Well, that is not a bad take on matters, Hamza2424.  

You realize that currently the 100-week moving average is at about $34.5k, and the 200-week moving average is at about $21,5k, so there could be dreamers to be expecting breaking below the 100-week moving average when we had not even broken below it last May/June when the BTC price had gotten down to $28.6k.. so it seems that if the BTC price did actually get below $28.6k, then it probably would not stop at $27k, but hey like you said, who knows?

So, Hamza2424, on a personal basis, what has been your strategy?  Have you been accumulating BTC for a while or do you wait for dips in order to attempt to maximize your stash at those certain buy points that may or may not end up happening?

Surely, each of us will attempt to balance in our own ways, while at the same time, as you seem to have noticed from the Cointelegraph article, there frequently can be pie in the sky views regarding what might happen, and some of the normies who follow those kinds of pie in the sky ideas will end up screwing their lil selfies worse than if they had just chosen a more prudent/practical approach - even if they might end up buying several of their coins at higher prices than if they were to achieve some kind of stroke of luck.. that again, may or may not end up playing out so wet dream-ishly.

I will send you an smerit anyhow for pointing out a decent grain of skepticism about the Cointelegraph article, even though it does appear that you are spending a lot of your own forum efforts engaged in chasing bounties.. so a lot of guys do not like to send smerits to bounty chasers, which you seem to be engaged in such practices.

Being into crypto sounds criminal to me, too... even though in fact it is a meaningless statement (almost the same as remaining silent, if it were not confusing).


Let's add one more line.

Cop:  "You have the right to remain silent."

Arrestee:  "impossible.  I'm into crypto."

Cop:  Shrugs shoulders, and says under his breath.   "It's like the guy did not even say anything because I have no fucking clue what is 'crypto.' Probably going to need to investigate further because whatever the fuck is 'crypto,' it does not sound like something a good citizen would be into." 


You're so morbid, sometimes.


Yet, I suppose the truth of the matter, regarding "how the sausage is made" sometimes does need to be pointed out, especially when some of the anthropomorphizing can sometimes lead normies (am I referring to city-slickers?) astray regarding various aspects of nature.. including Hollywood being less than helpful when showing so many of the fantasy chic flicks in which guys get all their asses kicked by some supposed beautiful but tough imaginary being that does not exist in any kind of reality world.. yeah right?

I do recognize that you Ratimov have maintained some level of guarded skepticism regarding what rich people/companies do and what they say, and I suppose that there is nothing wrong with continuing to maintain some alertness in regards to whether contradictions of the statements can be seen through actual actions.

For sure, the language of a lot of the MSTR debt instruments retain quite a bit of flexibility in order that Saylor can do what he wants in regards to the MSTR bitcoin holdings, and surely he would end up getting himself into quite a bit of a pickle if his actions (such as selling large quantities of BTC) were to greatly contradict his many statements in which he proclaimed that he is not selling (and/or never selling and strong statements like that)...

So for sure, in that regard, disclosures in any SEC filings (that he does have to make) may well end up coming quite a bit after he had already sold.. but surely, I would continue to imagine that Saylor does not even come close to acting as internally contradictory as someone like Elon Musk in which Elon is saying all kinds of contradictory things on an ongoing basis and likely figures that a kind of craziness works to his advantage in terms of being able to continue to do what he likes, but Saylor seems to be way more of a straight-shooter in the sense that he does not make those kinds of all over the place statements, and his actions seem to ongoingly consistent with his statements in terms of ongoing bullishness, so I really doubt that Saylor is going to put himself (or his company) into some kind of a questionable position in regards to whether "not sell" really did mean "not sell" or it just meant "don't sell very much".. .  hahahahahaha

Of course, there is going to be some level of faith regarding whether a guy like Saylor is good for his word in regards to how he talks about bitcoin, and surely there are so many folks out their just drooling to see him slip up in some kind of way to show that he is really an opportunist rather than the real deal bitcoin bull that he holds himself out to be, and on a personal level I doubt that Saylor is going to be fucking around like that, and I believe that it works way more to his personal (and company) advantage to just remain steadfast in the mega bull category and let the chips fall where they may.

For sure, I was being a bit provocative in the way that I asked the question, and surely there could be some advantages in sharing some of the resources and common spaces to possibly get more bang for the buck, overall.

I understand that there could be quite a few different variables too, and for example, renting through AirBnb may well be 2x to 5x higher prices than you might be able to find on the regular market in any given place, but one of the conveniences of AirBnb is that you can customize the length of time that you stay, get a commitment ahead of time, be able to get a pretty good idea what you are getting and frequently see reviews of prior guests, and some kind of an arrangement like that might cost more in the interim and then be able to identify some deals that are better bang for the buck.

Another way might be if one or two guys go in advance, and then scout out the area in a way to be able to pick a location that fits the bill, and for sure I use the word "guys" on purpose, so whether you are "guys" or "gals", you are likely going to be in a better situation not to be mixing it up, unless the couples that might be involved are solid.. but the more I think about it, the more possibilities of drama with more people involved including that sometimes there are going to be pretty big flakes in the group, and then if too much drama is created, then it could cause drama/tension/or even dissolution of group members, leaving 1-2 guys having to cover the bills (and picking up the fall out) of what had been intended to be 5 guys.  So, many variables, and surely sometimes the savings and conveniences of having guys to help out could sometimes outweigh some of the costs of the drama possibilities, too.


Surely, you might be considering this entry-level fuck you status matter in ways that are different from how I had been attempting to frame it.  Of course, there can be aspects in which guys have better negotiation positions, and they might be able to control the various terms of their employment of their contract relations because they are in a good bargaining position regarding skills, experiences, references, etc.

I was largely attempting to use the concept of entry-level fuck you status as a way to describe when a guy is able to sever work completely - and largely just live off of the income that is generated from savings/investments without having to work.  I am not talking about living off the principle, but only from the income generation of the whole package of the investment... so in some sense when I already mentioned that $1 million or $2 million, it could be presumed that $1 million of principle should be able to generate $3,333 per month of income (that is $1 million * 4% = $40k / 12).  $2 million should be able to generate double that amount of $6,666 per month.  

Of course, entry-level is ultimately described by the guy entering into such status and I really consider the matter to be problematic for a guy to be believing that he is entering into fuck you status, but has to come back with his tail between his legs because he has not adequately calculated his own situation.  By the time, any guy is ready to pull the fuck you lever, he should have a pretty damned good idea regarding how much money he needs on a regular basis to either maintain his accustomed standard of living or to live at the standard of living that he expects.

For sure, if a guy is merely at entry-level fuck you status then there might well not be as much room to work with in regards to ensuring that s/he is able to cover all expenses and even to make sure that an emergency fund is maintained. and for sure accounting for increases in the cost of living should already be attempted to be baked into his calculations, and so surely there are ways to figure out the variables with a sufficient amount of confidence or even to calculate the volatility of the various assets that are held in order to not be putting oneself into a position that there would be a need to go back to working, unless that were to be completely voluntary.

Maybe I should not suggest it is easy to calculate, but instead that there are ways to calculate to attempt to account for a variety of extremes that could happen and also to figure out the ways to allocate assets and investments and/or to calculate the allocations that ultimately end up having a sufficient cushion that the fuck you lever is not pulled too prematurely.


 I really believe that I was not considering the fuck you status concept in that kind of a way.. well not completely anyhow, because I was trying to tie the fuck you status idea to economic abilities to sustain oneself with passive income from the investment and surely not to be worried about if certain work-related cashflows were to dry up.. or maybe some of the work-related cashflows would be sporadic and completely voluntary rather than regular and relied upon.

We know that there are all kinds of areas in life in which we might be in a position to negotiate our other kinds of relationships in a fuck you status kind of way, and surely levels of wealth and autonomy would allow the ability to engage in that kind of employment of fuck-you in a variety of circumstances - like for example if a business is a largest in a community and the community is reliant upon the business, so the business can sometimes get away with way more than what normies have to tolerate - and I had been attempting to consider the matter more narrowly in regards to personal economic power to be able to pretty much continue to live your accustomed standard of living without relying on any employer or employment.

By the way, many of us likely realize that so many young people in the 20s and 30s will frequently conduct themselves as if they have the world by the balls and if they are going to be ballers into their future, yet by the time that so many folks get into their late 40s, 50s and 60s, they may well realize that they had not adequately/sufficiently prepared themselves in such a way that they would be able to stop working.. so they may end up trying to figure out ways to play catch up and maybe coming to the realization that they had not been sufficiently/adequately preparing to enter into a kind of fuck you status.

There surely can be compounding effects in regards towards savings that could take place in a guys 20s and 30s and that would really start to show themselves by the time a guy gets into his 50s and later, but frequently what ends up happening is that guys will either not keep building principle, but dip into principle at various times to invest or consume with that principle, and it can be really difficult to build principle back, even if a younger guy might have a bit of a cocky mindset in that direction in terms of believing that he can build back whatever principle that he depletes along his/her life's journey in which age does come upon you in sneaky kinds of ways.


You may well be getting back to negotiating power that comes with having had built skills and abilities through experiences.

Also, what is your standard of living?  It might be all fine and dandy to yell fuck you to the world, but if you get into your 40s, 50s, 60s, you might not be in a physical and energy level to live in flexible kinds of ways.  Your body might not tolerate some of the crazy abilities of a younger guy.  I have had some personal experiences in that direction, and it can be very surprising how much your aging body might not be able to tolerate some of the extremes that it had been able to tolerate during younger years.  I do understand that there are some guys who act like animals into their 50s and 60s and are able to get away with it without seeming to have large diminutions in energy, and so I understand that there could be some luck and genetics that play out well for some folks, but still seems to me that a guy is going to be in a much better place to have some financial backup plans that are building up, so that s/he has some of those kinds of cushions when getting into his late 40s and beyond.

Regarding the 9-5 drone, I am not sure.  Some jobs are more dead end than others, and some jobs do provide a decent income and benefits to build upon, and surely, the trade offs between what kinds of education and skills that guys have and/or how much they might get trapped into some kind of a dead end job or a job that does not end up giving them geographical mobility, can surely vary in terms of how a guy might use such a job, if he is even able to get one (if it were to be preferred for some in some circumstances).


I personally believe that any guy who considers investment levels has to really get some good grasps on his own finances in regards to how much he needs to live, to have an emergency fund and then to figure out how much to invest on an ongoing basis and into which assets....

A decent starting out guide might be to allocate at least 10% of any income towards investing and savings, and of course, I am not too excited about anything besides bitcoin, but surely guys would come to other decisions in that regard.  So in the very beginning the guy is building up his investment portfolio principle, and then maybe once it gets to a certain size (such as $50k or larger), then it can be diversified beyond having just bitcoin in it.

Of course, some guys will come into bitcoin and they will already have other investments, and they will have already built an investment portfolio, so for guys in that situation, then there becomes some calculations that may well be needed in terms of how much to allocate into various assets with hopefully having a goal to reach some level of fuck you status at some point (meaning having some ideas about how much that he needs to live off of the income from his investment portfolio - or just continue to build such investment portfolio until he gets into the neighborhood of reaching fuck you status at the level that he has figured out based on his/her own individual circumstances).


I agree with your point Doan9269 that the world is really crazy right now, so there can be some struggles in terms of figuring out how to hold value and within which assets to hold such value and how to manage those holdings, including whether there might be needs to tweak or reallocate from time to time and the extent to which some winners should be allowed to ride rather than reallocating.

yes..

stuck for six hours..

u r koreck

You make some decent points, OgNasty.

For sure, I am not going to shit on Jack because Jack has done a lot for bitcoin in terms of funding that he has done for it in a variety of ways and also the various bullish ways that he talks about bitcoin... so without shitting on Jack in any meaningful way, there are ways to question how billionnaires might be investing their money - and surely, sometimes there might be some lack of liquidity in terms of moving a lot of value around because they may well NOT be keeping a whole hell of a lot in cash - because even with Elon last week, there was a decent amount of speculation that he might not be able to come up with 60 billion or whatever it was without fucking around with his holdings in something like TESLA.

For my own position, I had considered myself decently well off when coming to bitcoin in late 2013, so I had at least of a modest cashflow from my various investments that I had made over the previous 20 years or so that I would not necessarily have to work, if I did not want to, and I also owned some property (like personal real estate), I had an investment in a private business, and I had a 401k plan that was diversified within the kinds of index funds that are offered within my particular plan, and some other equity funds that were mostly in index-like funds...

So I figured that when I got into bitcoin, I could be sustained by my various other investments, even if I engaged in a certain amount of juggling around, which meant diverting new funds into bitcoin... and only selling a few things - but to attempt to get up to 10% allocation in bitcoin.. which was NOT exactly a complete networth calculation but instead a way of creating a formula to figure out quasi-liquid evaluations for value on the various assets.. so for example the business and the property were a hell of a lot less liquid than the 401k and some other equity investment and the 401k had some decent amount of time-lock penalties though would have decent amounts of liquidity after the timelock or if it were to be transferred into some other kind of self-directed investment fund.

Within the concepts of reallocation versus letting the winners ride, my punchline amount of initial investment into BTC ended up being around 13.5% by the end of 2015 - however, the subsequent exponential price rises in BTC between 2016 and present caused my BTC allocation to rise to around 88% in  late 2017 but then drop back down to around 45% in the lows of the various drops and then now is largely back into the 90%s again based on current BTC price performance as well as some of my own management of holdings considerations that largely fall into a camp of NOT reallocating by letting my winners ride (which is BTC in this case) but still some maintenance strategies within the holdings in which BTC is sold as the price goes up and those proceeds are used to buy BTC as the price goes down, so in that regard there are both cash reserves that are dedicated towards BTC but they might also get pulled from the BTC system at some point too... so a kind of possible working cash that could end up getting pulled out upon individual discretion.

I don't necessarily want to get all judgmental on folks, so of course, my personal recommendation has changed in recent times, so I am currently suggesting getting started with anywhere between 1% and 25% of your total investment portfolio to put into BTC, when I used to recommend between 1% and 10% as starting allocations into BTC considerations.. whether you are more bearish or bullish would show whether you are investing towards the bottom of the suggested range or towards the top or even if you were to go outside of the range in a kind of Michael Saylor style (which I do not recommend that style, even though it seems to work for him and of course, he has way more working capital, cashflow and even credibility to get access and negotiate various favorable debt instruments)...  

Just as a reminder, in mid 2020, Saylor had bought around 17k BTC for himself, and then in about August, he had used about 75% of MSTRs cash reserves to buy bitcoin, and he had been increasing the employment of debt and equity ever since, and surely even if he is a bit of a bitcoin psycho, he also does have cash reserves coming in on a regular basis to both justify those levels of investments and also to sufficiently cover the servicing of any debts that he has entered into through MSTR.   

Furthermore, I am also not going to get judgmental if a guy chooses to not let his winners ride and to reallocate along the way, so behaviors of choosing to reallocate or not surely could show bearishness or bullishness of the investors actions speaking louder than his words.

Of course, there is a difference between someone starting out with an investment portfolio already established and someone who does not have an investment portfolio already established.  The already existing wealth could be reallocated or it can be that new investment cashflow is diverted into into bitcoin rather than into other investments.  

The newbie normie who is starting without any already existing investment portfolio does not necessarily need to diversify into various investments from the start, and so that kind of a newbie normie investor might be strictly investing into bitcoin until his/her BTC investment holdings reachs a certain amount of his/her networth or a certain value amount and then diversifying at some later threshold points.   Personally, I am not even sure if there is much value diversifying before an investment gets up to $50k or so, but surely the threshold level is going to vary and then how much to diversify after reaching the threshold amount is going to vary too... It might not make a whole hell of a lot of sense to have $10k invested into 5 different things, but maybe once reaching $50k, there might be some value in splitting that $50k into two parts and once that whole investment portfolio reaches $100k there might be some value in splitting it into 3, 4 or 5 parts.. Surely, there is discretion involved, but sometimes the diversification does not make a lot of sense when the value has not grown to very high levels, yet.... In other words, too much diversification could interfere with growth, and the portfolio might not yet be at a sufficient size in which material/meaningful benefits of safety, for example, are gotten out of diversifying.

Personally, I would speculate that many billionaires should have more flexibility than the normie, but they may well NOT have as much flexibility as someone like Michael Saylor, and I would not even expect anyone to invest so heavily into bitcoin like Saylor has been doing.... So for sure there might need to be some assessments of what the Billionnaire is doing with his/her capital to figure out how much they should be putting into BTC on a personal treasuries basis......   Maybe there is some value in the billionnaire not unwinding very much of their positions in their other assets and putting that into bitcoin?  There are likely billionnaires who are playing active roles in their companies (investments) and other billionnaires who are not really as active in their investments....

Maybe in the end, I would not want to get too judgmental regarding if certain billionnaires are true bitcoiner or not based merely on what percentage of their wealth that they have in bitcoin, and surely there would be a whole hell of a lot of movement in bitcoin's price if everyone gets the fuck off of zero and gets to some kind of 1% to 25% initial allocation into bitcoin, whether they are a billionnaire, millionaire, multi-millionnaire or some other classification of wealth (including normies who likely have only thousands of wealth rather than millions), and just sticking with the general prescription that a good starting point does still seem that everyone can still fit the same criteria to be anywhere between 1% and 25% allocated into bitcoin to get started and then see how that level of investment works for people within those various categories and of course within their own discretion (except those no coiner and under-coiner fucks should not have any discretion regarding whether to get the fuck off of zero.. no need to repeat that command, right?).,.

For sure, I would not be calling Jack a non-bitcoiner or not sufficiently committed to bitcoin, and so other factors would be determining how their investment into bitcoin goes (because just through time, the percentage allocated in bitcoin should go up with bitcoin's likely ongoing price appreciation relative to other assets/investments) and also determine if they are within the camp of just letting their winners (BTC in this case) ride or reallocating their winners from time to time?

Must be true, if CB just confirmed it.

Of course, we know that holding some, if not all of your keys is a kind of better practice, and for sure, we have a lot of current systems that don't really allow holding of your own keys for a variety of assets and even currencies - especially in the institutional and governmental world, we can understand why there might be some skepticisms in terms of allowing individual reps/ or principles to hold keys when they are also the property of more than just the key holder.

For sure, bitcoin provides some options that had not been available previously, but still some inadequate systems to just transition immediately over to everyone holding their bitcoin private keys too.  Even if there were some kinds of user-friendly multi-signature set ups for institutions and government reps, the standards have neither been set nor understood in a kind of way that might need both transparency and privacy at the same time.

Many of us longer term bitcoiners (sounds strange to say that) have come to realize that there are a variety of ways that individuals have been advantaged and empowered by bitcoin both in terms of being able to have options to hold some or all of our own value and that we are able to get into bitcoin way faster than some of the institutions and governments because we do not really have to follow so many check and balance systems, unless maybe our spouse happens to be overly micromanaging and overly complicating matters... hahahaha.. yet in any event, the little guy (aka retail) has had one of the first opportunities to front run both institutions and even the very wealthy who have not recognized/appreciated bitcoin for its investment opportunity paradigm shifting power.

It is still early days boiz.. and it may even well take 5-10 years longer for a variety of the systems to be created and adopted into bitcoin with so many folks (normies and institutions and governments) also allowing themselves to get distracted into shitcoins, various other projects, ESG/SJW narratives and distracted into not even recognizing/appreciating bitcoin for what it is.

Some of us might either just be getting started in bitcoin or ONLY just accumulating small amounts of BTC up until now, but we should be able to recognize and appreciate that we get some systems in place to get started accumulating and/or just continuing to build our stacks of sats... even if we are perceiving $39k to be high prices.. and even if there may well be many more short-term ups and downs along the way (both in terms of price and also in terms of the negative information that is out there about bitcoin).

It is a kind of weird interview because it represents people and it does not... In some sense the guy is saying that he is afraid of all things that he does not know including the world of finance and bitcoin seems to be part of the world of finance and the guy finds all of that to be scary because he does not really know about it and he is also skeptical of the world of the rich, too.

In some sense, bitcoin would be perfect for a guy like that to get involved with bitcoin, but he does not know bitcoin would be good for him, and it scares him. 

Also, consider that bitcoin has a bit of a learning curve, and even learning about bitcoin could cause some folks to get scared even more because in one way, there might be getting started by creating an account with a third party and then in some other developments there are needs to figure out how to hold one's own keys.. which is also an even BIGGER leap of possible confusion and investment into learning about various ways to hold your own keys and backing them up.. even backing up systems are not consistent - and even those of us who have been in bitcoin for a while have concerns about our own backing up systems - whether it is adequate for security purposes and even passing down to someone else if we were to die or maybe we might make a system that is too complicated so either we lock ourselves out of our coins(value) or lock our successors out of our coins.

For sure, part of the solution would be for any of us to get started and to try to bite off at least a little bit at a time, and sure another negative or scary potential is to end up getting too sucked into having to spend a decent amount of time to gain in comfort, too.

If you are referring to nominal interest rates rather than real interest rates, you seem to be contradicting actual fact, no?  In regard to real interest rates, we have been far exceeding a negative territory for well over a year - perhaps two years, no?  In other words, if prices are going up higher than any interest that you can earn on your money, then the real interest rate is negative, there is no need for the fed to announce shit in the negative direction in that regard.

On the other hand, the non-likelihood of the Fed to announce negative interest rates is further bolstered by their actual conduct, no?  From mid-to-late last year, the Fed has been announcing several interest rate hikes that they say that they are going to carry out through 2022.  Yes, they would like to get interest rates into the 3% to 5% arena over a couple of years, in order that they have something to work with when they are wanting to stimulate the economy.. but even their projections hardly get them to 3%, and many of us even question if they are going to be able to carry out their proposed increases (that is why you are suggesting negative, but I just don't think that they are going to go that far in terms of undermining their credibility - even more than it has been undermined in recent times). 

https://www.marketplace.org/2022/03/16/fed-announces-interest-rate-hike-to-combat-inflation/

Yeah, they actually implemented a BIG ASS 0.25% increase in recent weeks, so surely they are whimpy.. but going negative seems a road too far in my own speculation on the topic - even if some other govts - in Europe... have gone into the negative...

To repeat.. we are already effectively at negative, and they are already admitting something like 7.5% inflation when many of us know it is higher than that..  The other day I bought a pack of Ends and pieces bacon, and a couple of years ago, I had been buying 3 lbs for $8 and $7 or less when on sale, so when I went to buy it, and I saw that it was "only" $11, I thought that's not so bad, it's less than a 30% increase.. fair enough... but when I got it home, I noticed that it was only 2.5 pounds rather than 3 pounds.. those fucks.  that's another 17% reduction in quantity..

That is my final statement, until it is not.

I must admit that you are a genius, and that must be an actual selfie that you are sharing.. 


You actually look that retarded I am about 91.319432% positive about that.

Yes.  I am recommending that everyone sells, so long as you are at least $.01 in profits.  Value your wealth in dollars, like me and my llama buddy like to say.


Well, right now as I type this post, the BTC price is $38,430 (and it is moving around), so the profits would not need to be very much in order to be in profits, but sure, if the profits are $430, that's pretty good money, no?

Sell

Sell

Sell.


You heard it here first. 


My secret agenda all along.. has been to get everyone to sell their bitcoin - especially since Save the RF believes it, then ignore everything that I said all along.  Save the RF has figured me out.

I am glad that you have been able to undercover the truth Save the RF..


You are quite the detective.



You have been able to ignore almost everything that I said, and pick up upon the few words that are showing my true underlying agenda... and gosh.. I feel so bad that I have been caught.

I don't feel bad that I did it, but I do feel bad that I have gotten discovered.

 


The WO needs more members who are able to sort through the bullshit and get to the real truth.

Thanks Save the RF.

You are the greatest.. or at least the second greatest, after Cryptotourist... and proudhon.. so maybe the third greatest.. but hey, who's counting? still within the top 10, and if you aren't in the top 10 then you are at least in the top 1,000 or so, no?

It's a joke...

Oh fuck... I forgot to laugh.


I am going to send another -1 WO merit just for that, too.

It's going to take a while to dig out of this mess.

 



hahahahahaha

"Are the cunts and 'special service' douchebags in the room with us now?"

 


And I was starting to speculate that perhaps Save the Rf and yours truly might be starting to go off the deep end.


Wow..

some real retards there.

Makes our resident cryptotourist look like a sane (and even smart) person.

Sounds like I need to get more self-aware.

Maybe yoga lessons, might help?


Why did you have to go say that?  You BIG meanie.


Do you have any suggestions how I can attempt to make my lil selfie more like uie-pooie then?


You're on a roll (steam roller, that is).. so it appears.

I better stay out of your way, or I may well get run over and smooshed like a bug....

Not unlike what happened here.





You consider ur lil selfie to be competent enough to address and potentially fix these issues?  to the extent that such issues might actually exist and might need fixing?




You seem to be projecting .. which means that you are engaging in conduct to create an issue that does not exist in reality.

In other words, if you attempt to balance all the things that I say about bitcoin price dynamics, the overall essence starts with 1) buying first.. .. when in doubt get the fuck started and get a position in bitcoin.   

to the extent that I ever suggest that selling has become an option would be if the stat stacker has already either over accumulated or accumulated way beyond authorization levels..

Furthermore, I have never suggested anyone sell any sat that is not in profits..

Of course, anything that I say could be misinterpreted, and just like bitcoin does not care, I do not care either... If people are such dumbasses to misinterpret what I am saying as to be selling bitcoin, then they are either dumb as fuck or they deserve to lose money or they were already inclined to not be ready to invest in bitcoin.

In essence, my message has been more than clear since I started in bitcoin, which is to error on the side of   ongoing BTC accumulation... especially for newbies or for folks who are not adequately allocated in bitcoin.

Maybe a couple of caveats are warranted here?

There are some folks who have not figured out their own cashflows, and they should not be investing into bitcoin in the first place.  So in some sense before even getting started in bitcoin, it is important to have your cashflows under control and figured out which means to likely project expenses well in advance and also to have a decent emergency fund in order to never have to sell any BTC that is at a time that is anything than your own choosing.

Another matter is that for those folks who have transitioned into either a maintenance stage or a liquidation phase in their bitcoin investment, and of course, if they have transitioned into those kinds of stages, then they likely give fewer fucks about when they sell, even though they may well have formulas for selling from time to time, and don't really want to be selling any BTC as the price is dropping.. to the extent that they give any fucks.. and surely if those guys are in 3-8x profits or even 40x to 400x profits they also might give few fucks about what point that they might be selling their bitcoin, even though they still might strategize to sell more when the BTC price is going up rather than when it is going down.. even though if they need some small things here and there, it might not even matter very much to shave off 0.1% of their stash or even if they have to sell 3-5% of their stash at an inopportune time, they might not give too many shits.

So of course, there is going to be variance in terms of what guys might consider to be reasonable options for themselves, but I doubt that I am suggesting that bitcoin newbies should be engaging in the tactics of bitcoiners who have already reached maintenance or liquidation stages, so if folks are on the internet are misunderstanding some of the contents of my posts in that direction, I give few shits because each of us need to attempt to take responsibility for our learnings and our tailoring our approach to our own situation.. and I doubt that anything that I say is as confusing as you are making it out to be, even though I agree that some folks might not understand what I am saying, so they better find someone else to read.. or to take matters a bit slower without presuming too much.. as you seem to suggest everyone might be retarded like you are.. hahahahahaha  (I should not let you drag me into this... right?.. You dweeb.)..

The know nothing pointing out others who also do not know nuttin.


What kinds of results will this produce?

#that's called a rhetorical question



Getting back to the idea of whether that delusional guy (Elon) is a bitcoiner.. oh my...  and at least you were able to muster up sense enough to put doggie coin as your back up idea, but still that has the problem, even within your way of framing the whole matter, to convolute the ideas of bitcoin and doggie coin as if they were similar things.. which surely a common mainstream problem is convoluting various coins and losing track of what is bitcoin as compared some various random shitcoin project (even if popular and funny and seeming to get some short-term pump and dump traction), but I question whether OG bitcoiners (pointing at uie-pooie, cAPSLOCK) should be re-inforcing such nonsense mainstream convolutions... and of course, you seem to understand bitcoin.. so no excuses....   -1 WO merit to you for that idea (if we might even refer to it as that?).

It seems that in these here parts, many of us prefer the bullishly inclined bitcoin presentations - does not seem to matter too much whether it happens to be a bull market, bear market or seemingly indecisive market.


To me, it seems that Will is saying that it could go either way.. he is not really committing to anything overly bullish in that particular statement.


Of course, there are guys in the space who are trying to use bitcoin tailored analysis that will use the kinds of data that are not so easily gotten in traditional assets - while at the same time, some of the tools that they used might have been ported over from mainstream usages.. and it seems at the same time, there are some new bitcoin specific tools - and of course, if we are not experts in these areas, we might not even be able to determine if some kind of a tool is a new tool or not or if there might or might not be very good predictive power to attempt to employ some variation of an analyzing tool in bitcoinlandia.

That's true.




Hey.. by the way.. even though you say some pretty dumb stuff from time to time.. you do say some smart stuff sometimes, too. #justsaying.

I suppose part of my ongoing annoyance is that you just seem to want to ongoingly get caught up on wild speculative tangents on a regular basis.. It's like the sorcerer wannabe syndrome.. and part of the problem would be getting into too many specifics on a regular and ongoing basis.. You seem unable to help ur lil selfie.  

In that regard, at this time, we cannot really know your regular levels of specifics in the future.. even though we might be able to figure out some directions that are more likely to play out than others, we still need some of the gaps to fill in before we can get into knowing some of the specifics that you end up liking to outline.. so  filling the gaps with a variety of assumptions that might or might not happen can sometimes be misleading and wanting to reach the answer way too soon... even though there is a chance that the ultimate speculation could end up coming out correctly and exactly as you said (but still would not take a way that you had filled in some of the gaps with guesses (even if somewhat educated guesses) - that you ended up randomly either getting correct.. or the matter/events that ended up filling in those gaps ended up contributing to  the causing of the same results that you had been speculating upon)... and for some reason, if you were to get the conclusion correct, then you still would seem to want to get credit for being able to predict the future with too many specifics.

Why does there seem to be such an ongoing and pressing need for you (of course, you are not the only one who does this) to want to ongoingly get into so many specifics about the various future scenarios?  I am not sure.


I doubt very many of us were getting into that level of granularity rather than just attempting to grapple with Philips overall doomy/gloomy point that likes to suggest that something is broken in bitcoin's mining incentive thing - even while he does not seem to account for enough facts (including even some less doomy and gloomy but logical directions of future mining incentives and also including some unknowns - that he cannot really account for but seems inclined to want to do it anyhow).

Upon review, I see that you must be talking about the 2048 bitcoin reward which should have been 0.04882812 BTC rather than 0.03882812 BTC...? which would be one of the reasons to go back and edit previous posts when substantive mistakes are pointed out... unless citing from another source.. then forgetting that there is a mistake in part of the substantive posts?



Sure.  There can be some fair points in terms of trying to suss out and speculate on what might be motivating Elon...

Of course, you had made a bit of a funny reference in regards to how you and Elon might be thinking alike on aspects of the mining/rewards incentive topic, too. hahahahahaha  You gotta admit that some of the juxtaposing of doggie coin and bitcoin remain ridiculous in vary BIG ways and it is not really fair to even attempt to make any of us have to go down those kinds of nonsense comparative roads that would even have to closely attempt to treat that crap coin (though lots of funzies coin) seriously.


Why not both?

Of course, you know fools.


You can grant as much credibility as you like regarding various limitations that seems to have in Philip's thinking regarding the future direction of bitcoin's mining incentives.  I am not even saying that some of the things that he says do not make sense, and it hardly seems very relevant if Philip may have said some smart things in the past that you should grant credibility to his various current nonsense speculations regarding what he believes to be problematic future bitcoin incentives...

Of course, do what you like, if you need a sorcerer because there is no need to even suggest that I am proclaiming that Philip does not make sensible posts from time to time, even though I will also assert that he spouts out a lot of negative speculation based on limit facts, too.

Anyhow, his speculation that bitcoin mining has incentive challenges 6-7 halvenings down the road comes off as way too premature to be scaremongering about supposed negative impacts of bitcoin rewards - when there are a whole hell of a lot of matters/factors that go into the bitcoin mining incentive formula - including various bitcoin adoption angles that need to play out and also affect BTC prices too.. whether we have activities on layer 1, 2, 3 and/or various interactions and transactions within each of those layers that incentivize the other layers within that..

And, seems to me that just the incentives of BIGGER and BIGGER players (who may get involved in mining too) to want to secure their historical coins/accumulations rather than being directly motivated by block rewards (part of the rationale that block rewards could go down to effectively zero and incentives to mine bitcoin will remain). 

Maybe part of my point remains that there are too many unknowns into bitcoin's future to be becoming all doomy and gloomy about some kind of bitcoin mining incentives spiral which historically Philip seems to harp on those kinds of simple formulas a lot, and I am not even saying to ignore those ideas completely but they seems to be of way less immediate concern and to have way too many variables that they are really not actionable in the here and now.. so why fearmonger about them? In some sense it was like the supposed professor Stolfi coming into this thread and showing us how smart he was about the hundreds of fringe ways that bitcoin could spiral to the ground, and surely none of the proposals that Stolfi was making were untrue - but they have not played out very well historically to get caught up in the weeds of doom and gloom and projecting those kinds of negative scenarios when not accounting for some other facts, or sometimes more likely scenarios or even some unknowable facts...  Of course, Philip is no Stolfi, but directionally we can still go down the road of similar kinds of problems to be placing too much emphasis on too few facts to reach conclusions that could happen but there is not enough information to really get all worked up about those kinds of potentially negative scenarios way too prematurely.

Oh gawd......

Is it even possible that both you and Elon are goofy and delirious as fuck in the same synchronized direction to not understand bitcoin.. and have dumb ideas even though both of you should know better?  What a strange world it is.

Say it is not so.  Wake me up, at some point.


seems as if you were talking a lot of doom and gloom just a day or two ago, and the tide seems to be shifting, slowly but surly...

Yes.. what you say is problematic... and you can believe or say whatever you like.

Part of the greatness of having this thread is that we can bat around ideas, and we do not have to agree with each other in terms of substance or in terms of how to present matters, and I don't have any problems with you continuing to say and to frame matters however you like - but it is not going to stop me from responding or proclaiming your ways to be problematic, as I just did... whether you get it or not is either within you, or maybe you don't want to get it.... or you might be unable of getting it, and that's fine too.  

Another great thing about bitcoin, is that we do not even have to agree what it is or how it is used or how it should be used... even though some members do seem to see bitcoin in similar ways, and others seem to evolve with time, and there are areas in which several members continue to disagree with each other and from time to time, such disagreements result in name calling.. you fuck (Admittedly, from time to time, I might need to get a bit more variety in my word choices).