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

[Fatman3001]

We now have another faketoshi on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/satoshi/status/1063516638870478848

This is Craig Wright, pretending to be Satoshi again. Apparently, he managed to sign a message with Hal Finney's private key, somehow. (Edit: or he might've pulled up an old Hal Finney signature)

The scuttlebutt is that he signed it in a non-standard way, kind of like when he "signed" a message as Satoshi to convince Gavin that he's Satoshi.

Unless you know how to check this yourself you might want to wait with the conclusions until some more people who can check this have.

[1686360537]

1686360537

[Raja_MBZ]

We now have another faketoshi on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/satoshi/status/1063516638870478848

This is Craig Wright, pretending to be Satoshi again. Apparently, he managed to sign a message with Hal Finney's private key, somehow. (Edit: or he might've pulled up an old Hal Finney signature)

The scuttlebutt is that he signed it in a non-standard way, kind of like when he "signed" a message as Satoshi to convince Gavin that he's Satoshi.

Seems like Craig did PhD in handling multiple Twitter accounts, not in Computer Science.

[JayJuanGee]

Rastani throws in the towel, capitulation begins

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRCYQz6EAAY

I watched that about 8 minute long video, and I agree with his conclusion that if certain support levels break, then the probabilities also break; however, I don't agree with his position that any of us should sell now... hahahahaha   

By the way, there is a kind of assumption, in his whole analysis, that bitcoin is a mature market.  Good luck with that assumption... Surely, he could be correct that bitcoin breaks lower than $5k or lower than $4k, but it is likely no way as near as inevitable to break down to those levels as he seems to be arguing to be "likely."

By the way, after i watched the above nonsense video, another better video came up in my cue - which is worth sharing, here, which was a one hour discussion from yesterday, I believe, between Adam Meister and Trace Mayer.

[video=youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN5uZXcwLlE[/video]

There are a few moments in which Trace is either a bit too brutal (on no-coiners, those distracted by shitcoin and those who don't take enough personal security measures with their bitcoin), and even seemed to have been patting himself on his back a bit much, but nontheless, there seems to some brutal truth, too, in what he is asserting in terms of distinguishing between what bitcoin offers, as compared with the other snake-oil crap that is out there... and even the discussion of making sure that you are neither distracted by the voluminous white noise in the space nor shook out of your bitcoins.

Even though Trace is likely correct that more personal security in securing your bitcoin needs to be of a very high priority for HODLers, his solutions seem to neither be user-friendly nor in the grasp of a very large number of regular people... so his seeming discounting of security of the trezor and ledger storage solutions seems to be a bit too hyperbolic, at least from my perspective about reasonable and adequate personal security measures.

I have heard him in other interviews, however, suggest that level of personal security will also relate to how much value that a person is trying to secure in bitcoin, and as the value of the coin goes up, the amount of effort in security has to go up too.. so in that regard, the higher the value of the bitcoins the greater the security measures that peeps are going to need to take to secure their coins.

[barota]

Eh, it will go to 6502 and get stuck. Again.

i agree with you , 6000 usd per btc can be easily for short terms

You have to be ready to buy, friends

[Last of the V8s]

Huge resistance at 6k surely? Our support for so long.
So many latecomers who bought at 6-6.5k will be happy to take a small loss.

[JayJuanGee]

In the midst of this despair, I just wanted to surface the observation that anybody who has been holding bitcoin for more the thirteen months is in the green.

That is all.

I would like to say that you and your buddies caused all of this, but that would not be accurate.. because if they did anything, they exacerbated a preexisting condition... so in that regard, I would not be genuine if I were really blaming anyone personally for things that happen, including both extreme things and things that are a bit beyond expectations (while still being within a reasonable realm of what could happen).   

[JayJuanGee]

Rastani throws in the towel, capitulation begins

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRCYQz6EAAY

He's one of my favorite analysts.

TLDW: We're going to $4,000-$4,500

No chance. We’re at the bottom now. I’m buying right now and will keep buying all the way back to $6,500.

I like your hypothesis better, QuestionAuthority, but the others have kind of substantiated their view with external TA or with their own arguments. Why do you think the bottom is in? Please share.

I'd also love to hear a contrarian opinion, like Tera's. Alas, (s)he's not here anymore.

I wish the hopium you guys have was worth something because I would be buying it. The same type of logic that said we would not be going below $6k, yet here we are. Just because you don't understand what TA is, doesn't mean that your opinion holds any weight.

Keep clinging to your stance. I will keep buying all the way down to ~$2200.

If you are so smart, PoolMinor, then 1) you gotta be really richie and 2) why would you buy all the way down to $2,200 rather than just waiting for $2,200 and buy at that seemingly "inevitable" BTC price point?  Does not make sense to buy "all the way down."  Did you misspeak about your supposed BTC buying plan?

[PoolMinor]

Rastani throws in the towel, capitulation begins

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRCYQz6EAAY

He's one of my favorite analysts.

TLDW: We're going to $4,000-$4,500

No chance. We’re at the bottom now. I’m buying right now and will keep buying all the way back to $6,500.

I like your hypothesis better, QuestionAuthority, but the others have kind of substantiated their view with external TA or with their own arguments. Why do you think the bottom is in? Please share.

I'd also love to hear a contrarian opinion, like Tera's. Alas, (s)he's not here anymore.

I wish the hopium you guys have was worth something because I would be buying it. The same type of logic that said we would not be going below $6k, yet here we are. Just because you don't understand what TA is, doesn't mean that your opinion holds any weight.

Keep clinging to your stance. I will keep buying all the way down to ~$2200.

If you are so smart, PoolMinor, then 1) you gotta be really richie and 2) why would you buy all the way down to $2,200 rather than just waiting for $2,200 and buy at that seemingly "inevitable" BTC price point?  Does not make sense to buy "all the way down."  Did you misspeak about your supposed BTC buying plan?

As a long term trader I think you would have a reasonable idea as to why to buy all the way down. If you don't understand, sorry, I don't have time to enlighten you at this time.

[gentlemand]

Unless you know how to check this yourself you might want to wait with the conclusions until some more people who can check this have.

Fatmantoshi?

I guess we'll have to wait for a few more misplaced commas before we can be sure.

[Torque]

Before people go off trying to deify Satoshi, they need to remember (or be informed) that Gavin himself was correcting Satoshi's coding mistakes. That was before even sharper devs came into the project.

We are all following an open source project with principles and with 100+ genius core devs.

We are NOT following a single person.

[JayJuanGee]

Rastani throws in the towel, capitulation begins

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRCYQz6EAAY

He's one of my favorite analysts.

TLDW: We're going to $4,000-$4,500

No chance. We’re at the bottom now. I’m buying right now and will keep buying all the way back to $6,500.

I like your hypothesis better, QuestionAuthority, but the others have kind of substantiated their view with external TA or with their own arguments. Why do you think the bottom is in? Please share.

I'd also love to hear a contrarian opinion, like Tera's. Alas, (s)he's not here anymore.

I wish the hopium you guys have was worth something because I would be buying it. The same type of logic that said we would not be going below $6k, yet here we are. Just because you don't understand what TA is, doesn't mean that your opinion holds any weight.

Keep clinging to your stance. I will keep buying all the way down to ~$2200.

If you are so smart, PoolMinor, then 1) you gotta be really richie and 2) why would you buy all the way down to $2,200 rather than just waiting for $2,200 and buy at that seemingly "inevitable" BTC price point?  Does not make sense to buy "all the way down."  Did you misspeak about your supposed BTC buying plan?

As a long term trader I think you would have a reasonable idea as to why to buy all the way down. If you don't understand, sorry, I don't have time to enlighten you at this time.

I am not asking from my perspective, I am asking from your perspective based on your assertion of supposed wisdom about 1) other peeps in this thread filled with too much hopium and 2) your assertion that BTC prics are going down to $2,200. 

So my questions are not about what I think, but instead asking you about what you think, why and what you are doing about it, and instead of attempting to respond, you just diverted into putting such burden on me - when my outlook seems to be different from yours and the reason for my approach seems to be different from yours, too - even if we might happen to be following a similar strategy.  Furthermore, I do not have any strong presumptions that the BTC price is going down, and I especially think that any targeting of $2,200 would be quite pie in the sky, even though there is a chance that such price could happen.. maybe less than 5% (concedingly that such odds of $2,200 are a bit higher now as compared with last week, but they still remain pretty low, in my humble bumble opinion).

[JayJuanGee]

Before people go off trying to deify Satoshi, they need to remember (or be informed) that Gavin himself was correcting Satoshi's coding mistakes. That was before even sharper devs came into the project.

We are all following an open source project with principles and with 100+ genius core devs.

We are NOT following a single person.

Don't go too far with your seeming attempts at nonsense openmindedness concerning the identity of Satoshi, Torque.

Surely, Satoshi was far from perfect, but to concede that his level of either sloppiness or bullshitedness was even close to the pig troughs of Craig Wright seems to allow for way too much "openmindedness" that is hardly supported by any kind of evidence at all, besides pie in the sky conspiracy-theory numerology type evidence.   

[Syke]

We now have another faketoshi on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/satoshi/status/1063516638870478848

This is Craig Wright, pretending to be Satoshi again. Apparently, he managed to sign a message with Hal Finney's private key, somehow. (Edit: or he might've pulled up an old Hal Finney signature)

The scuttlebutt is that he signed it in a non-standard way, kind of like when he "signed" a message as Satoshi to convince Gavin that he's Satoshi.

This is the real mystery, the @satoshi twitter handle "Joined May 2018". How in the world did squatters not nab that one earlier?

And yeah, without a publicly released signed message signed with the private key from block 0, he's not Satoshi. It's that simple.

[Torque]

Before people go off trying to deify Satoshi, they need to remember (or be informed) that Gavin himself was correcting Satoshi's coding mistakes. That was before even sharper devs came into the project.

We are all following an open source project with principles and with 100+ genius core devs.

We are NOT following a single person.

Don't go too far with your seeming attempts at nonsense openmindedness concerning the identity of Satoshi, Torque.

Surely, Satoshi was far from perfect, but to concede that his level of either sloppiness or bullshitedness was even close to the pig troughs of Craig Wright seems to allow for way too much "openmindedness" that is hardly supported by any kind of evidence at all, besides pie in the sky conspiracy-theory numerology type evidence.    

I wasn't even coming close to inferring that CSW could be Satoshi, JJG. That's what you mistakenly read in my post. CSW is a straight up con-man, a fraud.

I was simply saying that who Satoshi is or was, no longer matters, nor should it for Bitcoin to be successful. Just like if Linus Torvalds were to exit the Linux project, or die tomorrow, it's continued development wouldn't suffer a bit. Especially because he tends to be an asshole anyway. 

[BTCMILLIONAIRE]

Before people go off trying to deify Satoshi, they need to remember (or be informed) that Gavin himself was correcting Satoshi's coding mistakes. That was before even sharper devs came into the project.

We are all following an open source project with principles and with 100+ genius core devs.

We are NOT following a single person.

Coding is mostly grunt work. If Satoshi came up with the general idea himself the credit goes largely to him. Turning preconceived things into code is the easier part.


I do agree that it's irrelevant where Satoshi is now regarding Bitcoin's success. Once an idea is out in the wild it will prevail, given that it's good enough in the first place.

[Astargath]

We now have another faketoshi on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/satoshi/status/1063516638870478848

This is Craig Wright, pretending to be Satoshi again. Apparently, he managed to sign a message with Hal Finney's private key, somehow. (Edit: or he might've pulled up an old Hal Finney signature)

The scuttlebutt is that he signed it in a non-standard way, kind of like when he "signed" a message as Satoshi to convince Gavin that he's Satoshi.

Seems like Craig did PhD in handling multiple Twitter accounts, not in Computer Science.

Also what about the fact that satoshi himself said something like BCH would be a bad idea? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=195.msg1611#msg1611

[yefi]

would be nice to freeze me in on my AGE as i am now and just release me @2021-ish at my AGE of now and just see where i'm standing .....
wouldn't that be a nice move

Would be best to not grow old at all.

Damn this universe and its tick-tockery.

No chance. We’re at the bottom now. I’m buying right now and will keep buying all the way back to $6,500.

I wouldn't be too eager to buy. We'll probably need a new round of consolidation before the next bull run commences, and who knows what level that will occur at.

[Last of the V8s]

hmm not sure the body's cold quite yet

[Spaceman_Spiff_Original]

would be nice to freeze me in on my AGE as i am now and just release me @2021-ish at my AGE of now and just see where i'm standing .....
wouldn't that be a nice move

Would be best to not grow old at all.

Damn this universe and its tick-tockery.

You might be aware of this already, but I'll leave it here anyway : sens.org .

[JayJuanGee]

Before people go off trying to deify Satoshi, they need to remember (or be informed) that Gavin himself was correcting Satoshi's coding mistakes. That was before even sharper devs came into the project.

We are all following an open source project with principles and with 100+ genius core devs.

We are NOT following a single person.

Coding is mostly grunt work. If Satoshi came up with the general idea himself the credit goes largely to him. Turning preconceived things into code is the easier part.


I do agree that it's irrelevant where Satoshi is now regarding Bitcoin's success. Once an idea is out in the wild it will prevail, given that it's good enough in the first place.

My overall general understanding of the situation was that Satoshi had largely already coded bitcoin by the time that he released the whitepaper in September 2008, and surely there were some tweaks to the code before he began running the code live on January 3, 2009.  I think that the generally accepted story is that Satoshi was not really a great coder, which caused needs for a considerable number of tweaks - however, also, since there was ongoing attempts to continue to learn after the software went live, there had always been analogy suggestions that the fixing of bitcoin was like performing improvements and repairs on an airplane that continued to fly, and the repairs/maintenance were always necessary on an ongoing basis, but they were never so eggregious that the plane had to be landed (even though there may have been a few close calls), but the plane has been allowed to grow and really open to the participation of almost anyone to contribute to the project who shared goals to attempt to keep the plane flying and to attempt to improve its performance while at the same time, perhaps shutting out folks who expressed desires to either crash the plane or to undermine the plane in various ways.  So surely you are correct, BTCMILLIONAIRE, that the flying of the plane has become much BIGGER than satoshi.. because maybe when he started working on it, it was a 1 engine propeller plane, but it has become much more with the passage of time.

Edit: Astargath seems to have addressed some of what I am saying with his reference to satoshi's post.  Thanks for that link (and thread) Astargath:

Also what about the fact that satoshi himself said something like BCH would be a bad idea? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=195.msg1611#msg1611