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

[NotLambchop]

If bitcoin was really about solving poor people problems, then it should have been distributed for free with all of them. But we all know that kind of approach would have never worked out.

Instead it will be sold to them at high prices, so all people who invested before (mostly from rich countries) can make lot of profit.

And don't get me wrong, early adopters deserve all that profit. But don't come to sell that lie about poor people, because poors will be the last ones to benefit.

Perhaps you are not understanding the effects of inflation on the poor?  ...

Perhaps you don't understand that the poor, almost by definition, have no savings, and live hand to mouth.
Explain how the depreciation of wealth stored as money affects the poor again?

[1715163500]

1715163500

[cbeast]

...
This is where I am working to change this. I'm not giving bitcoins to the poor. I'm teaching them how to secure Bitcoins.

And I'm teaching them how to secure their mansions & yachts.  

Must be a busy time for you teaching "the poor" how to secure their mansions and yachts?

Well, technically I'm using testnet coins. But I like the idea of mansions and yachts. I will get miniature models as prizes for understanding.

[NotLambchop]

...
This is where I am working to change this. I'm not giving bitcoins to the poor. I'm teaching them how to secure Bitcoins.

And I'm teaching them how to secure their mansions & yachts.  

Must be a busy time for you teaching "the poor" how to secure their mansions and yachts?

Well, technically I'm using testnet coins. But I like the idea of mansions and yachts. I will get miniature models as prizes for understanding.

You have the third-world poor transacting on the testnet? 

[NewLiberty]

If bitcoin was really about solving poor people problems, then it should have been distributed for free with all of them. But we all know that kind of approach would have never worked out.

Instead it will be sold to them at high prices, so all people who invested before (mostly from rich countries) can make lot of profit.

And don't get me wrong, early adopters deserve all that profit. But don't come to sell that lie about poor people, because poors will be the last ones to benefit.

Perhaps you are not understanding the effects of inflation on the poor?  ...

Perhaps you don't understand that the poor, almost by definition, have no savings, and live hand to mouth.
Explain how the depreciation of wealth stored as money affects the poor again?

You are missing it entirely again little lamby.
The SoV isn't so much the feature that benefits here, so much as the existential stability of the money and not having the Argentine Peso yanked out from under them.

[greenlion]

all that talk about mass adoption and price skyrocketing, especially in 3rd world countries.  

did any of you consider scenario where mass adoption leads to massive price decrease?

the more people use it to transfer value (transfer as opposed to hodl) less value it has.

Perhaps you can talk us through the precise mechanism whereby millions of people buy in to bitcoin but the price falls.

Quantity theory of money, equation of exchange, velocity increasing, ceteris parabis.

Your analysis shows how price rises with adoption not falls.
You do understand what the "Quantity theory of money" applies to don't you?
Try again?

(Or are you expecting a sudden "quantitative contraction" of all fiat?)

I'm not the person with the "analysis", read what you're replying to.

What I'm saying is exactly correct and unambiguous, providing supporting information to explain the theoretical basis for the claim made by the original person quoted.

[NotLambchop]

If bitcoin was really about solving poor people problems, then it should have been distributed for free with all of them. But we all know that kind of approach would have never worked out.

Instead it will be sold to them at high prices, so all people who invested before (mostly from rich countries) can make lot of profit.

And don't get me wrong, early adopters deserve all that profit. But don't come to sell that lie about poor people, because poors will be the last ones to benefit.

Perhaps you are not understanding the effects of inflation on the poor?  ...

Perhaps you don't understand that the poor, almost by definition, have no savings, and live hand to mouth.
Explain how the depreciation of wealth stored as money affects the poor again?

You are missing it entirely again little lamby.
The SoV isn't so much the feature that benefits here, so much as the existential stability of the money and not having the Argentine Peso yanked out from under them.

Wait, "existential stability" of Bitcoin, the most unstable thing calling itself a "currency" in the history of the world?!

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[NewLiberty]

all that talk about mass adoption and price skyrocketing, especially in 3rd world countries.  

did any of you consider scenario where mass adoption leads to massive price decrease?

the more people use it to transfer value (transfer as opposed to hodl) less value it has.

Perhaps you can talk us through the precise mechanism whereby millions of people buy in to bitcoin but the price falls.

Quantity theory of money, equation of exchange, velocity increasing, ceteris parabis.

Your analysis shows how price rises with adoption not falls.
You do understand what the "Quantity theory of money" applies to don't you?
Try again?

(Or are you expecting a sudden "quantitative contraction" of all fiat?)

I'm not the person with the "analysis", read what you're replying to.

What I'm saying is exactly correct and unambiguous, providing supporting information to explain the theoretical basis for the claim made by the original person quoted.

Then you do understand.  Appreciate the clarification.
As to unambiguous, you offered only bullet points without stating your conclusion or position.

[NewLiberty]

If bitcoin was really about solving poor people problems, then it should have been distributed for free with all of them. But we all know that kind of approach would have never worked out.

Instead it will be sold to them at high prices, so all people who invested before (mostly from rich countries) can make lot of profit.

And don't get me wrong, early adopters deserve all that profit. But don't come to sell that lie about poor people, because poors will be the last ones to benefit.

Perhaps you are not understanding the effects of inflation on the poor?  ...

Perhaps you don't understand that the poor, almost by definition, have no savings, and live hand to mouth.
Explain how the depreciation of wealth stored as money affects the poor again?

You are missing it entirely again little lamby.
The SoV isn't so much the feature that benefits here, so much as the existential stability of the money and not having the Argentine Peso yanked out from under them.

Wait, "existential stability" of Bitcoin, the most unstable thing calling itself a "currency" in the history of the world?!

You have something more stable than math?

What, gold?

[NotLambchop]

If bitcoin was really about solving poor people problems, then it should have been distributed for free with all of them. But we all know that kind of approach would have never worked out.

Instead it will be sold to them at high prices, so all people who invested before (mostly from rich countries) can make lot of profit.

And don't get me wrong, early adopters deserve all that profit. But don't come to sell that lie about poor people, because poors will be the last ones to benefit.

Perhaps you are not understanding the effects of inflation on the poor?  ...

Perhaps you don't understand that the poor, almost by definition, have no savings, and live hand to mouth.
Explain how the depreciation of wealth stored as money affects the poor again?

You are missing it entirely again little lamby.
The SoV isn't so much the feature that benefits here, so much as the existential stability of the money and not having the Argentine Peso yanked out from under them.

Wait, "existential stability" of Bitcoin, the most unstable thing calling itself a "currency" in the history of the world?!

You have something more stable than math?

What, gold?

Bitcoin relies on math.  So do banks.  So do random number generators.  So do shitcoins.
If you seriously need examples of things more stable than Bitcoin, there's the dollar.  And the peso, for that matter

[Wilhelm]

This picture still sums up the general TA of bitcoin

[cbeast]

This picture still sums up the general TA of bitcoin

That's also about the frequency FUD is spread on this forum as well.

[NewLiberty]

Bitcoin relies on math.  So do banks.  So do random number generators.  So do shitcoins.
If you seriously need examples of things more stable than Bitcoin, there's the dollar.  And the peso, for that matter

The difference being that each of the national fiats rely on a particular regional taxation and military regime and those people pulling its strings to keep those strings untangled, unbroken, and well sorted.

There is nothing more unstable than people.  You are evidence enough of that.

[NewLiberty]

On a positive note: good news about your man Von Nothaus. That was a long time coming

Thanks for this.   Yes, good, not great, but certainly good.  The judge figured out a way to "split the baby" and not do too much evil.
It was a Record Setting long time coming, longest time between conviction and sentencing in the court's history.

[NotLambchop]

Bitcoin relies on math.  So do banks.  So do random number generators.  So do shitcoins.
If you seriously need examples of things more stable than Bitcoin, there's the dollar.  And the peso, for that matter

The difference being that each of the national fiats rely on a particular regional taxation and military regime and those people pulling its strings to keep those strings untangled, unbroken, and well sorted.
Lol, the dollar, which is
There is nothing more unstable than people.  You are evidence enough of that.

Over the lifespan of Bitcoin, its value has increased by 999999999%, and over the last year has tanked by ~65%.
In the same timespan, the USD has remained within 10%.
Just stop, brah.

[NewLiberty]

The Argentine Peso was a case-study justification for Bitcoin, until Bitcoin underperformed even it

If we pick an arbitrary time-frame where that is true, sure.  Can say the opposite also.

Discussing existential stability, we still have to wait a while in order to see which one is here in the end.

[NotLambchop]

The Argentine Peso was a case-study justification for Bitcoin, until Bitcoin underperformed even it

If we pick an arbitrary time-frame where that is true, sure.  Can say the opposite also.

Discussing existential stability, we still have to wait a while in order to see which one is here in the end.

>existential stability

What does that mean?  Another meaningless phrase coined by coiners?

[NewLiberty]

Bitcoin relies on math.  So do banks.  So do random number generators.  So do shitcoins.
If you seriously need examples of things more stable than Bitcoin, there's the dollar.  And the peso, for that matter

The difference being that each of the national fiats rely on a particular regional taxation and military regime and those people pulling its strings to keep those strings untangled, unbroken, and well sorted.
Lol, the dollar, which is
There is nothing more unstable than people.  You are evidence enough of that.

Over the lifespan of Bitcoin, its value has increased by 999999999%, and over the last year has tanked by ~65%.
In the same timespan, the USD has remained within 10%.
Just stop, brah.

Why, you can't handle the truth?

The USD hasn't remained within 10% of anything except the USD, which is all that it is redeemable for anyhow.

[ShroomsKit]

How's the pump and dump going?

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

On a positive note: good news about your man Von Nothaus. That was a long time coming

Thanks for this.   Yes, good, not great, but certainly good.  The judge figured out a way to "split the baby" and not do too much evil.
It was a Record Setting long time coming, longest time between conviction and sentencing in the court's history.

Wasn't there a time during the depression when it became illegal for citizens to own gold? Was this law still on the books somehow and used against him? Because the counterfeiting charges were a joke