Bitcoin Forum
May 26, 2024, 02:15:43 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: What happens first:
New ATH - 43 (69.4%)
<$60,000 - 19 (30.6%)
Total Voters: 62

Pages: « 1 ... 20771 20772 20773 20774 20775 20776 20777 20778 20779 20780 20781 20782 20783 20784 20785 20786 20787 20788 20789 20790 20791 20792 20793 20794 20795 20796 20797 20798 20799 20800 20801 20802 20803 20804 20805 20806 20807 20808 20809 20810 20811 20812 20813 20814 20815 20816 20817 20818 20819 20820 [20821] 20822 20823 20824 20825 20826 20827 20828 20829 20830 20831 20832 20833 20834 20835 20836 20837 20838 20839 20840 20841 20842 20843 20844 20845 20846 20847 20848 20849 20850 20851 20852 20853 20854 20855 20856 20857 20858 20859 20860 20861 20862 20863 20864 20865 20866 20867 20868 20869 20870 20871 ... 33384 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion  (Read 26390559 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. (174 posts by 3 users with 9 merit deleted.)
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3724
Merit: 10318


Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"


View Profile
July 26, 2018, 10:18:41 PM



I like the above graph... Do you have a link for it?
Last of the V8s
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 4392


Be a bank


View Profile
July 26, 2018, 10:28:35 PM
Merited by JayJuanGee (1)



I like the above graph... Do you have a link for it?
https://twitter.com/MustStopMurad/status/1022169639386836992
bones261
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1806
Merit: 1827



View Profile
July 26, 2018, 10:28:41 PM

Well, it appears the dumping has cooled off a little, for now. A 5% drop doesn't appear too bad considering that some trader's ETF dreams are looking less probable than ever. Hopefully the CBOE has indeed put together a better argument than the twins. I noticed that today's ruling is 3 to 1. So at least there is one dissenter among the group.
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3724
Merit: 10318


Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"


View Profile
July 26, 2018, 10:30:47 PM


Haha. You found a few play projects. Most of my code is not open source. And most of my FOSS stuff was written before git was conceived , let alone github.

The point of the initial comment is that JJG, in his/her technical ignorance, is in no position to judge the capability of various engineers.

Yes, you fuck twit.  I already responded to your point here that you are repeating.  You are attempting to make your stupid ass bcash defense about personal technical status rather that the actual point that I was making and I already made, and that is bcash is a way inferior product  from bitcoin that is mostly engaged in attacking bitcoin rather than providing technical competence.  So get the fuck out of here with your attempt to get into technical weeds in order to support your lame bitcoin attack vector.

Let alone his/her making of blanket statements about a group of folk, without even being able to identify one or two of said group.

No need to identify anyone about this mostly off topic coin that serves as an attack vector on bitcoin.  Yeah, sure, you and some other bcash pumpers participate in this thread because you want to engage in ongoing polishing of such turd in order to attempt to make bcash seem like a more legitimate contribution than it is... . and in part, you do so by engaging in various distractions, including your latest distraction that is attempting to pull technical status rank.. Get the fuck out of here with your supposed rank pulling efforts... by the way, remember stolfi was engaged in the ongoing practice of attempting to pull rank, and that did not seem to get him too far in terms of his providing substantive contributions to the thread, even though he surely distracted us into the weeds a lot with his nonsense.. Are you stolfi-lite?

Last of the V8s
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 4392


Be a bank


View Profile
July 26, 2018, 10:34:10 PM

Well, it appears the dumping has cooled off a little, for now. A 5% drop doesn't appear too bad considering that some trader's ETF dreams are looking less probable than ever. Hopefully the CBOE has indeed put together a better argument than the twins. I noticed that today's ruling is 3 to 1. So at least there is one dissenter among the group.
https://twitter.com/HesterPeirce/status/1022601549309198337
Trump's pick.
HairyMaclairy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 2174


Degenerate bull hatter & Bitcoin monotheist


View Profile
July 26, 2018, 10:37:17 PM

JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3724
Merit: 10318


Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"


View Profile
July 26, 2018, 10:47:19 PM

Jbear

Blocksize is a security parameter.

I know this.

You know this.

Let’s move on.

jbreher is not here in order to present actual practicality.  He's got technical irrelevance to spread.. in order to attempt to fulfill a mission that certain bcash peeps might be able to fight their way out of a wet paper bag, someday.

Rosewater Foundation
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 254



View Profile
July 26, 2018, 10:50:04 PM

Jbear

Blocksize is a security parameter.

I know this.

You know this.

Let’s move on.

jbreher

Jbear might be the best salesman bcash has on the floor. He's too good at it, and his timing is suspect. It's fishy. I'd put him on your list if I was you.
Rosewater Foundation
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 254



View Profile
July 26, 2018, 10:51:33 PM

Ain't gonna lie.

I has a pretty bad sad about now.

WHY BITCORN WHY !?!???

* BobLawblaw breaks down and sobs unconsolably

I will go make you a personal action figure to cheer you up. Wait.
BitcoinNewsMagazine
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1806
Merit: 1164



View Profile WWW
July 26, 2018, 10:54:15 PM

From https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/peirce-dissent-34-83723

Quote
By precluding approval of cryptocurrency-based ETPs for the foreseeable future, the Commission is engaging in merit regulation. Bitcoin is a new phenomenon, and its long-term viability is uncertain. It may succeed; it may fail. The Commission, however, is not well positioned to assess the likelihood of either outcome, for bitcoin or any other asset. Many investors have expressed an interest in gaining exposure to bitcoin, and a subset of these investors would prefer to gain exposure without owning bitcoin directly. An ETP based on bitcoin would offer investors indirect exposure to bitcoin through a product that trades on a regulated securities market and in a manner that eliminates some of the frictions and worries of buying and holding bitcoin directly. If we were to approve the ETP at issue here, investors could choose whether to buy it or avoid it. The Commission’s action today deprives investors of this choice. I reject the role of gatekeeper of innovation—a role very different from (and, indeed, inconsistent with) our mission of protecting investors, fostering capital formation, and facilitating fair, orderly, and efficient markets. Accordingly, I dissent.

Hester M. Peirce, Commissioner
Elwar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3598
Merit: 2386


Viva Ut Vivas


View Profile WWW
July 26, 2018, 11:02:25 PM

I think the key to look for (I haven't been paying attention enough to the new ETF to know) is, if the CBOE is trying to change the rules in the same way that Winklevoss ETF did. Which they require some safeguards to manipulation according to their shit response.

They said that they would approve something with existing futures markets if "an ETP listing exchange...demonstrates in a proposed rule change that it will be able to address the risk of fraud and manipulation by sharing surveillance information with a regulated market of significant size related to bitcoin"

Is this what CBOE is doing?
Rosewater Foundation
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 254



View Profile
July 26, 2018, 11:04:20 PM



Bitcorn B'awb is hodling for Bitcorn music.
HairyMaclairy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 2174


Degenerate bull hatter & Bitcoin monotheist


View Profile
July 26, 2018, 11:07:58 PM

I think the key to look for (I haven't been paying attention enough to the new ETF to know) is, if the CBOE is trying to change the rules in the same way that Winklevoss ETF did. Which they require some safeguards to manipulation according to their shit response.

They said that they would approve something with existing futures markets if "an ETP listing exchange...demonstrates in a proposed rule change that it will be able to address the risk of fraud and manipulation by sharing surveillance information with a regulated market of significant size related to bitcoin"

Is this what CBOE is doing?

The point is there is not yet a regulated market of sufficient size.  

Give it a couple of years.  Then moon.
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3724
Merit: 10318


Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"


View Profile
July 26, 2018, 11:11:19 PM

Bbut... but Anon, it's like when you want a car engine to 'scale' to higher horsepower and speed, the most straightforward way is to simply add more cylinders!  V32 engines for everyone so we can get places faster, amiright?  /s

Stupid analogy is stupid.

If you want a transportation analogy, a closer analog would be passenger demand for a certain train route exceeding capacity solved by adding more passenger cars to the train.

Still a stupid analogy, but an order of magnitude closer to the situation at hand.
Dude you are eating my merits! Put those pic'a'nic baskets down!

For the record, I maintain that segwit was a mistake. And that bcash is shit. And no, these are not contradictory, Torque. Feel less and think more.

O.k. great, so you cannot find another coin?  Instead you want to come here and bash on segwit which was accepted through consensus and NOT likely to be diminished anytime soon, except you nutjobs just want some pie in the sky speculative things to complain about?
V1lpu
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 332
Merit: 12


View Profile
July 26, 2018, 11:15:48 PM
Merited by JayJuanGee (1)



I like the above graph... Do you have a link for it?

Yes, https://twitter.com/MustStopMurad – interesting account

JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3724
Merit: 10318


Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"


View Profile
July 26, 2018, 11:23:35 PM

Maybe you just look down on those who attempt to engage in self-improvement BTC trading practices? 

I think that's an astute observation. I don't have the gumption to trade. Full-stop.

And this is why I suck at this.

This remains exact within expectations of what could happen.

Remember 3 weeks ago, we were down at $5,777-ish?  O.k.? 

On the overall scheme of things, we would have been buying BTC all the way down to $5,777 - or whatever closest proximate buy order was filled.. perhaps $6k might have been the closest, depending on how far apart your buy orders are placed.

Then when the BTC price went up, largely, from that point until nearly $8,500, then you would have been selling all the way up.  Let's say for example, you did not hit the bottom, and you were only able to buy around $6,000, then you might have been selling from $6,500 up or maybe your orders are spread wider (because you don't like to be so active in your trades) and your sell orders would have begun to execute around $7k all the way up to $8,500..

Again, on the way up, let's say that your sell orders are  spread kind of wide, and the closest one to hit was around $8k, and therefore, you might not be ready to buy back until $7k or something like that?  Anyhow, if your orders are closer together, then more of them will trigger, but a $2,700 price swing (nearly a 50% swing in price) should have caused some orders to trigger - unless you are playing really large swings (and some folks do play the really large swings).

Currently, I have larger gaps between my buy and sell orders, but once the orders start to trigger, then subsequent orders are relatively close together.
V1lpu
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 332
Merit: 12


View Profile
July 26, 2018, 11:26:42 PM

Did anyone still following Masterluc? He posted this yesterday:

Quote
Six months have passed since the beginning of the correction, there is still the same. The drains didn't want to fall. Bitcoin too. The longer we stay at current levels, the lower the likelihood of falling to new bottoms.

I think it will be many months of sideways movement. Time is now against the bears.
Elwar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3598
Merit: 2386


Viva Ut Vivas


View Profile WWW
July 26, 2018, 11:31:04 PM

After going through the whole process of verifying my account on WEX.nz, sending them signed transactions of wallets I control that received LTC, PPC and BTC from them along with much more proof they sent me this:

Quote
Hi,

Unfortunately we haven't found any way to work with USA citizens yet. We will renew our news portals when this possibility appears
Best Regards,
WEX Support
Knowledge Base https://wex.kayako.com

Utter bullshit. I'm not even a US resident. I haven't lived in the US for 5 years. Bitfinex was fine with non-US residents using their exchange. Non-US residents are not bound to the same SEC or exchange laws as US residents.

They can just come up with some new reasons (after they have your money) on why they can keep your money.
Rosewater Foundation
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 254



View Profile
July 26, 2018, 11:31:23 PM

Maybe you just look down on those who attempt to engage in self-improvement BTC trading practices?

I think that's an astute observation. I don't have the gumption to trade. Full-stop.

And this is why I suck at this.

This remains exact within expectations of what could happen.

Remember 3 weeks ago, we were down at $5,777-ish?  O.k.?  

On the overall scheme of things, we would have been buying BTC all the way down to $5,777 - or whatever closest proximate buy order was filled.. perhaps $6k might have been the closest, depending on how far apart your buy orders are placed.

Then when the BTC price went up, largely, from that point until nearly $8,500, then you would have been selling all the way up.  Let's say for example, you did not hit the bottom, and you were only able to buy around $6,000, then you might have been selling from $6,500 up or maybe your orders are spread wider (because you don't like to be so active in your trades) and your sell orders would have begun to execute around $7k all the way up to $8,500..

Again, on the way up, let's say that your sell orders are  spread kind of wide, and the closest one to hit was around $8k, and therefore, you might not be ready to buy back until $7k or something like that?  Anyhow, if your orders are closer together, then more of them will trigger, but a $2,700 price swing (nearly a 50% swing in price) should have caused some orders to trigger - unless you are playing really large swings (and some folks do play the really large swings).

Currently, I have larger gaps between my buy and sell orders, but once the orders start to trigger, then subsequent orders are relatively close together.

Ok Jay. I'm going to start improving my Bitcorn position. No guts no glory. Wish me luck.

Edit: Let me know if you want your own action figure.
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349


Eadem mutata resurgo


View Profile
July 26, 2018, 11:44:11 PM

From https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/peirce-dissent-34-83723

Quote
By precluding approval of cryptocurrency-based ETPs for the foreseeable future, the Commission is engaging in merit regulation. Bitcoin is a new phenomenon, and its long-term viability is uncertain. It may succeed; it may fail. The Commission, however, is not well positioned to assess the likelihood of either outcome, for bitcoin or any other asset. Many investors have expressed an interest in gaining exposure to bitcoin, and a subset of these investors would prefer to gain exposure without owning bitcoin directly. An ETP based on bitcoin would offer investors indirect exposure to bitcoin through a product that trades on a regulated securities market and in a manner that eliminates some of the frictions and worries of buying and holding bitcoin directly. If we were to approve the ETP at issue here, investors could choose whether to buy it or avoid it. The Commission’s action today deprives investors of this choice. I reject the role of gatekeeper of innovation—a role very different from (and, indeed, inconsistent with) our mission of protecting investors, fostering capital formation, and facilitating fair, orderly, and efficient markets. Accordingly, I dissent.

Hester M. Peirce, Commissioner



Pages: « 1 ... 20771 20772 20773 20774 20775 20776 20777 20778 20779 20780 20781 20782 20783 20784 20785 20786 20787 20788 20789 20790 20791 20792 20793 20794 20795 20796 20797 20798 20799 20800 20801 20802 20803 20804 20805 20806 20807 20808 20809 20810 20811 20812 20813 20814 20815 20816 20817 20818 20819 20820 [20821] 20822 20823 20824 20825 20826 20827 20828 20829 20830 20831 20832 20833 20834 20835 20836 20837 20838 20839 20840 20841 20842 20843 20844 20845 20846 20847 20848 20849 20850 20851 20852 20853 20854 20855 20856 20857 20858 20859 20860 20861 20862 20863 20864 20865 20866 20867 20868 20869 20870 20871 ... 33384 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!