I'm thinking that it's a different programming language, especially since my reaction was:

A correction is not called a bear market...

Helrow?



What bitcoinPsycho said.....



What _javi_ said.....




What ToxicMoxic said....


What serveria said.....

oooohhhhhhhh  gaaaaaaaawwwwwddddd   baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwbbbbbbb!!!!!!

You forgot to disclaim with "#nohomo".....causing me to look about pondering the day .

 



#nohomo  

 

Always looking for simple and dumb explanations.


Have you ever heard about normal bitcoin price movements?

The BTC price has largely come up from the mid march correction of $3,850 with only one or two mediocre corrections, and many of us who have been following BTC for a while realize that we should not take for granted that BTC's price is just going to go up, without some profit taking from time to time (which also allows for the shaking out of some weak hands).

In other words, even though BTC's price does go shooting up 2x or 3.5x in short periods of time, it is quite unrealistic to presume that such upward shooting BTC price moves are going to continue to take place without at least a certain amount of correction, profit-taking. weak-hand shakening, etc..  here and there... along the way.



Go buy gold then.  Good luck with that.  See ya...

I recall watching it, too, and I recall buying into it, too..... I looked through my records, and I could not see how much I bought, exactly, but my memory of the event was that I had wanted to be part of the buying because it felt like a pretty BIG deal, even while it was happening, but I did not have a lot of spare money at that particular time, and there was some uncertainty about how the whole wall of coins would resolve.  

I am pretty sure that I bought into the wall, and I bought less than 1 bitcoin during the time because I had already been buying BTC several times around that time because the BTC price continued to be on a downwards trajectory, and I even recall that there was some kind of Fed Marshals auction or something that preceded the bearwhale event, and a lot of those fed marshall coins were sold while the BTC price was around $385... and I had been fairly confident that the bottom was then in.. so I had exhausted a lot of my spare fiat in the upper $300s.. prior to the bearwhale event... live and learn.. I am not sure.. but when the BTC price is going down for so long, it continues to be quite difficult to NOT exhaust your fiat at various points above the bottom out of hope that the bottom is in (when it ends up NOT being the case).

And, sure the man bear whale was a kind of symbolic event in which the conquering was surely ONLY short-lived (the price went up only briefly and then went down below $300 soon thereafter - within about three months) because the BTC price did linger well below the $300 sales price for over a year after such event.  So maybe the man-bear-whale was conquered and allowed the BTC price to stay above $300 for a few months but the downward pressure continued through the following months and the whole buying support of the community seemed to have exhausted for a year thereafter without enough dry powder to keep BTC prices above $300.. not until one year later...

Call me party poop, if you must (again).  

The moves between $400 and $600 were in 2016.

2014 was like a downward spiral similar to 2018.. and 2015 was way fucking worse than 2019 (until the end of 2015), because it was flat through the whole year pretty much with ongoing threats to break below $200.. with only one short-lived bout above $300... So, 2015 was almost like 2019 without the 3.5x price rise in the middle.  

Do you even appreciate how much a 3.5x rise in the middle changes the dynamics?

If we had spent 2019 flat, like we were in 2015, then maybe we would have lingered between $3,400 and $4,200 for most of the whole of 2019 with maybe a bout of a bounce up to $5,350 and then resuming within our $3,400 and $4,200 price range, and then in late august getting a retest of something close to $3,124.. and then maybe in October/November 2019 getting a bounce to $6.9k.. and then reverting back to ranging between $5k & $6k for then next 6 months - until the end of May 2020.

From my illustration, above, you should be able to appreciate that so far, this cycle has been waaaaay less painful than the cycle that drug out through 2014, 2015 and most of 2016...... even though there were signs of optimism in 2016...  and currently we are way more into a kind of a 2016 feeling than in a 2015 feeling.. which currently is a lot more optimistic than those times... with a current feeling that the bottom (currently $3,124) is "in" (and maybe we can even feel somewhat comfortable about not again going below $5k or maybe $6k? - less certain about those numbers), even though nothing is guaranteed in bitcoinlandia.. especially given our current macro circumstances involving the ongoing inflating of the equities market (including pumping of admittedly bankrupt companies) by dollar printing, which could come crashing down at any time for any or no reason.

TLDR:  In current BTC market conditions, I surely feel better (less pain and stress) now and more like 2016 rather than how I was feeling in 2014/2015.

By the way, I do agree with you that we are likely still in a decent accumulation zone, and there are likely a decent number of bear whales that really want to make sure that all or most of the weak hands have been shaken out before proceeding into supra $10k territory.. because things might start getting a bit out of control the more that the BTC price is allowed to go UPpity.


Yeah... and you would be exactly wrong in your memory, too..  (see my response above  - hate to cite myself as the authority, but gotta do what you gotta do.. and haters gonna hate... )

 

Doesn't look good.... if true.

Aren't governments already doing it in small ways, and frequently, governments have covert operations, too....

In other words, it seems that there are already incentive mechanisms built into bitcoin to account for this kind of behavior, but there may be some questions about comfort level for governments to consider various official government programs that might be directed towards either bitcoin mining or bitcoin stockpiling (even just small amounts in a kind of DCA way on a governmental level).

That's the spirit, Torque!!!!!

Put up a little fight, and don't allow me  to triumph too easily.  Touché.  

You likely realize that I am not going to agree with your assertion that your frequently occurring conspiratorial manipulation dumb ideas are purportedly not dumber than the (generally speaking) substantive content of my sometimes happening walls of text..

What half-way paying attention non-robot would agree to those kinds of conclusions?  Surely, not this one.  

Nonetheless, my earlier observation about the dumbness of your ideas was mostly meant to verify whether you were awake, anyhow.

   



It is not like Zhan does not have a rightful claim to Bitmain's business, as far as I recall of some of the background facts.. and even chinese law likely would support him in that regard, perhaps.

Well, you might be correct, and surely owning bitcoin directly remains a very powerfui weapon that distinguishes it from other markets that end up getting manipulated, including gold, silver, oil and other markets, but with bitcoin, we can take possession of our keys and find a lot of accountability making power through that.

On the other hand, it seems to me that financialization remains a kind of necessary evil, and we cannot really stop them from coming, and stop some people wanting to create a variety of financial tools and a variety of ways that traditional financial institutions can get into custodially holding bitcoin, whether through retirement accounts or various other kinds of funds.

So, they can attempt to manipulate BTC's price down or up, but in the end, we still need to see how all of these matters are going to play out, and I doubt that the fact that various institutions and governments are going to try to manipulate and control and tame bitcoin is going to take away bitcoin's investment thesis and the fact that bitcoin remains a good, solid investment asset. 

By the way, some smart governments might end up trying to front run other governments in terms of both competing in the mining of bitcoin and the competing in the stockpiling of a financial reserve in bitcoin, and those likely behaviors do not hurt bitcoin's investment thesis, either.

I don't know why you need to take my battles with you on this topic so personally.  I am largely attacking your arguments rather than you, and largely my assertion has continued to be that you have a tendency to overexaggerate concepts of manipulation, and I have never denied that manipulation exists, but instead that you have been giving the practice way more weight than it deserves.

Surely, you can likely recall when I used to proclaim that you were too much into numerology, and exaggerations in that regard, and so even though any of us likely recognize that there tends to be gravitation of the BTC price around certain numerological points, it still does not legitimize placing unwarranted levels of emphasis on various manipulations that are taking place.

So yeah, in the end, I suppose that we have some differences in opinion regarding how much weight to give to the concept of manipulation and to give very many shits about it, and I also recall that you were whining the shit out of bearish scenarios because you thought that BTC prices would not be able to go up beyond certain points because the "manipulators" were not going to allow it.  You would think that through the past years, you would have gotten a bit more out of the manipulation rut, but instead, I suppose each of us have some of our framework preferences that we tend to rely upon, even if they are based on certain levels of nonsense, futility... and outweighted conspiracy theory skepticisms.

Hey, Torque, I agree with a lot of the things that you say, and your various macro-level observations, but even you should realize that you have both a tendency to go overboard with your conspiracy angle and your seemingly want to concede way more powers to status quo institutions than those fucktwats deserve and even taking matters way more personally than they should be taken. 

What you say, good ole buddy, can't we just get along?  Even though you have a lot of dumb ideas?   

 

Huh? 

These kinds of market behaviors happen all the time, and you especially should be expecting attempts to keep the BTC price within a range in bitcoin as compared with other markets because bitcoin is still pretty damned immature, as a market, and there is a lot of ability to get away with attempting to control the price, but in the end, who the fuck is going to win?  The manipulators?

They can only manipulate so long.

Remember, Torque, you were whining about manipulation at $350 and $500, and what the fuck happened to those BTC prices?  The manipulators would have loved to keep BTC prices below $500 and even below 4 digits, but at a certain point, they no longer had any choice.

Yeah, manipulate all the fuck that you want, does not mean that they can keep it up forever.  Do you really believe that the manipulators wanted the BTC price to go up to $19,666 in December 2017?  They would have preferred to have kept it down.  But they did not have a choice.

In other words, fuck these claims about manipulation, and sure they are going to do it and sure they are going to try, and sure we are going to find out if they are going to be able to suppress bitcoin similarly to the ways that they have been able to suppress gold and silver, and my hunch is that they are going to be in for a rude awakening at some point, even if they might have some temporary bouts of success to temporarily manipulate bitcoin, but in the end, there is likely ONLY so much manipulation that they are going to able to achieve with king daddy...

TLDR: claims of manipulation are overrated...   Can you manipulate time?  Can you manipulate math?  Can you manipulate bitcoin?

Apart from your name dropping a shitcoin... which I am going to act like you did not say it... hahahahahaha.... let me see if I can discuss the other part of your post.

I am having a kind of similar dilemma with regard to privacy to some of my coins too, and I am thinking that there are ways to spend coins slowly.. or to mix them or to coin join them or to get caught into obscurity slowly in such a way that there are not really any red flags that are raised.

So, sure there are stacks of coins that any of us might have within our control that are more KYC/AML and there are other coins that have a bit more obscurity and maybe they have not been moved for a long time or there might be some questions regarding who is the owner or controller of some of the coins.

In other words, I agree that it is likely that a lot of us can say "mistakes have been made" over the years... And maybe in my case, I can proclaim that I might have multiple addresses containing between .001BTC and .63697BTC each.. but I still would not mind figuring out ways to move parts of those coins into various kinds of coin joining or mixing or whatever addresses.... whether I am doing it on the 1st layer or some 2nd or 3rd layer or whatever.  

In no way am I advocating the avoidance of taxes or criminal activities, but instead, I am trying to suggest that there are likely ways in which bitcoin can be maneuvered in ways to treat bitcoin like cash in terms of various kinds of privacy and various kinds of "it's none of your fucking business" that I bought prOn with my BTC or that I have a tendency to fill up at x, y or z gasoline station...  

So, for example, in my above rendition of my BTC holdings situation, my largest BTC addresses might currently be valued in the arena approaching $6,500 - but maybe if BTC does another 10x or 100x from here in the coming years, then some of my BTC addresses might have even bigger quantities in terms of their dollar valuations.. so there may likely be incentives for me to either move my coins now, or to wait for some of the privacy tools and practice to improve (perhaps?) to move them over the years in ways that allow small amounts of moving without really drawing attention to my transactional matters.  

Let's say for example one of my larger BTC addresses might have a sending of .01 BTC and then a change output of .62697 BTC  and maybe some other amount that goes towards the fees, too.   When the BTC price is at it's current price of about $9,900, the send amount and even the change amount are each less than $10k ($99 and $6,207 respectively), then currently, there might not be much attention given to my transactions, but if the BTC price were to go up 10x from today's price (presuming that we might go there someday soon), then perhaps attention could come to a transaction that has a .01 BTC and then a change output of .62697 BTC.. because then, even the change is worth about $62k rather than $6.2k.  

So, there might be some threshold amounts of BTC that are preferred to stay below, and maybe even future regulations might change our ponderings on such privacy subject matter and how diligent that we believe that we need to be in regards to such privacy and/or preparing for the future, too.

I am conjecturing (perhaps erroneously) that through the years some of the security and privacy through obscurity is going to improve, including that hopefully some of the privacy tools within bitcoin will improve too, including perhaps some tools that cause (or incentivize) almost every BTC transaction to become automatically coin joined or mixed in some kind of way... and surely, some of the technicals regarding how the changes are achieved remain a bit beyond my current understandings and expertise regarding how some of those practices and/or tools may be achieved and improved in bitcoin, even though from time to time, I hear and read discussions and proposals from seemingly very knowledgeable peeps in the bitcoin space in regards to some of these bitcoin privacy improvement topics.  


Exactly!!!!

That's why we cannot have nice things.

Protip:  I do highly recommend the hunt and peck method.

Not enough to buy an island, but enough to buy a food platter whether BTC prices go up or not...

What to make of it?

I will have to ponder the matter longer, and maybe some day, I could formulate a witty response.

You have truly and literally stumped the chump, this time.  

There was a similar article posted by Biodom yesterday, and I posted an expression of some my reservations in response to that Biodom post.

Team of in-house research experts looks something like this:



It's an idea that composes every peep.. peep, peep, peep...

Maybe there are more reasons besides the outages (that now are being accused as being purposeful)?

There are also accusations that Coinbase is helping out the feds with surveillance tools.  No?

Coindesk article from 5 days ago describing Coinbase as helping out the feds

I am somewhat sorry to rub it in, but there is not really a lot of sympathy for people who got involved in shitcoins in this thread, and I suppose there is more sympathy if you have at some point gotten out of them, and agree to mostly denigrate them.. at least in this thread.

Surely there are some folks who cannot resist to dabble in shitcoins, but I cannot really see much if any reason to have more than 10% of the value of your bitcoin investment into shitcoins, even though there might be some willing to accept that some people may have up to 25% in shitcoins, and still have some redeeming characteristics.

I recall during the 2017 price rise, there were quite a few people with almost no allocation in bitcoin, or merely small amounts of their investment in bitcoin like 10% or 20% in bitcoin, when their allocation into bitcoin should have been the opposite.. 80% to 90% in bitcoin.

Some are still waiting, anxiously, for another altcoin season that may or may not happen.. I am not going to write off the happening of another altcoin season, even though I still believe that it is not a good place to have very much of your investment unless you have largely got a decent stake in bitcoin first.


Even if coinmarket cap is your last resort, it is still not a good resort... especially if you are attempting to figure out the short to medium term direction of BTC prices.

There are a lot of us who are active in this thread who believe that some of the best strategies in bitcoin are to dollar cost average, to buy on the dip and to HODL... And, frequently it is not a good strategy to sell with the intent to buy back later, unless you are merely selling small amounts as the BTC price goes up and using that money to buy back on the dip.

So yeah, if there is an anticipation that the BTC price might be breaking down, then it might be better to hold onto cash and to buy on the dip, so there are ways to just buy regularly no matter what and then try to not really guess if the BTC price is going to dip, but if it does happen to dip to have some fiat available to buy in the event that happens.

What kind of strategies are you following, fonship?

Have you been stacking away BTC that you do not sell, and maybe only selling small portions of your BTC from time to time, or are you trying to play BIGGER with your BTC stash in order to attempt to time the market?

A worse, practice would be shorting or using margin.  Those are very risky and take a lot of time to learn and to develop skills and we have even witnessed a lot of experienced traders who have come to the BTC space and tried to employ their trading skills while using margin and shorting and who frequently get reckt when they engage in such practices.

There are some traders who proclaim to do well with their engaging in leveraged trades, but many times those traders are shown to get matters wrong - especially when they are betting on down in a bull market.  Concededly we might not know whether we are in a bull market or a bear market until we have been in it for a year or more, but hey, still frequently, the stacking of BTC without engaging in leverage should still be enough to get very rich in bitcoin, without having to employ leverage.

Yes... we might even be able to profess that the BTC price has moved into a supra $8k price about two months ago, and several times, has pushed up to try to get above $10k and has mostly stayed in the higher parts of the price range, but even pushing up on the higher end of the range would not necessarily give confidence that a break is going to be up, rather than having some down correction... even though a lot of us would prefer to just leave 4 digits behind. and move onto BIGGER and higher price arenas.   



I really have a lot of doubts regarding how much weight to give to such a sloppy and even manipulated metric, such as bitcoin dominance, including relying on the pumpementals (or lack of pumpementals) of a bunch of shitcoins in order to determine where the BTC price might go.

Recall that we had falling BTC dominance through a large part of the 2017 BTC price rise, and sure several of the shitcoins did outperform BTC on paper, but surely there would have been a much greater need to get out of those coins, and even questions about how to get out of some of them (once in them), so very difficult to give much confidence to figure out where bitcoin might go based on where it is relative to shitcoins.

Furthermore, another way that BTC dominance can be manipulated is by the addition of various other kinds of worthless coins.  i am not going to assert that tether is worthless, but there are other purportedly stable coins that may or may not be justified to add to the coin market cap (and even if tether might not be worthless, it is an asset is meant to be pegged to the dollar and provides a decent amount of in and out liquidity), so it just seems to be a bit of a different animal and whether it is inflated in one direction or another (whether artificially or not), that still might not really tell us where bitcoin is going to go whether we are talking short term or medium term. 

Same would be true if something like a Libra coin were to show up on the scene (coinmarketcap) all of a sudden, and let's say it came on with an evaluation that was greater than the value of bitcoin, and maybe bitcoin's dominance would then sink between 10% and 25%, but still would not be telling us anything about bitcoin's price performance and/or that bitcoin is a much better asset to be invested into, even if there might be some ambiguity in its relative short term price performance or its ability (or lack of ability) to sustain any kind of meaningful marketcap dominance.


Sure the GBTC premium could give some indication regarding increasing demands for that product which are supposed to be backed by real bitcoin.


I agree with you that there are multiple factors affecting BTC price, and surely the effects of halvening can take several months before it is felt - but there still might be some questions regarding how much the BTC price might have had already been pushed up prior to the halvening (the priced in theory).. so surely, there might be some bearwhales who would like to play on perceptions that there is going to be a BTC price drop after the halvening before the BTC price goes up, but for sure a BTC price drop is not a condition precedent.  In other words, the BTC price could surely go up without any need for a BTC price drop first.

I will clarify that I do not buy that the halvening is in any kind of meaningful way "priced in," because I continue to believe that people hardly know shit about bitcoin, including people who own bitcoin, and there will still be a lot of attempts to get the BTC price to go down, even while the material reality of a shrunk supply (meaning the reduction of the issuance of new BTC) becomes more and more felt with the passage of time.. and forces the BTC price to go up, whether bearwhales want to keep the BTC price down or not.