That's Horace. He's from the UK. We don't like talking about him very much. Sorry this photo leaked.
Man, you're wrong, this is a caricature of the president of Ukraine (Zelensky). But to be honest, I don’t understand at all why they started talking about Ukrainian politics in this thread.  Thats some hat jealous Candidate for the post-$100k WO era. Flower included (tulips forbidden).
Edit: I'm hooked to this tune: Sabilu feat. Mian (Mira & Christopher Schwarzwalder Remix) * * Blame Cryptotourist, who infected me with the Schwarzwalder bug. |
|
|
|
Well, if you can borrow a billion dollars at near zero percent interest, and then use those funds to buy corn, and those debts are payable with all sorts of conditions several years later ... ... wait, that's exactly what MSTR did. And just quoting something someone said more than ten years ago. Indeed there is nobody to act as central bank or federal reserve to adjust the money supply as the population of users grows. That would have required a trusted party to determine the value, because I don't know a way for software to know the real world value of things. If there was some clever way, or if we wanted to trust someone to actively manage the money supply to peg it to something, the rules could have been programmed for that.
In this sense, it's more typical of a precious metal. Instead of the supply changing to keep the value the same, the supply is predetermined and the value changes. As the number of users grows, the value per coin increases. It has the potential for a positive feedback loop; as users increase, the value goes up, which could attract more users to take advantage of the increasing value.
Satoshi Nakamoto, February 18, 2009 Just to throw in the electronic engineer's spin on this: positive feedback loops are nasty things that destabilize systems. It's the designer's duty to make absolutely sure there are no positive feedback loops in a system, or it can potentially collapse and become uncontrollable. Positive feedback loops are used to build oscillators (i.e., things that go up and down periodically, and never stabilize). On the other hand, instability is not always a bad thing. The F-15 Eagle is more stable but less agile than the F-16 Fighting Falcon. The superior agility of the latter is due to its inherent instability. Just sayin'... Edit: Added F-15/16 comment. |
|
|
|
Is it dumping time yet or what exactly?
The thing about Bitcoin is that it's always dumping time. And it's always pumping time. And if you buy and HoDL, you always win. Kind of like Alice-In-Wonderland money. |
|
|
|
My birthday today, I'm now 60, got celebrated by the family earlier.
I didn't really care that much when I turned 50, but 60 does make me feel a bit old.
O well,nothing I can do about it, back to the internet and my model rocket rabbithole.
Happy birthday Arrie, may you live long and be healthy to enjoy your riches! Hi, a long time without publishing here, for my part everything is fine, but with many open fronts in work life, I hope to return soon when everything stabilizes.
Hugs.
Hey VB, nice to hear from you. Hope you'll be back before $100k, you wouldn't want to miss the party. |
|
|
|
Craig Wright probably timed his law suit against the Core developers to try to crash the market, but badger don’t care.
That's the definition of a robust network. Do anything that can be done to it (FUD, legal action, abuse, use by criminals, DDoS attacks, Mempool overloading, whatever) and it should be able to take it all and spit it out. So, to all Craig Wrights out there, I say bring it on! |
|
|
|
this technical evolution timeline is an important piece to study. so much knowledge is concentrated here. there would be far less consequential misunderstandings of bitcoin-technology if more folks would be able to draw conclusions out of this. some examples: -bitcoin has a rich history of technological advances that were all tested and used and have proven to be rock solid. it was not a invention that came out of the blue. it is using reliable tech as a foundation. -bitcoin is a breakthrough in computer science, not just a data entry on some server. lots of no-coiners still view bitcoin as something like airline miles that just got speculated up to sky high figures (tulip-mania) -as bitcoin is a unique combination of several well understood technologies, it is this combination that makes it work and NOT its transaction history database called blockchain. this combination we can refer to as bitcoin-technology. in contrast to the semantic wasteland referred to as "blockchain-technology". -bitcoin technology was designed for a special purpose (scarce digital cash bearer instrument) and is serves this very special purpose with immaculate perfection for more than a decade. when it comes to money/value - why rely on a system where unverifiable trust is mandatory when you can opt out to a system with trustless verifiability? -bitcoin-technology solves cheating and lying within its technical boundaries of a monetary digital network. people that do not understand this evolution easily fall victim to the idea that the technical elimination of trust in this highly specialized field somehow gave way to a new technology that is capable of doing the same trick to anything else like supply chains or ownership titles. this new tech is referred to as "blockchain-technology". if satoshis intend was not to invent "blockchain" that "will change everything" -"blockchain-technology" is not a technology. how can the transaction history of a digital money network resemble a technology? whenever "blockchain-experts" try to build something useful they are using parts of the technical developments shown in the above timeline, and that makes it look like technology. they- for example re-invent tamper-proof databases and think it has something to do with "blockchain" edited. Thanks 600watt, you saved me the typing. Take my last merit. The image above is very important, as it encapsulates the history of how Bitcoin came to be what it is today. It was not just a man's creation, but a long process of developing the foundations, ideas and technologies that have shaped Bitcoin, a process that is still ongoing, as new additions/improvements to the protocol are carefully implemented (SegWit being the most important so far). I stress the word carefully, for those who are eager to quickly add new things or make changes (like block size increases) without considering the implications. To me, as a devoted electronics engineer and science/technology lover, it is an extremely powerful feeling, almost to the point of shedding tears (literally) when I imagine the dreams and ideas of those early pioneers, and the determination and hard work of the cypherpunk community to turn those dreams and ideas into reality. All without monetary gain, all for free, as a contribution to society. Satoshi Nakamoto is, of course, the man/team behind getting it all together and setting it in motion. Regardless of what will happen to Bitcoin in the future, and if it is replaced by something else or dies out (and I strongly believe it will carry on existing and improving long after we all have passed away), it will always be the protocol that started it all. A point of reference for all future digital monetary tech. It will be taught at universities (already happening) and will be included in history books. These are great times we live in, and we are all privileged to be a part of this. Edit: Corrected typo, improved syntax. |
|
|
|
I did another round of rigorous confirmed calculations this morning based on the best math and science and I can confirm that the irrational exuberance is over and we are entering the final and most dismal correction.
OK, so what would you advise us to do? Sell now? Everything? Or maybe sell some percentage (say 50-80%) and keep the rest of the BTC just in case? And also, what should we buy? USD? EUR? JPY? (I've always wanted to visit Japan BTW.) Your advice on this is highly appreciated, thanks. Sell now. Everything. Short on high margin is best. Ultimately you want to be heavy in USD. Preferably in a low yield savings account, which is proven to be the safest. If you want a little risk in your profile, then perhaps 1% in ripple. I had some XRP and I sold them all last year. Kind of regret it to be honest... Thanks for the reply, I appreciate it. |
|
|
|
I did another round of rigorous confirmed calculations this morning based on the best math and science and I can confirm that the irrational exuberance is over and we are entering the final and most dismal correction.
OK, so what would you advise us to do? Sell now? Everything? Or maybe sell some percentage (say, 50-80%) and keep the rest of the BTC just in case? And also, what should we buy? USD? EUR? JPY? (I've always wanted to visit Japan BTW.) Your advice on this is highly appreciated, thanks. |
|
|
|
Of course it's fake! They show how it was made at the end of the video... My post was meant as a parody to the truly spectacular (and totally real, absolutely no CGI) New-Year video from Boston Dynamics: https://youtu.be/fn3KWM1kuAw |
|
|
|
|
WO is not really the place to be discussing this, but for those abstaining from eating meat (vegetarians, vegans, etc.) for ethical reasons (i.e., being against cruelty to animals), please understand that our very existence and way of life in this world is based on violence and causes violence by natural necessity. To really stop causing violence, one must commit suicide. It is of no coincidence that in certain languages, the word "life" is exactly the same as the word "violence". It's a cause and effect thing. We cannot escape it. This is part of the tragedy of our existence.
Having said the above, I fully understand OOM's stance on this. I once watched a YouTube video (now banned) of slaughtering a cow in a slaughterhouse in former East-Germany, and I literally threw up. I would probably feel and do the same as OOM, if I was forced to slaughter an animal with my own hands before eating it. This is just our brains trying to deal with an act that seems so incompatible with our ethical values. Is this what we do to animals? Yes, it is! And many more, unspeakable acts of violence, that we do to animals and fellow humans, to sustain our existence and way of life. Violence that society/civilization carefully shields us from. It's kind of like unplugging yourself from The Matrix and seeing reality in its truly raw form.
|
|
|
|
I would put 2021-2022 on the left graph, but yes, I know what you're sayin'... |
|
|
|
Green candle in less than ten minutes (or i will go to sleep).  Me too... This $49-50k grinding is boring AF... Maybe it's better to stop following the price so closely, and just wait for it to pick up when it will. But, CAN WE? See, we're turning into TradeView junkies I fear...  HoDLsleep soon (after watching a movie). Good night WOerzzzZZZZZ... |
|
|
|
If I accidentally deposit $1000 to your account, I cannot just say to the bank "I'm sorry, I made a mistake, I want my $1000 back". I have to contact you and kindly ask you to send the money back to me, and you can refuse to do so for whatever reason. Depending on who you are, you certainly can. Hence Bitcoin. Correct. If you have an unexpected windfall at a bank (error transfer) that is classified as "not reasonable" then yes you have to give it back. Sucks, but that's life. Now if you deposit extra money to pay a debt in error then the holder of the debt does NOT have to give it back as it is a payment against the debt. Bitcoin fixes the above issue. That said, if someone dropped 100btc into my account by mistake I would refund it. Because it's the right thing to do and laying claim to something that isn't mine would corrupt my soul. That's worth way more than 100btc to me. For large amounts classified as "unreasonable", where the sender can clearly show that they made an honest mistake, then yes, I suppose the bank can intervene and reverse the transaction, or legally force the recipient to do it. But if I accidentally deposit $1000 to an unintended account, it's not so easy. I don't think I can just call my bank and reverse it. It can probably be done, but it will take time and I wouldn't expect the bank to be so helpful, especially if the recipient is uncooperative and tells them some fake story justifying the transfer. If I know the recipient and have transacted with him before, this will make things even more difficult. I'd also do the same as you, and return the money to the sender if there was an accidental deposit to my account, just as I would take a wallet I found on the street to the police, but not everyone in this world wants to "do the right thing" when it involves money... Or course, Bitcoin settles this ambiguity, and puts total control on the key holder, so we'd better triple-check the addresses we sent our corn to. Fortunately, Bitcoin addresses have some level of error-checking built-in, so as to avoid sending your corn to an unintended address. |
|
|
|
Wth is 'illiquid supply' and why is it tracked separately from 'liquid supply'? “78% of the circulating #Bitcoin supply is illiquid and therefore hardly accessible for buying. This points to a bullish investor sentiment as large amounts of $BTC are being hoarded – which reduces sell pressure.” Wow that’s very interesting never thought of this way. But how do they track liquid and illiquid supply? Let me guess... So all the bitcoins on “exchanges” are the liquid supply? And any other Bitcoins that exist anywhere in my wallet or your wallet or any other wallet is a illiquid supply?? Is it? But still that does not make any sense... let say if I transfer my bitcoins to someone in return of any service or product shouldn’t it be considered as circulating supply? I think I’m seriously wrong somewhere... No need to over-analyze it. The gist of it is that the big players have now "seen the light" and are accumulating large sums of BTC with the aim to HoDL long-term, meaning that there's less and less BTC that's available to buy & sell. Your wallet and my wallet are just dust compared to the amounts we're talking about. Price has only one direction to go in response to this, and that is UP! |
|
|
|
But "the price" is made of sell and buy orders. Who was selling at 6000$ ?
They said some whale made the mistake of trying to sell it on the BTC/ETH pair or something and fat fingered 300k PHP (or $6k USD) ... someone supposedly sent 300k BTC to the exchange not wanting to get USD out of it for whatever reasons. What is to be believed, I'm not sure we'll ever know, unless they say something about it again. People are just speculating on what really happened. The problem for them is that, since the BTC have already been withdrawn from their system, there's nothing they can do about it. They set the rules of their system, users just used it. No hacking or other illegal activity involved. The same thing applies to normal banks (yes, the ones we hate so much). If I accidentally deposit $1000 to your account, I cannot just say to the bank "I'm sorry, I made a mistake, I want my $1000 back". I have to contact you and kindly ask you to send the money back to me, and you can refuse to do so for whatever reason. They need to fire their server programmers ASAP. |
|
|
|
OK great news.
I was afraid that Bitcoin risked becoming the Eloncoin and that years of supporting for the crypto alternative had gone to waste in a few tweets.
Luckily, no BTC tweets atm.
Elon is doing what he had been doing to his own company tesla's stock. Tweeting out "Price to high?" then their investors panicked and the stock dumped price the very next day. It is like he's playing a childish game where real money is involved. Yet what does he care, he has trillions more where that came from. Not so surprised because what do you really expect from a guy who named one of his companies The Boring Company. [ /bɔː/ ] , verb, gerund or present participle: boring
make (a hole) in something with a tool or by digging. e.g.: "bore a hole in the wall to pass the cable through"Naming Elon's tunnel construction company "The Boring Company" is one of the smartest company name choices I've ever come across. |
|
|
|
Well then gents, are we back on the road to 5 trillion billion million thousand?
Yes. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
