43 PM

The halving is priced in or we will see a huge pump? How many percent are your bets?

My bet is nothing much happens. There's a whole lot of noise taking up attention elsewhere.

I'll be VERY surprised if we'll have this stable market all the way up to the halving in supply. I mean how accurate do you think they price these things in?

Based on your sig, If Bitcoin is not allowed to grow, won't price decline? I mean it seems impossible to have price appreciation without growth. There is no way to stop growth that won't also stop appreciation.

Quote

"And it leads to an obvious but crazy conclusion: if decentralisation is what makes Bitcoin good, and growth threatens decentralisation, then Bitcoin should not be allowed to grow." -Mike Hearn
Yes, yes, and again yes. Until better solution is found, growth should not be achieved simply at the cost of centralization!

Quote is from Hearn's rage quit. By growth he's talking about giving free access to something that is limited in supply by design. Think it's obvious that it won't work. Make a block 80MB and if it's free (or almost free) to fill up someone will. Utilization can continue to grow even if it costs few cents extra for a space in a block.

I know damn well where it's from, but you didn't answer my question. Utilization can only grow until it hits the limit, at which point it can't continue to grow. In the process, of course I understand that low value transactions will be replaced by relatively higher value transactions that merit higher fees, but there is still a limit and because of the correlation between price and utilization, there is a limit on price. We can debate what that limit is, but it's there. There is a price beyond which a network congestion failure is an inevitable certainty if capacity is constant. This should be so obvious, it bewilders me that I even have to say it. What is the cognitive disconnect of smallblockers who think capacity limits aren't also price limits?

Look, if price keeps going up, it's going to attract new users, traders, speculators etc. This is obvious. There is no way to stop it. The growth will continue to come until something prevents them from participating, like a physical inability to get their transactions processed. What else could stop them? The ONLY thing that I think would do it is if the price stopped rising. Do you have another idea?

So either we will eventually get a network congestion failure or a complete halt in price appreciation without additional capacity. This is not an opinion. This is a logical certainty.

Quote

If Bitcoin is not allowed to grow, won't price decline?

Well yes at it's very basic can't argue against this.

The flaw in your logic is that currently even with 1MB block we can technically reach 100% utilization in every single block. i.e. all of BTCs (15MM) can fit in a single block (if all of BTCs are transfered to few input addresses). Here's one transaction for BTC195K that only took up 7kb https://blockchain.info/tx/1c12443203a48f42cdf7b1acee5b4b1c1fedc144cb909a3bf5edbffafb0cd204

It bewilders me that i have to explain to you there there can't be a network congestion failure, just a fee market economy. If you send a transaction now with 0 fees and it doesn't confirm is that a network congestion failure too?

Again there is no such thing as a "physical inability to get their transactions processed" just a fee might be prohibitive and not worth it for a particular transaction.