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

[bluebits]

Does anyone have a link to the post about the original Winklevos ETF rejection and how some traders opened big positions on Mex while simultaneously pushing the Finex market? They only had to trade a relatively small amount to lock in a lot of profit from the expected volatility event.

[realr0ach]

(which includes my already assertion that it takes a whole hell-of-a-lot of posting of bullshit nonsense in order to get banned from this forum, which Anunymint/shelby has accomplished on numerous occasions, which also substantiates the likelihood that his ideas don't really deserve any special treatment because even he was not able to present them without unnecessary and irrelevant provocations. 

JayJuanGoyim, you will agree with Anonymint whether you like it or not:

[ivomm]

Are we at the reversal point yet? The funny thing is everybody is talking about bear patterns, but the falling wedge is generally considered as a bullish sign:
"The falling wedge pattern is characterized by a chart pattern which forms when the market makes lower lows and lower highs with a contracting range. When this pattern is found in a downward trend, it is considered a reversal pattern, as the contraction of the range indicates the downtrend is losing steam... In a falling wedge, both boundary lines slant down from left to right. The upper descends at a steeper angle than the lower line. Volume keeps on diminishing and trading activity slows down due to narrowing prices. There comes the breaking point, and trading activity after the breakout differs."
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_pattern
https://stockcharts.com/school/doku.php?id=chart_school:chart_analysis:chart_patterns:falling_wedge_reversal

[realr0ach]

@MarkFriedenbach https://twitter.com/MarkFriedenbach/status/1030211193544134658
I will be giving a talk at #ScalingBitcoin on how a block size increase up to 3600x the present size and a change of proof-of-work can be achieved with a fully backwards compatible soft-fork—old clients see all transactions and valid SHA256 block headers.

It's a bullshit argument.  If it changes the security model at all, even slightly, it's a change in fungibility, and thus a hard fork because fungibility was altered.  They only attempt to use this poor argument because bitcoin isn't even fungible (and thus impossible to be money) in the first place.  So the Luke Jr "soft fork" hack is really a hard fork.  You'll notice Jbreher stole this argument of mine and used it to try and promote Bcash lol.

It's getting old watching these people in cryptocurrency trying to raise and lower levers up and down to do arbitrary changes at will exactly like Keynesian central bankers while pretending these things are "decentralized".
They're completely centralized on both the development front and mining front.  This stuff is all a complete joke decentralization-wise compared to physical metals.

[Phil_S]

Lingering in the middle... it might take a while.

[realr0ach]

One thing I find interesting is people pretending the implosion of Bitmain is a non-factor in Bitcoin.  As I've said a billion times before, a single entity operating on Bitfinex controls the entire bitcoin market.  There are very few possibilities for this entity:

1)  Chinese mining cartel (Bitmain)

2)  Some TBTF Jew bank like Goldman Sachs

3)  The ESF

4)  The Bitfinex owners themselves operating in MtGox fashion (already know they're involved for sure as co-conspirators, but it might not be their money/trades and they might just take a cut as hush money)

In other words, if this single entity operating on Bitfinex that controls the entire bitcoin price turns out to be Bitmain and Bitmain leaves the market, this market is fucked.

[xyzzy099]

Funny. When we pointed out that soft forks -- which Coreans put forth as being inherently safe -- were capable of making any change whatsoever, we were shouted down as FUDsters. Now a Corean is putting forth this very same truism as new knowledge, and the masses are proclaiming some new revelation.

I don't think "the masses" are proclaiming any revelations  

One guy says he will do a presentation demonstrating a way such soft forks can be done.  As of this writing, this claim is still unsubstantiated, and it may turn out that there are issues that make his method unworkable in practice - or he may have genuinely have found a way to soft fork any change.  In either case, there certainly has not been any blind acceptance by "the masses" of Mark's claim nor any 'proclaiming' of anything related to it.

You say "when we pointed out that soft forks ... were capable of making any change whatsoever , we were shouted down as FUDsters".  I was not aware that you and some others had already presented a method to do this kind of thing (and apparently had your method rebuked and refused by 'coreans')...  Can you provide a link to the presentation (and hopefully the 'corean' rebuking as well)?

[realr0ach]

Changes that alter the security model or fungiblity are NOT soft forks, NOOBS.

[JayJuanGee]

(which includes my already assertion that it takes a whole hell-of-a-lot of posting of bullshit nonsense in order to get banned from this forum, which Anunymint/shelby has accomplished on numerous occasions, which also substantiates the likelihood that his ideas don't really deserve any special treatment because even he was not able to present them without unnecessary and irrelevant provocations.

JayJuanGoyim, you will agree with Anonymint whether you like it or not:

The realrOach is making some sense.  Is something wrong in the world?

@MarkFriedenbach https://twitter.com/MarkFriedenbach/status/1030211193544134658
I will be giving a talk at #ScalingBitcoin on how a block size increase up to 3600x the present size and a change of proof-of-work can be achieved with a fully backwards compatible soft-fork—old clients see all transactions and valid SHA256 block headers.

It's a bullshit argument.  If it changes the security model at all, even slightly, it's a change in fungibility, and thus a hard fork because fungibility was altered.  They only attempt to use this poor argument because bitcoin isn't even fungible (and thus impossible to be money) in the first place.  So the Luke Jr "soft fork" hack is really a hard fork.  You'll notice Jbreher stole this argument of mine and used it to try and promote Bcash lol.

It's getting old watching these people in cryptocurrency trying to raise and lower levers up and down to do arbitrary changes at will exactly like Keynesian central bankers while pretending these things are "decentralized".
They're completely centralized on both the development front and mining front.  This stuff is all a complete joke decentralization-wise compared to physical metals.

Oh my gawd!!!!!  

Two posts in a row making sense from roach the poach.

One thing I find interesting is people pretending the implosion of Bitmain is a non-factor in Bitcoin.  As I've said a billion times before, a single entity operating on Bitfinex controls the entire bitcoin market.  There are very few possibilities for this entity:

1)  Chinese mining cartel (Bitmain)

2)  Some TBTF Jew bank like Goldman Sachs

3)  The ESF

4)  The Bitfinex owners themselves operating in MtGox fashion (already know they're involved for sure as co-conspirators, but it might not be their money/trades and they might just take a cut as hush money)

In other words, if this single entity operating on Bitfinex that controls the entire bitcoin price turns out to be Bitmain and Bitmain leaves the market, this market is fucked.

Whew!!!!!!  What a relief!!!!!  Back to normal with some bitcoin is gonna die from one cause nonsense.  I feel better now.

[ivomm]

I know that feeling. Today it happened again for n-th time  

[El duderino_]

[El duderino_]

(which includes my already assertion that it takes a whole hell-of-a-lot of posting of bullshit nonsense in order to get banned from this forum, which Anunymint/shelby has accomplished on numerous occasions, which also substantiates the likelihood that his ideas don't really deserve any special treatment because even he was not able to present them without unnecessary and irrelevant provocations. 

JayJuanGoyim, you will agree with Anonymint whether you like it or not:

The realrOach is making some sense.  Is something wrong in the world?

one day even the realr0ach will become a coiner 

[El duderino_]

*Australians can now pay everyday bills with Bitcoin NICE but i will just HODL them

[JayJuanGee]

(which includes my already assertion that it takes a whole hell-of-a-lot of posting of bullshit nonsense in order to get banned from this forum, which Anunymint/shelby has accomplished on numerous occasions, which also substantiates the likelihood that his ideas don't really deserve any special treatment because even he was not able to present them without unnecessary and irrelevant provocations.

JayJuanGoyim, you will agree with Anonymint whether you like it or not:

The realrOach is making some sense.  Is something wrong in the world?

one day even the realr0ach will become a coiner  

He seems to know so much about bitcoin, so you gotta wonder why Roach dee poach would be so dumb and not already own at least a bit of coin (like a secret hedge on the side?) (by the way, we know that he already did own some coin in the 2015 time frame, and that is where the term "getting roached" or "getting BJA'd" comes into play)... Perhaps, like Stolfi, Roachie poachie wants to maintain some semblance of journalistic "impartiality", if that is even possible?

[Karartma1]

Code:

that mayor
Last of the V8s
Elwar
Anon136
becoin
jbreher
jojo69
Gyrsur
samson
yefi
bitserve
DaRude
Searing
kromer
kurious
mymenace
jonoiv
fragout
xhomerx10
strawbs
Asrael999
gentlemand
Torque
holzer
HairyMaclairy
Hueristic
slowlyslowly
RayX12
JayJuanGee
criptix
LFC_Bitcoin
BTCMILLIONAIRE
bones261
RoomBot
BobLawblaw
gembitz
Raja_MBZ
Millionero
ivomm
33bitcoin
Aveatrex
Phil_S
Ludwig Von
Icygreen
josephpogi
micgoossens
goldkingcoiner
realr0ach
diesmaster
kirreev070
serveria.com
leetlezee
RivAngE
BTCHadzija
asiwajuadejumo

After reading that list I feel lonely and desperate.

[El duderino_]

‘Bitcoin Jesus’ Is Having a Hard Time Winning Over True Believers

...Bitcoin Cash payments slumped to $3.7 million in May from a high of $10.5 million in March.

BITCOIN JESUS turned into to the BITCOIN CLOWN as proven by this spreadsheet

[El duderino_]

Code:

that mayor
Last of the V8s
Elwar
Anon136
becoin
jbreher
jojo69
Gyrsur
samson
yefi
bitserve
DaRude
Searing
kromer
kurious
mymenace
jonoiv
fragout
xhomerx10
strawbs
Asrael999
gentlemand
Torque
holzer
HairyMaclairy
Hueristic
slowlyslowly
RayX12
JayJuanGee
criptix
LFC_Bitcoin
BTCMILLIONAIRE
bones261
RoomBot
BobLawblaw
gembitz
Raja_MBZ
Millionero
ivomm
33bitcoin
Aveatrex
Phil_S
Ludwig Von
Icygreen
josephpogi
micgoossens
goldkingcoiner
realr0ach
diesmaster
kirreev070
serveria.com
leetlezee
RivAngE
BTCHadzija
asiwajuadejumo

After reading that list I feel lonely and desperate.

who's list is that one   

[Last of the V8s]

it was just a joke list
seems a long time ago now

[Last of the V8s]

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-45245149
Bitcoin buster? The search for a more stable cryptocurrency
By Matthew Wall Technology of Business editor

-front page of BBC today
-shilling for Goldman and other scammers

[Totscha]

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-45245149
Bitcoin buster? The search for a more stable cryptocurrency
By Matthew Wall Technology of Business editor

-front page of BBC today
-shilling for Goldman and other scammers

TLDR:
- Bitcoin sucks donkey balls
- Stablecoins are a short term distraction
- EOS and Stellar are the future

I puked in my mouth a bit to improve the taste I got from reading the article...