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

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[1714636282]

1714636282

[1714636282]

1714636282

[billyjoeallen]

Good news! NO FUD.

BTCChina:

http://www.weibo.com/2149945883/B1MStEjN0?mod=weibotime

Small partners about bitcoin China suspended all news withdrawals are false news Bitcoin Chinese recharge and withdrawals everything is normal. If you need help, please call customer service phone 400-664-3033

A chinese guy on tradingview chat was telling me this yesterday. a lot of chinese are not concerned at all - after all, the chinese have declared that they cant ban it, dont have the authority to ban it, and dont wish to ban it. There will be a loop hole in the system for deposits somewhere. ill bet on it, seems like the chinese think so.

thanks for posting.

China needs to die before the bull market can resume. The reason is simple: A China market that is still alive can die. A China market that is dead cannot die because it is already dead. That sucks for the Chinese traders and investors. Blame the PBoC if you like, but it's the truth.

the chinese govt is simply not simple. One word from the PBoC and the bull run resumes.

China is uncertainty. Markets hate uncertainty. Why is that so hard to grasp? Why is it so hard to accept?  

markets hate uncertainty. chinese LOVE bitcoin.

what are you accusing me of? anything is possible. I dont have the crystal ball, though a lot of people enjoy accusing me of this.

It's true but useless to say anything is possible. What is probable?

you are saying that it is uncertain, so we will probably fall. when markets are forward looking, Im gonna go right ahead and say thats a paradox. One word from the PBOC, and the bull is back.

Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Markets are forward looking, and I'm looking forward to buying coins at a lower price point, a point when I feel more confident that the downside is more priced in.

[JorgeStolfi]

Suitcases of cash and/or gold have worked for even more ambitious goals

One must take cash out of a bank and then carry the suitcase to the other guy, meeting him in person and in private.  Seems easy and safe to you?

Here, a few years ago, a State governor and a couple of Congressmen lost their posts and faced criminal charges because they were recorded by hidden cameras receiving packets of cash with the equivalent of 50'000--100'000 dollars.  Another one was caught boarding a plane with a large sum stuffed in his underwear.

you can just fucking send a letter with a private key if you really really don't understand what Blockchain taint means.

I don't understand.  If A puts the coins into some address X and sends its private key to B, the path on the blockchain just gets reduced to one node X and zero edges.  With the exchange deposit and withdrawal logs, the two links from A's bank account to the coins on X and the two links from there to B's bank account can be traced. What am I missing here?

[JorgeStolfi]

The discussion may have gotten too confusing.  I am trying to understand why the Chinese government felt necessary to further restrict the money flow to the exchanges, if they do not intend to ban bitcoin outright.

Until a month ago, the bitcoin situation in China seemed to be "safe" enough from the Chinese government's viewpoint.  Bitcoins could not be used in commerce (so the yuan's role as the only currency was assured), could not be handled by banks (so their financial stability was assured), and could not be bought through e-commerce sites.  For the most part, they could only be exchanged by yuan inside the exchanges, who would surely hand over all their deposits and withdrawals records to the police if requested.

So it would seem that there was no room to use the exchanges for illegal money transfers (bribing, money laundering, drug traffic, whatever) without the police being able to detect and trace them.

But the Chinese government was not satisfied, and the apparent reason for the further round of restrictions was continuing concern about illegal money transfers in or through the exchanges.  So, what were they still worried about?

[KeyserSoze]

http://fundacaobitcoinbrasil.org/

[EuroTrash]

The lack of volume and the lessening volatility makes this look like a slow recovery. I don't blame people for being sheepish since Gox and the China fiasco, but these things are forgotten over time. Greed always wins.

To me it makes it look like 2011 or worse.
Looking at transaction volume on the blockchain, which to me measures the real economy, using a similar method of http://thefurloff.com/2014/04/27/predicting-bitcoin-price/ I have come up with a "fair" price in the 230s today, and even that "fair" price below market price is still dropping week by week, same way it did in 2011.

[JorgeStolfi]

http://fundacaobitcoinbrasil.org/

Yeah, great. A local subsidiary of the Shrem Karpeles & Friends Foundation...

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[xulescu]

Suitcases of cash and/or gold have worked for even more ambitious goals

One must take cash out of a bank and then carry the suitcase to the other guy, meeting him in person and in private.  Seems easy and safe to you?

Here, a few years ago, a State governor and a couple of Congressmen lost their posts and faced criminal charges because they were recorded by hidden cameras receiving packets of cash with the equivalent of 50'000--100'000 dollars.  Another one was caught boarding a plane with a large sum stuffed in his underwear.

you can just fucking send a letter with a private key if you really really don't understand what Blockchain taint means.

I don't understand.  If A puts the coins into some address X and sends its private key to B, the path on the blockchain just gets reduced to one node X and zero edges.  With the exchange deposit and withdrawal logs, the two links from A's bank account to the coins on X and the two links from there to B's bank account can be traced. What am I missing here?

You are very deluded if you believe bribe money passes through the personal bank accounts of those involved. The US officials you gave as example are simply retarded and/or set up and/or part of a PR campaign. You are also deluded if you believe fraud and loopholes are kept under control in China. They're not even kept under control in the "civilized world".

Finally, if someone were to use BTC for bribe money, be certain the transfer would be thoroughly sterilized through a bunch of exchanges and other BTC hygiene services worldwide. Do you seriously believe there is any way to stop or detect this? For all I know there already exists a BTC laundromat for oligarchs.

[xulescu]

The discussion may have gotten too confusing.  I am trying to understand why the Chinese government felt necessary to further restrict the money flow to the exchanges, if they do not intend to ban bitcoin outright.

Until a month ago, the bitcoin situation in China seemed to be "safe" enough from the Chinese government's viewpoint.  Bitcoins could not be used in commerce (so the yuan's role as the only currency was assured), could not be handled by banks (so their financial stability was assured), and could not be bought through e-commerce sites.  For the most part, they could only be exchanged by yuan inside the exchanges, who would surely hand over all their deposits and withdrawals records to the police if requested.

So it would seem that there was no room to use the exchanges for illegal money transfers (bribing, money laundering, drug traffic, whatever) without the police being able to detect and trace them.

But the Chinese government was not satisfied, and the apparent reason for the further round of restrictions was continuing concern about illegal money transfers in or through the exchanges.  So, what were they still worried about?

How exactly would that work? I have accidentally sent BTC to the wrong address a few times when withdrawing from the exchanges and it is no longer in my control.

As for the macro picture, Bitcoin is hazelnuts for China. They are desperately trying to pop their bubbles everywhere. Bitcoin was only one of the things that got more attention because of the price reaction. CNY is another. The grand credit contraption is trying to no avail to rev down.

[rpietila]

Without any prior introduction, I posted the following. Because no prior info was given, this must be treated as the sole expression of my wish:

Based on my research, I don't believe we will see 435 ever again (Bitstamp). If someone is willing to bet (I naturally expect much better than 1:1 for me), PM please.

Chart1 & Chart2.

This is just the 2013-7-18 again. No looking back (when you least expect it).

Keywords:
- (implicit) in BTC
- (implicit) long duration at least 3 months (to adequately model "ever")
- trigger condition breaching 435
- someone (anyone can take it!)
- send me PM
- much better than 1:1 odds for me

Windjc's proposal:

In 2014-3-30, the exponential trendline model gave a buy signal at $460 and the price has been unable to go below it for any extended time even after 4 weeks.

In 2013-11-23 it gave a sell signal at $872 (SlipperySlope's 0.40 confidence) or 2013-11-28 at $1,056 (my 0.45 confidence). It was also unable to stay above it for any extended time.

What odds do you want? As I would be betting to win less valuable coin, you shouldn't get much better than 50%.

I think you will offer an unreasonable bet so that you don't have to make one at all.

But let me know.

Unreasonable? It's $30 to the trigger line (was $20 when I first called it). Are you willing to give 1:1 odds to me that price will hit $495 some point in the future? Of course not, you would not take that even at 10:1. So don't expect the same of me.

Lol. You didn't even make an offer. Why am I not surprised?

Since you are too chicken s*** to make a bet, here's one for you.

Bet $50k with of btc
Duration 30 days

If we hit 435 on Stamp and don't hit 500 I win.
If we hit 500 and not 435 you win
If we hit both or neither its a draw. And we both donate $1000 worth of btc each to charity.

Keywords:
- in USD
- short duration 30 days
- trigger condition breaching 435 and breaching 500, with both/neither considered a tie (windjc's estimation 90% this will end in a tie)
- aimed for me only, with insult
- public
- 1:1 odds, with charity clause

* *

EPILOGUE

It is difficult to read the thread because of so many posts, especially if you are of the type that never checks the sources and relies on people. But then you will also get the objectively wrong idea of what is happening. Here I wanted to have a nice private bet with anyone who thinks that breaking 435 is imminent and is willing to give me great odds for defending it. This windjc turned into a public challenge directed against me, with different terms in every 6 parameters that are important in a bet.

The bet itself seemed +EV for me so I decided to go on with it, but in the end there was not enough mutual agreement. As was perhaps the intention, windjc collected "fame" because I did not took his bet (why? do I also get points every time I propose things to people when it is not in their interest to comply?   ).

In the meanwhile nobody took my bet (the one which i would have unequivocally lost last night). Nobody was even interested. I had estimated that probability for 435 holding should be 10% in general public's eyes, but I thought it was 20%. So I would have taken 7:1 odds for me, and lost almost straight away.

[T.Stuart]

The discussion may have gotten too confusing.  I am trying to understand why the Chinese government felt necessary to further restrict the money flow to the exchanges, if they do not intend to ban bitcoin outright.

Until a month ago, the bitcoin situation in China seemed to be "safe" enough from the Chinese government's viewpoint.  Bitcoins could not be used in commerce (so the yuan's role as the only currency was assured), could not be handled by banks (so their financial stability was assured), and could not be bought through e-commerce sites.  For the most part, they could only be exchanged by yuan inside the exchanges, who would surely hand over all their deposits and withdrawals records to the police if requested.

So it would seem that there was no room to use the exchanges for illegal money transfers (bribing, money laundering, drug traffic, whatever) without the police being able to detect and trace them.

But the Chinese government was not satisfied, and the apparent reason for the further round of restrictions was continuing concern about illegal money transfers in or through the exchanges.  So, what were they still worried about?

I believe the way you are thinking is exactly the outcome hoped for by the Chinese government.

They know that if they simply ban Bitcoin outright then there will be no more downside to the price. There will be no more tools left to manipulate the market downwards. Price discovery based on a Chinese black market will become established; then Bitcoin is on its next bull run.

They prefer to depress the market with myriad smaller rules and regulations, disseminated via third-party rumours and in an atmosphere of confusion: the most effective way to keep Bitcoin in check.

For Bitcoiners, thinking Bitcoin is banned in China would actually be the way forward. Too many are intent on yelling "Bitcoin is not banned in China!" from the rooftops. Until this stops the FUD remains.

[N12]

Until this stops the FUD remains.

FUD = Facts U Dislike

[T.Stuart]

Until this stops the FUD remains.

FUD = Facts U Dislike

That's right!

[threecats]

Rpietila

Water under the bridge. You are a smart guy and have been right alot before. Given current conditions, including 1 day macd turning down, china falling apart, breach of major supports - i woulld be very intersted in hearing from both of you thoughts on the next 72 hours.

[600watt]

i wish china would have banned/outlawed btc completely in december 2013. it would have been painful and price would have dropped to -150 but it would be over by now and we would be on the way up.

i just can´t sell. every time it goes down i look at 800, 660, 550, 500 and think "fuck, why haven´t you sold, you idiot. if it ever goes back there SELL"  then, when it recovers to 550 or 500 it feels so good/confident that selling seems stupid. then it goes down again and we are back to "fuck, NEXT TIME I SELL" which i never do. can someone please take my hand and tell me to sell at the next little top ? thanks...

(we are talking about 25% of my stash which is on exchanges, cold wallet is never touched anyway.)

at least we get to know now if 339 was really the bottom.  

[T.Stuart]

i just can´t sell.

Be proud, Hodler! 

[mmitech]

Without any prior introduction, I posted the following. Because no prior info was given, this must be treated as the sole expression of my wish:

Based on my research, I don't believe we will see 435 ever again (Bitstamp). If someone is willing to bet (I naturally expect much better than 1:1 for me), PM please.

Chart1 & Chart2.

This is just the 2013-7-18 again. No looking back (when you least expect it).

Keywords:
- (implicit) in BTC
- (implicit) long duration at least 3 months (to adequately model "ever")
- trigger condition breaching 435
- someone (anyone can take it!)
- send me PM
- much better than 1:1 odds for me

Windjc's proposal:

In 2014-3-30, the exponential trendline model gave a buy signal at $460 and the price has been unable to go below it for any extended time even after 4 weeks.

In 2013-11-23 it gave a sell signal at $872 (SlipperySlope's 0.40 confidence) or 2013-11-28 at $1,056 (my 0.45 confidence). It was also unable to stay above it for any extended time.

What odds do you want? As I would be betting to win less valuable coin, you shouldn't get much better than 50%.

I think you will offer an unreasonable bet so that you don't have to make one at all.

But let me know.

Unreasonable? It's $30 to the trigger line (was $20 when I first called it). Are you willing to give 1:1 odds to me that price will hit $495 some point in the future? Of course not, you would not take that even at 10:1. So don't expect the same of me.

Lol. You didn't even make an offer. Why am I not surprised?

Since you are too chicken s*** to make a bet, here's one for you.

Bet $50k with of btc
Duration 30 days

If we hit 435 on Stamp and don't hit 500 I win.
If we hit 500 and not 435 you win
If we hit both or neither its a draw. And we both donate $1000 worth of btc each to charity.

Keywords:
- in USD
- short duration 30 days
- trigger condition breaching 435 and breaching 500, with both/neither considered a tie (windjc's estimation 90% this will end in a tie)
- aimed for me only, with insult
- public
- 1:1 odds, with charity clause

* *

EPILOGUE

It is difficult to read the thread because of so many posts, especially if you are of the type that never checks the sources and relies on people. But then you will also get the objectively wrong idea of what is happening. Here I wanted to have a nice private bet with anyone who thinks that breaking 435 is imminent and is willing to give me great odds for defending it. This windjc turned into a public challenge directed against me, with different terms in every 6 parameters that are important in a bet.

The bet itself seemed +EV for me so I decided to go on with it, but in the end there was not enough mutual agreement. As was perhaps the intention, windjc collected "fame" because I did not took his bet (why? do I also get points every time I propose things to people when it is not in their interest to comply?   ).

In the meanwhile nobody took my bet (the one which i would have unequivocally lost last night). Nobody was even interested. I had estimated that probability for 435 holding should be 10% in general public's eyes, but I thought it was 20%. So I would have taken 7:1 odds for me, and lost almost straight away.

you are full of shit, your mask just fell off, get the fuck out of here back to your thread.... I said I wont post here anymore but I cant resist your BS...

[OldGeek]

^^  lol.  Tell us how you really feel, mmitech.

[rpietila]

Rpietila

Water under the bridge. You are a smart guy and have been right alot before. Given current conditions, including 1 day macd turning down, china falling apart, breach of major supports - i woulld be very intersted in hearing from both of you thoughts on the next 72 hours.

The low is reached when everybody thinks it will go lower.

The explosive uptrend will start when everybody are sure that the low has been reached (typically months before).

Most of us await a new low or at least retest of 340. So it will not go to the moon yet, but perhaps it means that the low is in place.

I have no idea what will happen this weekend.