Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[FullLife]

Oh man, piling on naked shorts in JPM coin?  What competing banker could resist?

Just admit that 686f646c's last post of the guitar cowboy made you think of barely resistible naked shorts. It's cool, man, it's cool. We're all friends here.

Zing!!

[1714672635]

1714672635

[1714672635]

1714672635

[Walsoraj]

So bitbulls believe that they will become even wealthier with support from wallstreet traders?

[F-bernanke]

Is there anybody in this mighty thread who has used bitcoin for actually purchasing something with it besides FIAT ?

Bought some gigs at Fiverr. But who cares? I'm in it for the store of value.

[aminorex]

Is there anybody in this mighty thread who has used bitcoin for actually purchasing something with it besides FIAT ?

Bought some gigs at Fiverr. But who cares? I'm in it for the store of value.

Use it or lose it.

[fluidjax]

So bitbulls believe that they will become even wealthier with support from wallstreet traders?

I think the HODL'ing bulls may, its the traders in this thread that need to be careful.

[Walsoraj]

Is there anybody in this mighty thread who has used bitcoin for actually purchasing something with it besides FIAT ?

Bought some gigs at Fiverr. But who cares? I'm in it for the store of value to cash out at a later time for more fiat.

Fixed.

[freebit13]

insight: friend of mine working in JP Morgan in London also confirmed they are kinda elaborating their own coin as we speak..  

JPMorgancoin? lol. I can't wait for it.

FractionalReserveCoin.. oh wait... Gox already did that 

[aminorex]

I think the HODL'ing bulls may, its the traders in this thread that need to be careful.

As I opined elsewhere, the one advantage you're likely to have is understanding the fundamentals, the mechanics.  Wall street is deeply inculcated with the idea that volatility are risk are one and the same.  This error is likely to persist for a long time.

[F-bernanke]

Is there anybody in this mighty thread who has used bitcoin for actually purchasing something with it besides FIAT ?

Bought some gigs at Fiverr. But who cares? I'm in it for the store of value to cash out at a later time for more fiat.

Fixed.

No, same reason why I hold Gold.

Fiat inflates away. I despise FIAT, holding fiat is promoting slavery.

[Richy_T]

Okay, so you're willing to take things piece-meal. Great, but you didn't provide any solution to the problem. Pretend you're taking things piece-meal, and this information has just come up. I'm personally not the type who is comfortable with "crossing that bridge when you come to it."

And I am not the "grand solution" type not least since it has proven to be so disastrous in the past (and present). Answers are often not evident until situations arise. Do you really think crossing a bridge before you come to it has a desirable outcome?

[billyjoeallen]

$200 billion in potential savings in retail, Etail and remittances. What about micropaypents, equities trading, voting, corporate management, wealth storage, accounting, and charities?

a $10,000 bitcoin at Google market cap is a reasonable expectation for the next couple of years, but he the upside potential is substantially greater than that.

[billyjoeallen]

Okay, so you're willing to take things piece-meal. Great, but you didn't provide any solution to the problem. Pretend you're taking things piece-meal, and this information has just come up. I'm personally not the type who is comfortable with "crossing that bridge when you come to it."

And I am not the "grand solution" type not least since it has proven to be so disastrous in the past (and present). Answers are often not evident until situations arise. Do you really think crossing a bridge before you come to it has a desirable outcome?

Central planners are incapable of seeing the limits of central planning. They don't understand that the absence of answers to their questions is a feature of decentralization, not a bug.

[Richy_T]

I have a lot of questions for libertarians that I want answered. I've been asking them for years. Most of them still haven't been answered. I thought that might change here, but I'm starting to lose hope and am almost to the point of writing it off as another lost cause.

Thing is, I run into people like you all too often. You have been provided answers (and you reject them for good or bad reasons depending on your point of view) then you run around crowing that you have not been provided answers and expect someone to spoon feed you and then you still reject those answers and the cycle continues. Worse, typically you don't actually have arguments against the answers you have been provided, you just reject them out-of-hand. It becomes tiresome.

There is much good literature out there if you care to educate yourself. Check out some Popper, Hayek etc. There is undoubtedly also much good counter-argument should you wish to properly be able to refute positions you disagree with. You might even find yourself altering your perspective. I used to be quite the socialist myself.

[Davyd05]

At the least bitcoin has us engaging with those we likely would've just left on ignore, well not everyone makes it to the debate...however the titles I' have seen tweeted in relation to the Goldman Sach's piece, tend to skew it towards a bash fest. After seeing those charts and figures...I can only think someone who doesn't know how to recognize opportunities is concluding it is doomed lol.

[Richy_T]

Central planners are incapable of seeing the limits of central planning. They don't understand that the absence of answers to their questions is a feature of decentralization, not a bug.

Too true. When one man makes a mistake, he maybe brings misery to himself and a few others usually. When government makes a mistake, it's misery for millions.

[JayJuanGee]

I'm looking for better definition on where you stand.

Alright, let's take this further: the argument is that we would support the poor through voluntary charity, yes? Now let's say after 10 years, charity turns out to be woefully inadequate. Let's assume that -- while the world has not devolved into chaos and anarchy as a result of a lack of government -- that some are suffering because not everything went as planned. There's slums with no police protection because everyone that lives in the neighborhood can't afford it. How do we approach that? Are some things up for socialization, or is it all strictly no go, no budge?

Sure, the poor ain't doing so hot right now, but in order for the change to be worth it, it's not enough to be different. It's got to be better, and noticeably so. The problem is better is subjective, and not everyone will agree on, let alone know, what better really is.

Oh, I'm fairly happy to take things piecemeal. If things don't appear to be working, back off and adjust approach. Obviously, I believe things would not tend to end up that way (though government action has created a huge underclass that would have to be accounted for) but I'm not one for big schemes that have to be implemented in one fell swoop (just look at Obamacare for how that kind of thing goes).

Basically I see it like a big game of Jenga. There are some pieces which can be taken easily and others which require the removal of other pieces before they can be taken without collapsing the whole tower. Fortunately, almost every step that is taken to improve freedom should make the next one easier.

Okay, so you're willing to take things piece-meal. Great, but you didn't provide any solution to the problem. Pretend you're taking things piece-meal, and this information has just come up. I'm personally not the type who is comfortable with "crossing that bridge when you come to it."

For that matter, what if there are no solutions to the problems that come up? What if it turns out that, for most, your idea is, in fact, a dismal failure? Or what if it's not even possible, for example forms of government start popping up because that's what people want. What if all these small governments start warring with each other? How do we set up an army to fight off an invasion from a country who doesn't share our approach? All of these are questions that need to be addressed before you take the leap.

I'm still lacking answers on the whole "what if I decide to get a large crew together to violently take your shit" argument I presented earlier, as well. That's a general statement to all who agree with you, not specifically directed at you. You can say all you want "it won't happen," but it will. There will always be monsters in this world who will take full advantage of whatever situation they are put in. It's just a question of how widespread it will be.

I have a lot of questions for libertarians that I want answered. I've been asking them for years. Most of them still haven't been answered. I thought that might change here, but I'm starting to lose hope and am almost to the point of writing it off as another lost cause.

I admire your persistence and your formulations of questions for the libertarians, and you are generally fairly polite in your presentation of various issues and various scenarios, yet it should be clear that trying to get concrete answers from the no government folks is an exercise in futility. 

It may be that they have an impossible task to describe some future society b/c no one person or group of libertarians are likely to be able to really design some community arrangement that adequately accounts for the variety of stakeholders (without involving some of the various stakeholders in the process).... which frequently causes the libertarians to speculate or to propose fairly specific plans that in fact have NOT been thought through very well.   

[JayJuanGee]

insight: friend of mine working in JP Morgan in London also confirmed they are kinda elaborating their own coin as we speak..  

They may succeed with novices but only until the banks fuck it up somehow, at which point people will begin to understand why they should support a coin not backed by any company/cartel.

Agreed.... In the end, these kind of endeavors are likely to bring more attention and credibility to bitcoin... even though they may seem to mimic or compete. 

Bitcoin will likely prevail - yet, we may want to see how these various competitive cryptos play out... and these additional cryptos will likely create hype and even pump and dump opportunities... for day traders.

[bassclef]

insight: friend of mine working in JP Morgan in London also confirmed they are kinda elaborating their own coin as we speak.. 

They may succeed with novices but only until the banks fuck it up somehow, at which point people will begin to understand why they should support a coin not backed by any company/cartel.

Agreed.... In the end, these kind of endeavors are likely to bring more attention and credibility to bitcoin... even though they may seem to mimic or compete. 

Bitcoin will likely prevail - yet, we may want to see how these various competitive cryptos play out... and these additional cryptos will likely create hype and even pump and dump opportunities... for day traders.

Yes you're probably right. But a centralized bitcoin clone kind of defeats the purpose. Who will mine? JPMorgan? The public? A "trusted" central banker type entity? What if they need to change the rules, will they just hard fork it forcing everyone along? Sounds like a total disaster in the making.

[Walsoraj]

Bitcoin needs more than wall street to soar to new irrational heights. It needs a Stratton Oakmont.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratton_Oakmont

[billyjoeallen]

I'm looking for better definition on where you stand.

Alright, let's take this further: the argument is that we would support the poor through voluntary charity, yes? Now let's say after 10 years, charity turns out to be woefully inadequate. Let's assume that -- while the world has not devolved into chaos and anarchy as a result of a lack of government -- that some are suffering because not everything went as planned. There's slums with no police protection because everyone that lives in the neighborhood can't afford it. How do we approach that? Are some things up for socialization, or is it all strictly no go, no budge?

Sure, the poor ain't doing so hot right now, but in order for the change to be worth it, it's not enough to be different. It's got to be better, and noticeably so. The problem is better is subjective, and not everyone will agree on, let alone know, what better really is.

Oh, I'm fairly happy to take things piecemeal. If things don't appear to be working, back off and adjust approach. Obviously, I believe things would not tend to end up that way (though government action has created a huge underclass that would have to be accounted for) but I'm not one for big schemes that have to be implemented in one fell swoop (just look at Obamacare for how that kind of thing goes).

Basically I see it like a big game of Jenga. There are some pieces which can be taken easily and others which require the removal of other pieces before they can be taken without collapsing the whole tower. Fortunately, almost every step that is taken to improve freedom should make the next one easier.

Okay, so you're willing to take things piece-meal. Great, but you didn't provide any solution to the problem. Pretend you're taking things piece-meal, and this information has just come up. I'm personally not the type who is comfortable with "crossing that bridge when you come to it."

For that matter, what if there are no solutions to the problems that come up? What if it turns out that, for most, your idea is, in fact, a dismal failure? Or what if it's not even possible, for example forms of government start popping up because that's what people want. What if all these small governments start warring with each other? How do we set up an army to fight off an invasion from a country who doesn't share our approach? All of these are questions that need to be addressed before you take the leap.

I'm still lacking answers on the whole "what if I decide to get a large crew together to violently take your shit" argument I presented earlier, as well. That's a general statement to all who agree with you, not specifically directed at you. You can say all you want "it won't happen," but it will. There will always be monsters in this world who will take full advantage of whatever situation they are put in. It's just a question of how widespread it will be.

I have a lot of questions for libertarians that I want answered. I've been asking them for years. Most of them still haven't been answered. I thought that might change here, but I'm starting to lose hope and am almost to the point of writing it off as another lost cause.

I admire your persistence and your formulations of questions for the libertarians, and you are generally fairly polite in your presentation of various issues and various scenarios, yet it should be clear that trying to get concrete answers from the no government folks is an exercise in futility. 

It may be that they have an impossible task to describe some future society b/c no one person or group of libertarians are likely to be able to really design some community arrangement that adequately accounts for the variety of stakeholders (without involving some of the various stakeholders in the process).... which frequently causes the libertarians to speculate or to propose fairly specific plans that in fact have NOT been thought through very well.   

A voluntary society cannot be designed at all. It will be emergent. When a critical mass of people realize that the rules we tell children to live by (namely don't hurt people, don't mess with their stuff, and keep your promises) should be applied across the board, and that no other general rules are necessary, then such a society will form.

There can be no formula for dealing with people in need. As soon as such a formula is known, most of the marginally needy and some of the non-needy attempt to game the system. Subsidizing poverty creates more poverty. The best way to deal with those in need is on an individual case-by-case basis. It's too important of a problem to be left to monopolists. Concrete answers are wrong answers.