That is only three years, the last time that I measured.. even if there are four lines being shown.

Go figure??


Yeah... right.. 

Bots only take time off when they are updating their algo...

Don't you know nuttin?

 



FTFY...

The odds of $xxxx is becoming lower and lower with each passing day.. seems to me..   seeming almost like a snowball's chance in hell... but hey, there is still a chance.

Even though the 208-week moving average still barely above $7k.


Almost completely forgot about that historical character of bitcoin...


my how time flies!!!!


Never was "coupled."

Zoom out a wee bit.. and you will see the reality that the "coupled" story is just a made up fantasy..that some peeps would like you to believe for either their own dumb-ass gullibility or their own attempt to spin fantasies to others.

As you likely realize, I made my comment about the unforkening of the various forks, and the teaming up idea as a kind of ironic joke.. surely the various fucktwats in the bitcoin forks or the bcash forks or even projects like ethereum and other shitcoins are not going to team up... part of the reason for their various projects is to print money and another reason is to scam people into thinking that there is some kind of value in the various "technical innovations" that whatever shitcoin supposedly provides to the "crypto" (whatever the fuck that is?) space.

Anyhow, it is merely just an interesting thought experiment for me to be suggesting for the various bcash forks or the shitcoins to team up.

Regarding jbreher... I had not known that there was a thread about him.. He's got his own thread. Wow... not really flattering but, still..

Anywho.. we have not seen him (jbreher) around these here parts in recent times, and surely he seems to be getting reamed up the ass in recent times with the various bcashes.. including the scam project bcash sv and maybe some of the supporters of that particular project are realizing that there is "no there there" and there is ONLY so much pumpening that deep pockets, including scamtwat calvin is going to be willing to put into such ongoing foolish nonsense...   they are still waiting for another pumpening that might not happen.. who knows.. the fucking shit project is so illiquid that it may only take a few thousand dollars to pump the crap... hahahahaha

The court case is toying around with the idea, so within the context of the court case, there is some importance to those kinds of questions and claims.

I am glad that you, yefi, are providing more information, even though it is a bit more information to manage.. but in the end, that seems to be what most peeps, including yours truly, who are actively commenting in this thread want to see.

By the way, we have USD coming close to top 5, GBP, EUR and CAD entering into top 5 and the lagging JPY barely approaching top 20.... still nice to see all of those...

Some people probably would not mind seeing gold, DJI and maybe some other asset classes... but that would likely be another thread... even though could be some interesting comparisons in other assets, too... for sure.

Yeah, but I did not know about Grayscale fitting in the same exact category as some of the other companies that are actually putting bitcoin into their treasuries and like microstrategy making a BIG move (percentage-wise) in that direction.

Seems that Fillippone already made this point about Grayscale, too.

Does Grayscale own any bitcoin in their actual corporate treasuries?  I am not sure about that.

I believe that Grayscale merely buys when various of their clients buy stakes in their GBTC stock.. and therefore, all (or nearly all) of Grayscales purchases of BTC are backed by client funds.. and accordingly GBTC is a kind of custodian.. even though the clients own the stock rather than the actual bitcoin.. but the BTC are ultimately dedicated to investments that clients had made.

Am I wrong?  Does Grayscale have some amount of corporate treasuries in BTC, too?

Yes, I recall that you, Fillippone, had mentioned that they earn around 27BTC per day by merely managing the funds... which surely is not a small amount of daily income to cover whatever expenses that they might have... which is probably far less than 27 BTC per day.

I don't know if that is a very good comparison, Philip.. because the BTC situation is far from guaranteed, even if we might place decently high odds upon BTC's ability to gain value in the coming years, especially relative to fiat.

I was about to inquire about that same subject...


Yes... V8....

Return to your station.   

Which one is coming first?

The pump or the dump?


I don't find a problem in continuing to call them in variations of bcash.. and to add various derogatory terms on onto the names from time to time, too.   Much better than some of the confusion in which there are attempts to rename the various trashcoins or crap forks and to use bitcoin in the name, which mostly they are derivatives of bcash rather than trying to some how insert bitcoin into their name in an effort to attempt to gain legitimacy (or cause greater confusion).  

You are probably correct with your inference that the various bcashes are forking into greater and greater irrelevance, so might even be preferable to ignore them completely and allow them to fade into the sunset or wherever it is that they are fading into...

...especially since the many bcashening forks are taking less than a couple of percentage of bitcoin's hashing power at best, and much of the time the total hashing power of all of the bcash forks have been devolving to less than 1% of bitcoin's hashing power... so if they are striving with all of their might to gain relevance and to fork into some kind of relevance by trying to gain hashpower - (I am having my doubts that they are going to regain hashing power), they may just be sharing a smaller and smaller kind of attention of hashing power which goes along with a shrinking in the prices of that crapola, too..

Alternatively, even if the various bcashes were to attempt to join forces, which probably such joining of shitcoin forces would be a smarter move if any of them could coordinate well enough to figure out such a force joining strategy.. and then it could be called a unforkening.....   and a proclamation:. ... all dee sheeeeiiiiitcoins unite!!!!!!.. hahahahahaha.. and still if you unite shitcoins, you still are going to end up with shitcoins.. so there is that angle, too... they may have to try to unite forces with bitcoin in order to get rid of the shitcoin stigma.. go figure.. all dee shitcoin unite under bitcoin, as kinds of side chains of shitcoins.. who would have thunk that king daddy was going to stay dee king through all of this turmoil.. and fighting for the crown.,. and they merely dwindle in their powers.  

O.k.

I think that I understand the two new bcashes, now.

The BCHN version on the coindance website is the one that keeps the mining without the extra mining tax...   So more or less the original chain.

The ABC version is the one that wanted to create an 8% mining tax... and looks like no one, not even miners, want to mine a chain in which they get 8% more because 8% more of zero is not going to be as good as 0% more of something.  

What a world.

What a world.

Which one is which?

I don't even understand it so far.

Probably not affecting BTC in any kind of way except for causing a bit of entertainment  - including showing that forking was dumb in the first place...

Do "we" have a choice, redsun114?

How are "we" going to stop them?

Break them up, for example,.. into 20 or more pieces and each ONLY has 1/20th (or less) the total amount?

Maybe I am not thinking creatively enough?  What do you have in mind, redsun114?  to stop giving them power?  Buy up the BTC before they do?

Another failure/refusal to disclaim.. #nohomo..

you fuck...

and fuck haikus, too

 


I see that you are really balling there, dude.  #nohomo

 


You are absolutamente koreck....

Such expression might be getting a wwwwwweeeeee bit worn out...

#homo_wannabe

Wouldn't LFC go all in, and then just put his extra cash flow into BTC as the extra cashflow comes in?  Something like that?

I am not sure exactly about the LFC strategy, except to appreciate that he largely does not come out of BTC, once he goes in... at least not until somewhere later down the road when he will start some kind of strategic withdrawal process that is kind of still being determined in regards to the amounts that he will withdraw and the price point locations of the various withdrawals.. (one of the advantages that LFC seems to have is that he has been through at least one other exponential BTC price rise period.. so he is in a better position to be at liberty to transition out of the BTC accumulation stage, at his discretion.. in other words, the longer that you have been in the more that the prior ongoing and persistent BTC accumulation gives options about whether to continue with any amount of BTC accumulation or just to enter into some variations of liquidation/withdrawals).

Another question seems to be that you do not have access to any of the $3k to $4k amount, until January?  I presume that you will have a cashflow that will be coming in after January 2021, too?  And, since I prefer to work with an exact number of cash that you will have, let's just estimate it to be in the middle of your range of the round number of $3,600 - and then you can work with any variation on what the exact number ends up being.

I understand that lump summing and front-loading may well work better than my more patient strategy - so if there is a way that you skew your upcoming BTC accumulation strategy towards front-loading you may possibly do better than what I am going to be suggesting, but I tend to NOT be greedy and I tend to have a preference to attempt to manage my own personal cashflow over a longer period of time.. so even if I miss out, I feel better psychologically to be able to have ongoing abilities to continue to buy BTC and to have cashflow flexibility....

So ultimately, probably, I would employ something like this:  Divide the lump sum ($3,600) amount into 3 parts which would be $1,200 for each 1/3.

The first 1/3 ($1,200) would get invested as soon as you have the total balance in hand - so within a week or two of you getting the balance in hand.  Sure, you can try to be a wee bit strategic about your initial lump sum investment, but pretty much you are buying BTC right away within 1-2 weeks with this first 1/3.

The next 1/3 of $1,200 would be divided over the next 6 months of DCA.... which ONLY gives you $46.15 per week to invest on a DCA basis  (that is $1,200/26)... Anyhow, each week you would invest the whole allotted $46.15 amount..  Sure, you can either just set a date and time for each of the purchases on a weekly basis, or you can try to be strategic with the exact time of each week that you buy... could be fun... if you have time.. without getting too emotional about it, since it ends up NOT really being a very large amount, anyhow.  Surely, I understand that sometimes there are too many fees involved with some exchanges and the attempts to buy BTC with lower amounts of value, so if you have to spread out your amount a bit (such as $92.30 over two weeks or some other variation) in order to save on fees, then I can understand the employment of those kinds of attempts at fee-saving strategies, too.

The last 1/3 of $1,200 would be structured in such a way to buy on BTC price dips.  So, whatever happens to be your initial entrance purchase price, you would thereby figure out what is a relatively extreme amount that you believe that the BTC price could go down and that you would be willing to run out of money if the BTC price were to go lower than that speculated amount, and then structure your BTC buys for those kinds of possible dips that you foresee (and hopefully you consider some of the extremes, too and be willing to live with either direction, too.. even if the BTC price does not end up dipping, then you do not end up using that money... fuck!!!!). 

So, let's say for example, you had engaged in your initial lump sum investment into BTC in the past several days or so, and your average BTC purchase price ended up being in the $15,750 price arena.  You perform a back of the napkin calculation, and you tentatively conclude that you are willing to run out of money if BTC were to dip below the $11k arena, in the event that BTC prices were to go down that low... So you might start your buying on BTC price dips at $15,350 (don't set your orders to buy BTC at exact round numbers, buy a little above the round numbers - unless you are market buying, then you have more flexibility to just pull the BTC buy trigger whenever you feel), and buy BTC at approximately every $333 drop in price.  So you calculate that there are about 13 $333 price increment drops between $11k and $15,350 (3 times per every thousand price drop)- and so therefore you calculate your authorized amounts to buy on BTC dips to be $92.31 for each of the BTC price dip increments (which is $1,200/13).

So, during the 6 months that you employ this initial plan, there could likely be additional cashflow that comes in to you and for your disposal that you are able to authorize the allocation of it towards this BTC accumulation practice.. If the lump sum of extra cash that comes in is relatively large, then you can allocate in the same way as the above process by dividing it into three parts and then lump-sum buying, adding to DCA and adding to buys on dips....

If you conclude that the extra amount of cash is too small to be dividing into three portions, then you could decide to use it in only one or two of the processes rather than all three.. of course at your discretion.. in terms of if you want to lump sum buy right away, add it to DCA (and if so how) or add it to buying on dips (and if so how)..    Sure, getting more money sometimes can be a great experiment to tweak around your plan, but in some sense, you might not want to be tweaking your whole plan every time that a new $20 comes available to you...

So maybe you would have some kind of threshold amounts of value that would trigger you to employ some differing way of dealing with the extra value that come in so that if the new amount that comes in is less than $100 you are going to only add such value to one category.. if the amount is less than $500 you will add to two of the categories, and if the amount is above $500 you will add such value to all three categories.. something like that... and you do NOT have to stick to your own guidelines because you can change your guidelines (even for mere learning and tweaking experiences) depending on some perceptions of what might be happening with BTC or with your own personal situation including changes to your cashflow, your investment in BTC as compared with other investments, your view of BTC as compared with other investments, your timeline, your risk tolerance and your time, skills and abilities to learn along the way, plan and/or tweak your plans including your allocations or your employment of any kind of trading...

Of course, staying the fuck away from shitcoins should go without saying (even though I said it anyhow)..

Even if you conclude the amounts of your allocation and your timeline for investing differently than me or the increments, this still remains an outline of more or less how I would consider the totality of the situation of how to attempt to manage the cashflow that I have allocated towards BTC by having a lump sum amount and considering new amounts of cash that might come in with goals of accumulating BTC while hopefully never running out of cash to be able to both buy BTC regularly, and to buy BTC on dips without necessarily erring on the side of shooting the whole of wadd value that I have in my BTC allocated fund in one shot. 

Another thing that I would attempt to presume is that once you authorize your money towards BTC, then that authorization and dedication of that value becomes a damned close to final decision.. and you better have some pretty damned extreme circumstances before you are pulling any of that money out in terms of letting it ride for 5-10 years or longer... so you better make sure that you have your various other cashflow matters in order including having an emergency fund upon which you can draw from because emergencies are almost inevitable to happen, especially if you try to take them for granted as not going to happen... so best to have your budget figured out for at least 6 months in advance, including some resources that are available to you so that you never have to draw into your BTC.... except for very extreme circumstances and for quite a bit down the road... 5-10 years or longer...

Decent points, 1miau.  Seems reasonable that there should at least be attempts to tie walls of text into bitcoin... and not just by mentioning bitcoin here and there, but substantively.

I have been around the WO thread as much as many other forum members, and surely I have witnessed that there are a lot of off-topic rants that are allowed to stay and even endure for days and weeks on end without much if any attempt to remove them - so I am not really sure exactly how disparities would be resolved regarding why some off-topic rants are allowed to stay, while others, such as nullius-type rants that do NOT even attempt to tie in bitcoin, are not allowed to stand - just like with any moderator decision, there may be something about the pervasiveness of the off-topicness rather than merely that off-topicness happens that cause the moderator to conclude that the off-topicness has crossed over some kind of line that is not exactly clear, since we all know that sporadic and even persistent off-topicness is considerably tolerated in WO...

Any opportunity that you can to bash on S2F when hardly even a close comparison... except that you are wanting such comparison to seem similarly.


I doubt that is the ONLY or the most appropriate question.

On a large number of occasions, I have asserted that one of the best strategies that any particular person can follow is to first figure out their own situation and then tailor their BTC strategy, if any, to their own particular circumstances. 

Of course, within BTC strategies, there are some that are better including DCA buying and ongoing accumulation until reaching some kind of tailored target.. and objectively, perhaps some kind of minimum investment into BTC would likely be better, as well.. but surely a bit more difficult to say in the event that people buying into BTC should, at least, attempt to figure out their cashflow first.



Well, any beginner investor is not going to be in a good position to be doing anything very complicated, at all... so surely you are describing strategies that are more straight forward to more complex, and giving higher grades to more straight forward theories, and I cannot really disagree with that general overall idea in regards to recommending that peeps start with the basics first.

Whoaza!!!!!

Jojo is a girl?

OMG.



You da man!!!!!

You da man!!!!



#homo

Here's how most peeps should judge your "always happens" proclamation:



But, yeah... do what you like


But yeah... expect what you like

It's a free world... last time I checked.

 

 

nullius and JJG sitting in a tree

t

a

lk

i

n

g


.....

#no homo.

hahahahaha


Truly hilariousandco should appreciate your level of "hilariousness", nullius... in terms of a lack of an ability to take responsibility for your own evil-genius aspirations to topple a wordy man from his petard.