This evening I sent the contents of several bitcoin legacy addresses to segwit wallet addresses, and the balances of each of those addresses were between .002 and .07.   I paid $.12 fees for each of the transactions (5 satoshis per byte), and it took less than 30 minutes to confirm.. .  This would be nice to last, right?

Are you even paying attention?

Have you heard of lightning network?  Of course, some of it is already being experimented upon... it could take many years before it is microtransacting on the level of visa... but it is in the works.

Also, you mention that you want to send big amounts of bitcoin around, and you know that the problem is not with big amounts, because in terms of percentage it is not bad, especially if you are getting into the several thousand dollars arena.

Finally, fees are low currently and transaction times are fast currently.

I just looked in my blockchain.info wallet, and it is showing $.12 for regular fees and $2.02 for priority.  Seems fairly reasonable to me, and you could take advantage of these low fees if you want to move money around, at this time.

You had me nodding all the way through your post, STT, and even asserting "Amen", even though I am not religious, until your last sentence.

>>>>>>>>Biggest problem right now is exclusion of participants by failure in the transactions fees<<<<<<<<,

Sounds like you are making up shit, here.

Sure there is some truth that transactions fees have been high recently, but get real... we had a spam attack going on and that spam attack is part of the creation of a false narrative to get folks to buy other coins and a bunch of bullshit mumbo jumbo asserting that bitcoin is broken and that it has a BIGGEST problem.   Get out of here with your "biggest problem" rendition.

I am sorry that you read my tone or assertiveness as condescending... I feel that I am just throwing in a few strong arguments here or there and a few assertions of ridiculous that amounts to my opinion.   Each of us have our styles, and aspects of your numerology and  fatalism wrapped up in conspiracy theories triggers my attention.

Of course, each of us have perspectives, and you do tend to provide a  lot of good angles and assessments and food for thought, but sometimes, it seems to me that you have gone over the deep end.. whether temporary or just some thing(s) in your posts strike me.



Yeah... of course, there is manipulation and plots going on, and sometimes that manipulation and plots are just some folks taking advantage of a situation that they just figured out or quickly forming a unlikely bed partners alliance, but it does not mean that the unlikely bed partners were planning since January when maybe they just each started coordinating in a similar direction - ten months later, in October



Of course, that stuff can be happening, because manipulators are going to take advantage of coordinated events or even announce new FUD when the other FUD has already hit in order to attempt to maximize the movement in their direction, but it still does not necessarily mean that they were coordinating with each other even though one may have known about the other and one may have known more and another may have had more insider information than another.  And, yeah, sure sometimes there is more manipulation and coordination than we may have known about, but it still does not make the whole fucking thing into a manipulated plan... because some of these dumb ass manipulators lose control too.  Do you think the dumb ass manipulators wanted prices to go above $500 in May 2016... probably not.... They also probably did not want the price to go above $10k in November 2017... but sometimes they just have no fucking ability to control it and then they have to wait for it to settle down again to attempt to apply some of their manipulation tools again.  So, yeah, I hardly disagree with you about manipulation taking place, it is just the enormity of the supposed coordination coming out of your keyboard that seems to go beyond the pale, from time to time.  Jesus, meesus!!!!   


Of course, manipulation is going on, and even moreso in alts, and you do care, so stop saying that you don't or you will make me sad.      

I don't think that I need to elaborate any further.  You made your points and I made mine.  We seem to disagree, and I doubt that it would be fruitful to continue on about these speculative points.  Actually, you act like I am dumb and I don't know that there is preparations and various kinds of groups that are manipulating and planning, but you seem to frequently attempt to make the matter as if everyone is coordinating amongst each other - as if the future is inevitable... blah blah blah...

Regarding day trading, I don't do it.. and why would I care to attempt such in the stock market?  Get real.

Sure, I do something that is like day trading in regards to bitcoin, but currently, I am not interested in trading or trying to trade or learning about trading in other asset classes.   So, why would I care about your challenge of me to get involved in something that is not worth a ratt's ass of consideration - at least for me?  Actually, I did not even want to trade bitcoin, but I just fell into some kind of seeming BTC trading practice as a kind of insurance system to protect my BTC investment.

Actually and if you even recall any of my posts, even though I throw out BTC price predictions here and there, my trading style is largely unchanged in regards to my predictions.. (except perhaps here and there on the margins).

That's a raccoon, and not a honey badger, but close enough.... let's go recover our food from the picnic food stealing bear(s).

I may be doing something wrong... because whenever i try to click on Moving average options,  I get an upgrade to paying member prompting window....

Also, I may be o.k. with the EMA, too, since it seems to be close to the MA, and maybe I could move to a longer time-frame too (such as the EMA 35 - which is currently providing $8241), in order to balance it out?   Or even averaging between $8861 and $8241, would put it around $8550 - good enough for me to become a couch potato BTC TA expert wannabe.

By using your instructions, I think that I have come a little bit further in my use of trading view tools, and I see EMA, but the EMA only goes up to 55 on the daily, but if I show EMA 30 on the weekly, then isn't that almost the same as a 200 day moving average - a 210 day moving average, measured by the week... maybe not exact, but in the ballpark?  Currently the EMA 30 is showing approximately a price of $8,861 on Bitstamp.

Hahahahahahaha



The keeping the stampeding masses down from the top of the pyramid theory.  Great.   

I did the same thing on one of my sending of merits, and accidentally sent two merits to the same person, when I had only meant to send one  (so I sent one merit twice to the same person).

What you have to do is NOT refresh from a page in which you send merits, but instead remove any of the text after the word "merit" in the refresh page.

So your refresh page address should look like the below address, without text after the word "merit" at the end:


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit

You could be wrong, and the same results of alt money flowing back into bitcoin will take place.

I pretty much agree with what you said, except for the preplanned nonsense... you got so much of this fatalism in your theory that it causes your overall presentation, here, to be less convincing, except for like numerology conspiracy theorists... hahahahahhaha

Anyhow, what I am suggesting is that you are likely correct about everything except the preplanning part because even preplanning causes some changes around and replanning and adapting to new circumstances, instead of someone happening to actually know the future within any kind of reasonable realm of certainty. 

What else is new in regards to this thread?



Reminds me of someone.   

Do you have to be a paid member on Trading View to see the 200 day moving average?, because I was wanting to attempt to verify this for myself.  I have heard some folks proclaiming that the 200 day moving average is in the mid $7000s, and so your proclamation of a 200 day moving average to be nearly $9k is surely a better number, from my perspective (because it is higher).  But verification?  How to calculate it?

In other words, we are in a very critical^tm time period.    

Of course, we do not necessarily need to have an open mind on all points, especially if there is some lacking in facts or logic for the points that are being made, but if we can recognize that sometimes change comes that includes both negatives and positives, yet it might not be fruitful to let the perfect become the enemy of the good - and sometimes we can make progress even when we do not agree (and we might not come to complete agreement, sometimes  - or maybe frequently). 

I have discretion to determine what I would like to read and I have discretion regarding what I post too, just like you do. 

Furthermore, we disagree about the large majority of your ad hominem seemingly bitter (if not envious) and without substantiation other points, of course. 

By the way, I am not even going to ignore you (lucky you   ) because once in a while I have seen that you have made  a decent point, here or there - especially when you can get past your tendencies towards emotionalism.

This claim of BCash being the original bitcoin is not correct in any way, technically or otherwise, except perhaps to retroactively spin historical facts to suit the bcash self promoting false narrative.

The more accurate historical rendition remains that bcash is and has been a minority attack on our lovey dovey  existing bitcoin; however, we could likely concede that if bcash were to gain network backing in various ways then at that time they could proclaim to be the real bitcoin, but to be honest they have to admit that they started out as a renegade and minority attack on the real bitcoin

Looks like you are living in a pie in the sky world.  You want to predict the future before it happens, and then you have a self-fulfilling prophecy.   

Yeah, you could end up being correct, but my earlier points still stand including that your high level of negativism from the get go is still not even attempting to either give the new system a chance or to work within the parameters of the new system in order to figure out the good, bad and the ugly and to be constructive in your whole approach, whether that is brainstorming with others or making suggestions.

Your challenge here is a bit much, and likely has the opposite effect.  In reality, I should just ignore you rather than even quoting anything... even though you made some decent other points, but your points are not the be all end all, there are a lot of ways of framing matters, and there is not ONLY ONE way of looking at things, which happen to be your own way.  Get a grip.        (see trying to find some humor in your nonsensical attempt at seriousness).