I doubt that transaction times of 10 minutes for 1 confirmation is holding BTC back.  Sure, at some point bitcoin is going to become better for smaller transactions and for quick payments, etc etc... but rome was not built in a day, and of course, lightning network is attempting to make bitcoin better in the small/quick transactions arena.

In accordance with Gresham's law, there is going to be reluctance to spend the best money, and bitcoin is the best money, but of course, if other monies are removed from the system because they die away or maybe there might be places where people do not have any other options, then in those circumstances they can spend their precious bitcoins.... otherwise, currently, there are fewer incentives to spend bitcoins when there remains so much upward price potential and there are likely other options that are available to people.  Of course, I would rather spend credit card, cash or some other means if it is going to allow me fewer transactions and I am also concerned that BTC prices might be going up before I am able to replace the BTC that I had spent in such hypothetical transaction(s).

A coup?  or a restoration of proper order?

Members really seem to like this, and I generated one card for myself and saved it.. but maybe it would be good to save all three colors just to be able to see the comparisons of the cards with the current algorithm?  I'm going to do that now.

My main issues with your posts remains your references to a kind of "inevitability" when we are talking about the future.  Yeah, of course there are cycles, and we can see the cycles, and the only inevitability about cycles is after they have already happened.  If we are talking about the future, then we may or may not get a cycle that happens in the direction or the amount that you expect; however, after such cycle happens, then looking back on it historically, then it all makes sense.

What are you talking about 193 days to $10.8k?  I remember less than 90 days from $4,200 to $13,800... that seems to be a whole hell of a lot more important than some interim numbers of the back and forths.  I also remember $7,300 to $10,300 in 12 hours.

In other words, any supposed 193 days to $10.8k to the extent that it is important at all seems to be just one historical factor, and maybe that is why everyone forgot it... because it is not very important in the whole scheme of things unless you are trying to paint some kind of nonsensical and selective dynamics in order to spread misinformation about ongoing actual / real dynamics and BTC price pressures.

hahahahahaha

All of the reluctant love I am feeling because of the webtricks algorithm...



By the way, I am the girl in this meme.... 

WTF?  I have not seen anything close to $6.5k, yet, except for a bunch of dumbass naysayers asserting that such BTC prices are inevitable... which most of us, here, should realize that inevitability is not really in BTC vocabulary, unless you are referring to a kind of likely ongoing adoption that inevitably results in upwards BTC price pressures, due to scarcity.. blah blah blah.

Exactamente!!!!!

The 2016 halvening had not exactly brought us great prices, exactly, until nearly six months after the halvening.  Member?

Our 2014/15 lows were largely balancing in the $250 range, and that was going on for nearly a year, and we were still stuck well below $500 for a vast majority of the time prior to the halvening.  We could not even get above $500, until just a month before the halvening when we got a boost above $500 (member?), but still BTC price did not really go anywhere for a very decent amount of time after the halvening, and surely we can blame the August 2016 alleged bitfinex hack, that kept us in the $600 range for several months, but even if there was not news of a bitfinex hack, there may have been some other phenomena keeping BTC prices from going up for as long and as low as the diptwat bears were able to manage.

Remember February/March 2017, there was a BTC price correction down to $890-ish, and so many fucktwats, including Vinny Lingham and others were trying to play their purported credibility to assert that we had to (inevitability again) go below $500 because that is what BIG money wanted and that was how BIG money was playing it.. blah blah blah.

Complain about BTC prices now if you must, but I agree with bitserve that we are largely ahead of schedule (especially comparing the 4-year fractals), and in that respect, it just seems like a BIG ASS waste of time to complain about down and manipulation attempts, etc etc, because some of these downward BTC price attempts are going to be tried and tried and tried and tried, and even end up happening to keep BTC prices as low as possible for as long as possible and sure all of the ammunition is going to be thrown at attempting to keep BTC prices down, which inevitably contributes to the real world facts that the upward explosion ends up happening so long after the new BTC supply had already been halved for a decently long period of time, and the whole situation gets to the point that down manipulators are no longer able to have success to manipulate BTC prices in the downward direction, so if there is going to be any manipulation then the ONLY choice that is remaining in order for such manipulators to be successful to play the UP card.... hahahahahaha...   

And, yeah, they cannot help it and yeah, the UP ends up becoming way the fuck more explosive than it should be because the BTC price had been held (and "manipulated") down for way longer than was healthy... and explosion ends up going up.

And, manipulators going to manipulate, so if they cannot do it down, then they are going to jump onto the UP train.  They have no choice, if they want to make money (or at least not lose money), which is likely way more important to them in the long run.

Seems like some of these ETF applications never die, and in this regard the SEC seems to be reviewing (and accepting comments until December 18, 2019) regarding the Bitwise / Arca ETF filing that had been rejected on October 9, 2019.

Here's the actual SEC announcement of the review - that is linked in the article that you had provided, Bitcoinaire:
https://www.federalregister.gov/document...iew-for-an

Like you mentioned, Bitcoinaire, I am thinking that the SEC will likely reject the ETF again, and I would imagine that any actual further decision will extend well into early 2020, and who knows if this kind of review triggers further time extensions or consideration of further evidence and/or arguments that might end up being raised through this particular 30-day commentary period?

Thanks akhjob!!!

The above-linked response seems to have largely addressed the earlier criticisms as hyperbolic exaggerations, so in that regard, grin/mimblewimble is far from dead, yet.

Fair enough, and it would be good to get as many of the bugs out of it as possible during the early days, and if it has some irreconcilable technical issues, then maybe its obituary can be written to be able to move on, if there is nothing salvageable, perhaps?


Of course, anyone can choose or not to report any post, and I was more than willing to bear the inconvenience of many of the posts; however, here we have a situation that seems reportable, and such posts should be removed - banned members should NOT be able to post here.  Otherwise I agree with you that compliance with forum rules is not very onerous for quasi-normal peeps.


ok.  Great.


Whenever you are  not really sure about something, the most logical place to start would be the beginning.



Alternatively, you can just attempt to remember where you last saw your keys, and go there.

eeeeeeeewwwwwwwww        Mr. Tough guy, aka Hueristic.  Can I get a fist bump from your highness?




 

BTW... I had to resize the earlier memes to be visible because they are part of the message context, herein.


I started to report the posts of THX1138 - since there seems to be a pattern of a ban evasion going on here. Banned members should not be able to go through other members to post responses here, which would cause THX1138 and anyone else who engages in such conduct to be attempting to evade a ban.

I was puzzled by the context of the statement because the interview seemed current, but the statements about going to $6k seemed quite a bit off.  I spent a decent amount of time perusing the article and various webpages including the comments on the YouTube page, and no one seemed to have mentioned it... so it still remains a bit of a puzzle for me concerning exactly when that interview actually took place and yeah it may have been uploaded much later than when it took place, perhaps?

To date, your possibly quasi-"friendly fork," xhomerx10 wannabe snakeoils salesman, aka madnessteat has made a few 10th anniversary hats (and submissions to the contest).   Does that stir your creative juices?  

Maybe mimblewimble will have some technologies that fold into bitcoin?  There are also privacy developments that seem to exist through lightning network, Schnoor signatures and taproot, to my understanding. 

I do recall some tokens being issued related to mimblewimble, grin which had been a change of plans, when originally they were going to build on bitcoin, they later decided to create and launch some tokens.

So yeah, I am not sure how "prudently" connected are such projects, and of course, we are going to expect some failures and challenges regarding a variety of these efforts which should cause us to be satisified that they are sufficiently separated from bitcoin, at least currently.

hahahahahaha

I am saying  that people try, and  people have tried, and you are people who have tried.  I know.  Largely, I remember.

You see.  It did not work.   

Of course, you can try harder.  I am not going to try to stop you from trying harder, yet just like with bitcoin, no guarantees.  Past performance does not guarantee future results.   

Good thing that Mimblewimble and BTC are not the same thing.  In other words, fuck that shit coin.   

I am not sure whether we are arguing about semantics or merely just some amount of variation in regards to how we speculate about the manipulation going on or the possible impact of such purported manipulation.

There might be some BTC/market/price dynamics that we actually agree upon, and then there would be questions regarding how we might characterize those dynamics, and their effects on either the market or perceptions of the market.

Shouldn't we already agree that there are going to be whale players who are going to want to manipulate bitcoin down as much as they can and for as long as they can, and they are going to use actual physical manipulations such as dumping coins, and if they can they are going to attempt to engage in dirty tactics such as fractional reserves and whatever they can to time their dumpenings and they are going to use information or misinformation campaigns in order to attempt to create negative impressions about bitcoin, but in the end, how far and for how long are they going to be able to be successful in keeping the BTC price down.

Those fucks tried and tried and tried to keep BTC prices below $500, but they lost control.  Same is true at other BTC price points, so what makes you believe that they are going to be any more successful this time?  Are they going to be able to get BTC prices to go below $3,122?  The odds seem quite highly against them, so who the fuck cares if they are able to drag out this particular correction for months and months and months, because in the end, they are going to have to give in and allow or chase BTC's price up.

I have no doubts that there are BIG ASS players who can keep BTC's price down further and for longer than reasonable or rational, but they are also ONLY likely to be able to achieve their objectives for so long, and that is likely what happened in late 2015 when they could no longer keep BTC's price down.  Same could happen this time.  If they can get BTC's price to go below $3,122 then there are going to be a lot of jaded folks, but what the fuck are HODLers like us going to do at those price points?  Hopefully we are buying rather than selling, but anyhow, let them manipulate and try to get the price to go down.  That is what we expect them to attempt to do, but BTC prices are still way the fuck higher than they were a few years ago, and that is surely not because whale manipulators wanted BTC's prices to be in these current $8k-ish territories.  If it was up to them, we would still be below $500. 

TLDR (for Hueristic)  , these bearwhale fucktwats, whether they are rich peeps, financial institutions, government entities or some combination can ONLY manipulate BTC prices and public sentiment so much, which in the end, I have a hard time conceding that manipulation is really the right descriptive word choice.

I already did, and LFC is my bff, too.  So yeah, you and I have the same BFF... go figure??

What do you believe is the date of that interview, LUCKMCFLY, or anyone else?

I know that the linked article is from today, and the download of the video is just a few days ago, but based on the content, it seems that Clem Chambers was describing $6k as an upwards price point for BTC (rather than downwards), which would imply that the interview was in early 2019 - before BTC had broken back above $6k, and maybe even before April 1, 2019.  Unless, he was suggesting $6k as a kind of BTC buying opportunity, and that is why he was suggesting $6k as if it were a positive BTC development?

Micgeese already provided the link, which is here.

Hey!!!!!!


I resemble that statement!!!!    


There has got(s) to be some forum members with me as their BFF, even if they don't want it.  It's inevitable and in the algorithm that was created by webtricks, and cannot be avoided - even when some guys and gal might employ tactics to avoid me as their BFF by trying to irritate / annoy me, I don't tend to hold grudges - except maybe with Roach.... hahahahaahaha