Thursday Afternoon Coin Clarity Check-Up: BTC Flat for the Week, Despite Briefly Passing $7800
Good afternoon (or evening) to you, crypto fans. Every Thursday we just like to give you a little update as to what’s to come for this weekend’s Weekly Roundup, and what has transpired thus far during the week. And we got to tell you, its actually been quite a bit. Drama, drama, drama in every corner. From the price of BTC reaching yet another high, to an Ethereum (mal)coder accidentally “locking away” over $150 million in ETH, to the Bitcoin Core team’s decision to postpone the implementation of a community voted-upon measure to increase the bitcoin block size from 1 MB to 2 MB.
In any case, we hope your week hasn’t been as stressful, and that you remember there’s far more to life than money — imaginary money at that! (And it is imaginary. Anything you can’t see or hold in your hands is a product of your imagination. Anything that requires both electricity and the internet to be “real,” cannot be defined as existing in a physical reality.). It doesn’t mean imaginary items don’t have value. Heck, World of Warcraft (WoW) Gold is now worth more than the Venezuelan bolivar, and you can’t tell me that WoW isn’t based purely on the user’s imagination.
A Quick Run-Down of Some Interesting Stories We’ve Seen This Week
- Even though SegWit still remains live and has been shortening transaction sizes in the bitcoin network since mid-August, the plan to double the BTC block site has been postponed by the Bitcoin Core team indefinitely, with the committee naming an inordinate amount of controversy among the community as their main rationale.
- Bitcoin Gold (BTG) plan to go ahead and release their hard fork next week, despite the Bitcoin Core (BTC) team’s decision not to hard fork BTC for a block size increase.
- Goldman Sachs, whose CEO Lloyd Blankfein recently came out in favor of bitcoin (unlike other monolithic Wall Street titans, predicts bitcoin to consolidate at around $8000 in price, although we would take anything they have to say with a grain of salt, seeing as how they received more bailout welfare money from the U.S. government than all of America’s poor combined over a ten year period), and have been collectively (along with JP Morgan and Bank of America) more wrong about finance than the rest of the country’s armchair analysts put together.
Our Recent Commentary on Forks and the Non-Increase of the BTC Block Size
The following was recently posted by one of our analysts and social mediologists on bitcointalk.org, which is the definitive discussion board for all things bitcoin. It attempts to explain why the second half of the “New York Agreement” was suddenly and inexplicably postponed by the Bitcoin Core development team, who have pretty much acted as the vanguards of bitcoin since 2010. The thread begins as follows:
If there is no implementation of a block size increase that was supposed to go ahead in a few days, why is BTG still hard forking on their own? I mean, the fork is backed by a Hong Kong-based ASIC mining company, I guess you needn’t look any further. But still, without the scheduled block size increase (the latter half of the “New York Agreement”), what is BTG forking against?
It’s funny to me that the philosophical underpinnings of BTG are to make bitcoin (even though its no longer bitcoin, its Bitcoin Gold) more ASIC-resistant are backed by an ASIC manufacturer.
And I also wonder if Voorhees was pressured by Garzik and his other peers into acting right instead of constantly (complaining) about transaction fees. I guess if he really believed in what he’s been tweeting recently, he woulda left the Core team. But that would be leaving behind too much power and influence for the great unknown (ala Roger Ver), and he can’t have that, now can he….
Personally I think transaction fees are a bit high — but nowhere near the >$10 cost that Voorhees claimed they are. I’m all for an increase from 1 MB to 2 MB blocks, however you have to keep in mind that the BTC blockchain is already >140 GB in size, so who actually has the space and time to run a full node? Not many. Certainly not the average citizen.
Maybe keeping blocks at 1 MB is the best move after all. Let the forks keep coming and failing. They will simply be remembered as failed altcoins that tried to cash in on the good name of bitcoin.
Its evident there’s enough space in the industry for multiple coins to be employed and there doesn’t have to “be only one.”