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

[bitserve]

In other news, what is WO take on giving btc to your own children? Worth it or idiotic since they don't know how to hold it safely?

I've been giving each of my progeny -- chillens and grandchillens -- one BTC (and one BCH ((and one BSV)) ) each year since years.

I look at the addresses each year to see how they're doing with them. All hodled tightly except for minimal percentages of daughter and one son, in whom I have instructed on the incremental laddered standing order plan.

Your practice alone is going to cause a BTC supply shortage.  Just think about the many poor folks around the world who are not even going to be able to own .1 BTC and many of your progeny will have several BTC each.  

By the way, the bcash variants are not likely to have and impact on the world in any kind of meaningful way, and if they hold them more than a few years, they are likely to increasingly decrease in value - perhaps even faster than the dollar, so likely they should spend those bcash variants first.   or better yet, convert them into BTC. #gresham's law

Building a family dynasty? I like it, until the grand kids trades it all for Facebook coin.

I had already expressed a couple of years ago that I don't think it is a good idea (especially giving a whole coin each year... that is ridiculous)... but whatever.. it is a child rearing choice that is totally within his discretion.

I think it's more than great if he has the funds to do so and the patience to not be upset if they do something silly with it. (As he does occasionally check their addresses it seems) The second part would probably be the hardest.

In my thinking it's not about generosity exactly, but instead trying to figure out ways that kids are going to develop their own self initiatives.

Let's say jbreher got into bitcoin around the same time that he began his forum account in 2011, and therefore started giving 1BTC per christmas per kid/grandkid then living.  The value of that gift changed stupendously, and the kid/grandkids who are at least 8 years old received 8BTC each, so far.

Perhaps, I don't know enough about the situation, but it seems both sloppy and reckless, from my perspective  - and jbreher's earlier explanation did not make too much sense to me, just like the quasi-unrelated concept of his ongoing support of bcash (including faketoshi) don't make much sense to me.  And, all of those are within his discretion... and the only way that we (am I using the royal we, here?) know about all of those ideations and practices of his and can talk about them, is because, at various times, he told us about them.

Jbreher is right in what he is doing (in regards to his family gifts). You are wrong. We already discussed this in the past

Of course most of the part of it is not just giving (that's the easy part in this case) but also educating about it. I am assuming jbreher also has that part well covered.

[1714317861]

1714317861

[1714317861]

1714317861

[1714317861]

1714317861

[1714317861]

1714317861

[JayJuanGee]

Would you be so kind as to enlighten me on slippage? In what way would it screw with trading?

I would assume the implication was that: if real volume be truly that large, then slippage should be much less than that experienced.

I understand the correlation between volume and slippage, but I'm not sure how exactly those contracts work as I've never used or read into them.

The particular trade that I found galling had me enter a stop loss at $xx93 (which was below a major support point).  The price fell through the support and the sell order executed at $xx20, which is $73 in slippage.

The most slippage I have previously experienced on breaking major support was $13 on Bitstamp at a much higher price (therefor far lower slippage in percentage terms).

This leads me to believe that either: (a) Bitmex has exceptionally poor liquidity or (b) their proprietary trading desk is front running trades or (c) they are deliberately discriminating against fish in the order book.

The net result is the same.

While there are some complexities around whether one uses the last, mark or index price as trigger, it really all comes out in the same place.  None of this should be impacted by the particular rules of the instrument, and this was not a liquidation (I have never been liquidated and don’t intend to start).

I have had a number of other trades on Bitmex where my slippage has been about 10x what I would expect.   Given that Bitmex supposedly has 10x the volume of Bitstamp and 10x liquidity, something is rotten in the State of Seychelles.  I would go so far as to say either they are front running their own customers or their organic volume is about 1% of what they claim.  

Makes sense. OR... maybe traders at Bitmex are *WAY* more prone to using leverage and stop loses which causes *HUGE* slippage due to "cascading" than Bitstamp traders. Think about it... it also makes some sense.

Something like this is what I was thinking too.  It may NOT cause as BIG of an effect to completely discount Hairy's criticism, but there could be some magnifying effect that happens with the use of leverage and margin trading that disproportionately causes the prices swings to be much greater.. and perhaps that would be because some BIGGER players (and it does not even have to be Bitmex, though logically they would seem to be the most likely suspect, because if some other BIGG players were doing it, then Bitmex would be able to verify what happened and develop ways to put a stop to it or at least ameliorate some of the effects) .... so yeah, the more that I write, through this thought process, the more I am coming over to Hairy's suspicions about the real cause, which is ultimately, way less liquidity than they claim to have...

I suppose that it would make a difference if it rises to 90% less liquidity or merely 50% less or some more innocent misrepresentation.  

Thr thing is we don't have enough information to reach a clear conclusion. Without it, there are several alternative plausible explanations. Who knows.....

Don't get me wrong, I am very skeptical of the various mainstream news outlets pumping out this common line that bitcoin's trade volume is like less than 10% of what is claimed, and actually, they don't even say bitcoin, exactly, it is some kind of amorphous claim about "crypto", whatever the fuck that is?  Furthermore, there seem to be some claims that the only valid volume are the trades that are processed through the orderbooks, and surely on the face, we should be able to recognize the bullshit angle to that kind of claim.

Otherwise, I agree with you that whatever is being used for information to reach these various conclusions are frequently incomplete.. and I suppose that is why we are batting it around here... and might even come up with some better analysis ourselves, perhaps?  That's not a given either.

[GreatArkansas]

What's next? hmmmmm


https://www.tradingview.com/chart/XBTUSD/zOOMUerE-Weekly-Candle-Analysis/

[realr0ach]

What's next? hmmmmm

https://i.imgur.com/c1uzuv1.png
https://www.tradingview.com/chart/XBTUSD/zOOMUerE-Weekly-Candle-Analysis/

Some of the least convincing analysis one way or another I've ever seen lol.  Comparing vertical cliff face rises in an artificial pump and dump with sideways noise movement then pretending there is any type of data that can be extrapolated here...

[jojo69]

A lot of the Brexit issues relate to the privileged position the UK has as a member of the EU. For example financial passporting which allows UK financial institutions to sell financial services into the EU. With Brexit, this door slams shut.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/brexit-passporting-rights-eea-explained-what-does-it-mean-for-banks-economy-pound-euro-a8065131.html

These are the sorts of issues that are causing operations to move from Manchester and Leeds to Frankfurt, Dublin and Luxembourg. Ironically it is the lower paid white collar workers performing back office functions in the Brexit belt that will be hit hardest, along with pink collar functions like HR and PR.

and the downside?

[realr0ach]

and the downside?

Andrew Yang becomes president, gives everyone on earth $1000 a month simply for existing, and the cost of bread is $100 per loaf.

[bitserve]

Hey r0ach, stop talking to yourself and just try to offer some good trading advice.

I mean, even if you don't do crypto anymore (which is not that clear considering your recent admission of hodling at least some until $19000) you are always speculating about it so.... What would you consider good entry and exit points? (either short or long). Because, you do know something about trading, don't you?

[JayJuanGee]

and perhaps that would be because some BIGGER players

Word on the street is that JayJuanGee alias "mouthpanties" is one of the biggest players of all:

Huh?  I almost was sucked into stating my preferences and practices, and then I thought, it's none of your fucking business, roachie poachie.. especially, since you don't seem to understand certain concepts...

Anyhow. I do do alright for myself, generally speaking.   From time to time, there are dry spells, but at least, I get frequent reminders about how it feels to cuddle up with a woman, and I would not feel comfortable, at all, cuddling with some gold or silver coins, which seems to be your ongoing problem area, especially since they do not seem to be gaining in value or to have gained any such appreciation likelihood... which could at least allow you to buy some temporary attention.   

[HairyMaclairy]

A lot of the Brexit issues relate to the privileged position the UK has as a member of the EU. For example financial passporting which allows UK financial institutions to sell financial services into the EU. With Brexit, this door slams shut.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/brexit-passporting-rights-eea-explained-what-does-it-mean-for-banks-economy-pound-euro-a8065131.html

These are the sorts of issues that are causing operations to move from Manchester and Leeds to Frankfurt, Dublin and Luxembourg. Ironically it is the lower paid white collar workers performing back office functions in the Brexit belt that will be hit hardest, along with pink collar functions like HR and PR.

and the downside?

Ummm much of the service centers built in the UK rust belt over the last decade, creating real wage increases and supporting the local economy, will be downsized or leave?  I don’t think many people realize how important financial services are to the UK economy.  It will be like austerity but not as cheerful?

[realr0ach]

I would not feel comfortable, at all, cuddling with some gold or silver coins

How do you "cuddle" up with a bitcoin?  They don't even exist.  You're paying $4000 for a time stamp.  The only thing that distinguishes them from worthless fiats is that it might be more difficult for Jews to print them into hyperinflation if you pretend altcoins don't exist. Transaction validators are designed to centralize and they're non-fungible (the two attributes guarantee it's a permissioned ledger) so it still has all the same other drawbacks of Jewish fiat notes if not even worse in some aspects like abolishing the 5th amendment by using it.

So your only real selling point is "buy this garbage because it's more difficult for the Jews to cause hyperinflation?"  That's not that good of a selling point when nobody holds US dollars to try and make money in the first place. Everyone already dumps the dollars and uses them to purchase actual investments like land, real estate, business, etc.  'Money' isn't supposed to be an investment or pay some type of dividend, it's supposed to simply have the aspect of stability.

Bitcoin is designed as some sort of multi-level marketing pyramid scheme with it's completely arbitrary halvings, which is the actual thing you're trying to sell.  I will do well holding physical metals simply because the ESF has artificially rigged them downward to oblivion in an inverse bubble to try and prop up the dollar.  For you to do well, you're required to trick people into a multi-level marketing scheme.

[Dabs]

For you to do well, you're required to trick people into a multi-level marketing scheme.

Multi Level Marketing, or just network marketing, or word of mouth marketing isn't bad in and of itself. The bigger companies that have the so called stair step break away compensation plans have been around for 20 or 30 years. The corporate leaders are mostly Mormons too, not Jews.

[jojo69]

The weekly has closed. The first weekly close above the MA20 since July.

my chart hasn't closed yet...and is trying to just eke out a 6th green candle

[JayJuanGee]

I would not feel comfortable, at all, cuddling with some gold or silver coins

How do you "cuddle" up with a bitcoin?  

In my earlier post, I was only addressing some earlier claim that you cuddle up with silver/gold... blah blah blah... and comparing that to cuddling with a woman.  My own error, not to be making such comparison to bitcoin, and your desire to purposefully convolute such point into a new thing about which you would like to talk.

Bitcoin is designed as some sort of multi-level marketing pyramid scheme with it's completely arbitrary halvings, which is the actual thing you're trying to sell.  I will do well holding physical metals simply because the ESF has artificially rigged them downward to oblivion in an inverse bubble to try and prop up the dollar.  For you to do well, you're required to trick people into a multi-level marketing scheme.

I will just briefly touch upon this last point of yours, which is nonsense, like most of your other bitcoin points.. in which you conveniently convolute concepts and seem to be directing your criticisms towards some amorphous digital currency concepts rather than making head on discussions of bitcoin, which should be more  of our focus in this thread. 

Anyhow, to me, it seems that you have been attempting to reach such MLM conclusion about bitcoin based on your own personal (but wrong) assessment that bitcoin does not have fundamental value or use cases, and you have batted your many reasons around the thread for years, which are wrong...   .

Whenever anyone actually describes some use cases for bitcoin or various other fundamental reasons for BTC to hold and to increase in value, you fail/refuse to address those kinds of issues... just like a troll or shill.  Wait?  Are you a troll/shill?  Go figure? 

So is there any use to go back and forth with your willful ongoing ignorance..? likely not.  Just a BIG ASS waste of time, and thread space, and you will continue to bat around your same talking points that are mostly conclusory, rather than based on actual relevant and/or  meaningful facts and logic.

Anyhow, on its own, bitcoin provides utility through its ability to permissionlessly transport value anywhere, including millions or billions of dollars of value.. for low cost and relative ease... try doing that with gold and silver...   Try authenticating your gold and silver like you can with bitcoin.. try moving gold/silver across borders (especially large quantities) like you can with bitcoin.. try dividing gold/silver into small, precise, exact or useable quantities like you can with bitcoin.. try storing gold/silver securely (especially large quantities) like you can with bitcoin.

In other words,  Stop being stubborn and spreading your ill-informed phoney baloney, you dumb-ass fool...

In essence, you can still buy into bitcoin (if you are not already), and helping you with a plan might be a better use of your time and energies within this thread.  We can help you.  And maybe your future richness (rather than gold/silver stagnation and preparation for a future that is never going to come) will help you to meet a nice girl, too, in order that you can moderate some hateful thoughts, too?  Perhaps?  You are still salvageable, you nazi loving bimbazo?

[Lambie Slayer]

Yesterday I saw Ryan Goslings Bitcoin movie from last year. It was pretty decent. Kind of a bummer when his buddies were dropping like flies for the cause, but when Bitcoin went to the moon it was all worth it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r13XUKqCPk0&vl=en

I dont think Kurt Russel's Bitcoin movie is gonna come close to Ryans. Russian hysteria doesnt sell anymore.

[JayJuanGee]

Would you be so kind as to enlighten me on slippage? In what way would it screw with trading?

I would assume the implication was that: if real volume be truly that large, then slippage should be much less than that experienced.

I understand the correlation between volume and slippage, but I'm not sure how exactly those contracts work as I've never used or read into them.

The particular trade that I found galling had me enter a stop loss at $xx93 (which was below a major support point).  The price fell through the support and the sell order executed at $xx20, which is $73 in slippage.

The most slippage I have previously experienced on breaking major support was $13 on Bitstamp at a much higher price (therefor far lower slippage in percentage terms).

This leads me to believe that either: (a) Bitmex has exceptionally poor liquidity or (b) their proprietary trading desk is front running trades or (c) they are deliberately discriminating against fish in the order book.

The net result is the same.

While there are some complexities around whether one uses the last, mark or index price as trigger, it really all comes out in the same place.  None of this should be impacted by the particular rules of the instrument, and this was not a liquidation (I have never been liquidated and don’t intend to start).

I have had a number of other trades on Bitmex where my slippage has been about 10x what I would expect.   Given that Bitmex supposedly has 10x the volume of Bitstamp and 10x liquidity, something is rotten in the State of Seychelles.  I would go so far as to say either they are front running their own customers or their organic volume is about 1% of what they claim.  

Makes sense. OR... maybe traders at Bitmex are *WAY* more prone to using leverage and stop loses which causes *HUGE* slippage due to "cascading" than Bitstamp traders. Think about it... it also makes some sense.

Something like this is what I was thinking too.  It may NOT cause as BIG of an effect to completely discount Hairy's criticism, but there could be some magnifying effect that happens with the use of leverage and margin trading that disproportionately causes the prices swings to be much greater.. and perhaps that would be because some BIGGER players (and it does not even have to be Bitmex, though logically they would seem to be the most likely suspect, because if some other BIGG players were doing it, then Bitmex would be able to verify what happened and develop ways to put a stop to it or at least ameliorate some of the effects) .... so yeah, the more that I write, through this thought process, the more I am coming over to Hairy's suspicions about the real cause, which is ultimately, way less liquidity than they claim to have...

I suppose that it would make a difference if it rises to 90% less liquidity or merely 50% less or some more innocent misrepresentation.  

Thr thing is we don't have enough information to reach a clear conclusion. Without it, there are several alternative plausible explanations. Who knows.....

Don't get me wrong, I am very skeptical of the various mainstream news outlets pumping out this common line that bitcoin's trade volume is like less than 10% of what is claimed, and actually, they don't even say bitcoin, exactly, it is some kind of amorphous claim about "crypto", whatever the fuck that is?  Furthermore, there seem to be some claims that the only valid volume are the trades that are processed through the orderbooks, and surely on the face, we should be able to recognize the bullshit angle to that kind of claim.

Otherwise, I agree with you that whatever is being used for information to reach these various conclusions are frequently incomplete.. and I suppose that is why we are batting it around here... and might even come up with some better analysis ourselves, perhaps?  That's not a given either.

Yeah because if this includes pairings of shitcoins to bitcoin then its all the fake pump and dumps and bot controlled trades. Not a big surprise there.

I would not define it as fake merely because the trading is done by bots or merely because alt coins are the pairs.

Some of that bot action is legitimate, especially if they are paying fees to trade.  Of course, if they are not paying fees, then there are questions of wash trading, which implies that those trades do not have much value except to make it appear that an exchange has more trade volume than it does.

Regarding alts, it can be legitimate too and even effect BTC volume especially if it is paired with BTC, but I could give any shits about altcoins trading amongst themselves, so I am largely objecting to an ongoing convoluting of what is actually affecting bitcoin price dynamics by some vague references to activities that are going on with alts, ICOs or whatever else is lumped into the analysis and claims bing made, that are then imputed to bitcoin, too while they were failing to engage in a proper BTC focus.   

[JayJuanGee]

The weekly has closed. The first weekly close above the MA20 since July.

my chart hasn't closed yet...and is trying to just eke out a 6th green candle

I agree with you that each of these latest green candles are just barely green.. each week an additional green, but only a little.

Regarding the number of weekly green candles on stamp, I show as closed one green, one red and then five green ones.  The current one is green, but who cares, the current one is only a few hours old.

What I am trying to say is that there appears to be 5 green weekly candles in a row that are closed - not 6.

[JayJuanGee]

Would you be so kind as to enlighten me on slippage? In what way would it screw with trading?

I would assume the implication was that: if real volume be truly that large, then slippage should be much less than that experienced.

I understand the correlation between volume and slippage, but I'm not sure how exactly those contracts work as I've never used or read into them.

The particular trade that I found galling had me enter a stop loss at $xx93 (which was below a major support point).  The price fell through the support and the sell order executed at $xx20, which is $73 in slippage.

The most slippage I have previously experienced on breaking major support was $13 on Bitstamp at a much higher price (therefor far lower slippage in percentage terms).

This leads me to believe that either: (a) Bitmex has exceptionally poor liquidity or (b) their proprietary trading desk is front running trades or (c) they are deliberately discriminating against fish in the order book.

The net result is the same.

While there are some complexities around whether one uses the last, mark or index price as trigger, it really all comes out in the same place.  None of this should be impacted by the particular rules of the instrument, and this was not a liquidation (I have never been liquidated and don’t intend to start).

I have had a number of other trades on Bitmex where my slippage has been about 10x what I would expect.   Given that Bitmex supposedly has 10x the volume of Bitstamp and 10x liquidity, something is rotten in the State of Seychelles.  I would go so far as to say either they are front running their own customers or their organic volume is about 1% of what they claim.  

Makes sense. OR... maybe traders at Bitmex are *WAY* more prone to using leverage and stop loses which causes *HUGE* slippage due to "cascading" than Bitstamp traders. Think about it... it also makes some sense.

Something like this is what I was thinking too.  It may NOT cause as BIG of an effect to completely discount Hairy's criticism, but there could be some magnifying effect that happens with the use of leverage and margin trading that disproportionately causes the prices swings to be much greater.. and perhaps that would be because some BIGGER players (and it does not even have to be Bitmex, though logically they would seem to be the most likely suspect, because if some other BIGG players were doing it, then Bitmex would be able to verify what happened and develop ways to put a stop to it or at least ameliorate some of the effects) .... so yeah, the more that I write, through this thought process, the more I am coming over to Hairy's suspicions about the real cause, which is ultimately, way less liquidity than they claim to have...

I suppose that it would make a difference if it rises to 90% less liquidity or merely 50% less or some more innocent misrepresentation.  

Thr thing is we don't have enough information to reach a clear conclusion. Without it, there are several alternative plausible explanations. Who knows.....

Don't get me wrong, I am very skeptical of the various mainstream news outlets pumping out this common line that bitcoin's trade volume is like less than 10% of what is claimed, and actually, they don't even say bitcoin, exactly, it is some kind of amorphous claim about "crypto", whatever the fuck that is?  Furthermore, there seem to be some claims that the only valid volume are the trades that are processed through the orderbooks, and surely on the face, we should be able to recognize the bullshit angle to that kind of claim.

Otherwise, I agree with you that whatever is being used for information to reach these various conclusions are frequently incomplete.. and I suppose that is why we are batting it around here... and might even come up with some better analysis ourselves, perhaps?  That's not a given either.

Yeah because if this includes pairings of shitcoins to bitcoin then its all the fake pump and dumps and bot controlled trades. Not a big surprise there.

I would not define it as fake merely because the trading is done by bots or merely because alt coins are the pairs.

Some of that bot action is legitimate, especially if they are paying fees to trade.  Of course, if they are not paying fees, then there are questions of wash trading, which implies that those trades do not have much value except to make it appear that an exchange has more trade volume than it does.

Regarding alts, it can be legitimate too and even effect BTC volume especially if it is paired with BTC, but I could give any shits about altcoins trading amongst themselves, so I am largely objecting to an ongoing convoluting of what is actually affecting bitcoin price dynamics by some vague references to activities that are going on with alts, ICOs or whatever else is lumped into the analysis and claims bing made, that are then imputed to bitcoin, too while they were failing to engage in a proper BTC focus.   

I'm not talking your litecoins and dash here, I am talking your random bullshit ICO on a single random exchange that has 98% of the volume with 2% on discord otc. I have seen these coins having so much fake volume it's wild.

I guess I can kind of see your point, but if they are trading with actual BTC, then could still be honestly reflecting on BTC's trade volume... At least the initial acquisition of the coins with BTC.  Maybe ultimately we could just agree with bitserve that there is so much information that we do not know, even if we have some skepticisms about the reports that are being done in terms of their ultimate conclusions, their methodology in figuring out relevant facts and even their logic once they have some vague and alleged factual findings.

[JSRAW]

~snip~  

I'm not talking your litecoins and dash here, I am talking your random bullshit ICO on a single random exchange that has 98% of the volume with 2% on discord otc. I have seen these coins having so much fake volume it's wild.

One can find such fake volume in Hotbit. you can add a couple of exchange too but hotbit comes in the top.

[Lambie Slayer]

99 days into the new Baby Bull Market and all is well. 

Tomorrow is a big day as we hit the big One Zero Zero. 

Enjoy it while its young(that means accumulate as much as you can ), bc these days will fly by and before you know it our Bull will be full grown and striking fear in every Bears heart like this guy.

"Worlds Strongest Bull" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTU9Ww-dUcs

[realr0ach]

bitcoin provides utility through its ability to permissionlessly transport value anywhere

100% Wrong.  It's impossible for something to qualify as money unless it qualifies as an actual non-perishable commodity beforehand and none of those can be transferred over a telephone cord.  "Bitcoins" are simply worthless timestamps; it's a fake commodity.  You're trying to push the fraudulent, Keynesian, Plato school of money that money can be a completely arbitrary, imaginary widget disconnected from the physical world.  Plato was a Keynesian statist and the jibberish you're pushing is inherently the exact same statist position in essence.

You're also pretending bitcoin was created by 'god' himself as some type of perfect, flawless creation, when it was created by a central planner human being just like in any communist country and it doesn't even work at all because transaction validators are designed to centralize.  The philosophy behind imaginary widgets posing as money is ALWAYS Keynesian central planning at it's core.  Just because it's designed to deflate instead of inflate doesn't mean it's not a Keynesian system.

Humans live in the physical world, not imaginary 'cyberspace', and the only thing that can be transferred over a phone line is extremely perishable digital data like a Steam video game that might hold some value temporarily through artificial scarcity, but doesn't qualify as money or a store of value.  Artificial scarcity is NOT scarcity.  Real scarcity can form a Schelling point, artificial scarcity can only form an endless stream of pump and dump scams while the last one is left to rot for the next one in perpetuity.