Bitcoin Forum
April 25, 2019, 06:53:52 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: Probability that we've seen the bottom of this bear market:
0% - 4 (3%)
1-5% - 4 (3%)
6-10% - 1 (0.8%)
11-15% - 1 (0.8%)
16-20% - 2 (1.5%)
21-25% - 2 (1.5%)
26-30% - 2 (1.5%)
31-35% - 1 (0.8%)
36-40% - 5 (3.8%)
41-45% - 2 (1.5%)
46-50% - 7 (5.3%)
51-55% - 8 (6%)
56-60% - 2 (1.5%)
61-65% - 2 (1.5%)
66-70% - 9 (6.8%)
71-75% - 8 (6%)
76-80% - 10 (7.5%)
81-85% - 12 (9%)
86-90% - 10 (7.5%)
91-95% - 7 (5.3%)
96-99% - 9 (6.8%)
100% - 25 (18.8%)
Total Voters: 133

Pages: « 1 ... 23176 23177 23178 23179 23180 23181 23182 23183 23184 23185 23186 23187 23188 23189 23190 23191 23192 23193 23194 23195 23196 23197 23198 23199 23200 23201 23202 23203 23204 23205 23206 23207 23208 23209 23210 23211 23212 23213 23214 23215 23216 23217 23218 23219 23220 23221 23222 23223 23224 23225 [23226] 23227 23228 23229 23230 23231 23232 23233 23234 23235 23236 23237 23238 23239 23240 23241 23242 23243 23244 23245 23246 23247 23248 23249 23250 23251 23252 23253 23254 23255 23256 23257 23258 23259 23260 23261 23262 23263 23264 23265 23266 23267 23268 23269 23270 23271 23272 23273 23274 23275 23276 ... 23601 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion  (Read 21126854 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. (19 posts by 10 users deleted.)
kingcolex
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1820
Merit: 1106


Anonymous bitcoin mixer


View Profile
March 25, 2019, 01:09:10 AM

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.
1556218432
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1556218432

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1556218432
Reply with quote  #2

1556218432
Report to moderator
1556218432
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1556218432

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1556218432
Reply with quote  #2

1556218432
Report to moderator
Remember that Bitcoin is still beta software. Don't put all of your money into BTC!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Dabs
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324
Merit: 1133



View Profile
March 25, 2019, 01:23:15 AM
Merited by JayJuanGee (1)

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.
kingcolex
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1820
Merit: 1106


Anonymous bitcoin mixer


View Profile
March 25, 2019, 01:26:48 AM

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.
There will always be people that see everything as a scheme regardless of what it is, I would go ahead and assume that R0ach is one of these people and just ignore it if I were you.
jojo69
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1728


no FOMO


View Profile
March 25, 2019, 02:01:37 AM

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
kingcolex
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1820
Merit: 1106


Anonymous bitcoin mixer


View Profile
March 25, 2019, 02:04:41 AM

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
That little candle would be the little one that could if it went and knocked out 4k and held it.
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1876
Merit: 1721


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
March 25, 2019, 02:24:31 AM

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
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 126



View Profile
March 25, 2019, 02:28:00 AM

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
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1876
Merit: 1721


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
March 25, 2019, 02:31:20 AM

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.   
kingcolex
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1820
Merit: 1106


Anonymous bitcoin mixer


View Profile
March 25, 2019, 02:33:21 AM

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.
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1876
Merit: 1721


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
March 25, 2019, 02:37:32 AM

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
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1876
Merit: 1721


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
March 25, 2019, 02:43:48 AM

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
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 126


WWW.BLOCKCHAIN021.COM


View Profile
March 25, 2019, 02:44:13 AM

~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
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 126



View Profile
March 25, 2019, 03:51:11 AM
Merited by micgoossens (1)

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

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

Enjoy it while its young(that means accumulate as much as you can Wink), 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
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630
Merit: 285


#TheGoyimKnow


View Profile
March 25, 2019, 04:04:25 AM

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.
Lambie Slayer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 126



View Profile
March 25, 2019, 04:19:21 AM
Merited by Cryptoqueeen (1)

In the word "marriage",
you won't find the letter "I",
but you will find "us".

Trollgoossen's life in 2 years:



Kissless Virgin Roach has spent more time jealously ranting about another mans woman this year than he spent talking directly to any of the other 3.75 billion women on Earth in the last 10 years.  Wink

This is the kind of brilliant achiever that dumps his Bitcoins in 2015 to go all in on Silver Cheesy

JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1876
Merit: 1721


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
March 25, 2019, 04:21:26 AM
Merited by bones261 (2)

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.  

What the fuck are you talking about?  You seem to be assuming that there is no internet or at least two computers in the whole world to verify the transaction.  At this time, we have millions of computers... so snap back into the real world rather than your fantasy post-Armageddon world.  

So in the real world, if I want to buy bitcoins at point A then I do... there are are lot of methods to buy bitcoins.  Thereafter, I have the option to transfer the bitcoins to point B, and there are a wide variety of ways to transfer bitcoins, including in my brain.  Once I get to point B, then I can cash the bitcoins out, if I want.   Anything else need to be said?  I don't need to go over all of the options because they are going to vary in different locations and also the means of storing or transporting the BTC will vary too.


"Bitcoins" are simply worthless timestamps; it's a fake commodity.  

In about the past 9 years, bitcoin has had a market value.  I will grant you that the first year of bitcoin, there was not very much of a market value'; however, the market value has increased, so we are not merely talking about a timestamp, you dumb fuck.  You may have been legit in making that criticism/assessment of bitcoin in its first year, and even if bitcoin had stayed in a similar status, as it's first year for the next 9 years, but it did not.  Snap out of it.  Snap into reality, and that is bitcoin has a market value... currently a little below $4k.

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.

I am not trying to push anything.  I am being descriptive, not prescriptive..   for the most part... although, for your own good, you probably should buy some and then maybe you will start to understand it better.  perhaps?  Are you capable?

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.

You are making shit up... with dumb nonsense.  Sounds good in theory, but you seem to be talking about something other than bitcoin.

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.

Again.. gobbledy gook.  Verification of a bitcoin transaction is transported in a variety of ways.. including over a phone line to the extent an internet connection is accomplished in that way... but how it relates to your claim that bitcoin does not have value because it lacks sufficient physicality is beyond me.  

Maybe you should take your emergency proclamation(s) to some other place because the vast majority of peeps here don't give a shit about your nonsense, baseless and overly repeated fantasy fearmongering(s).
realr0ach
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630
Merit: 285


#TheGoyimKnow


View Profile
March 25, 2019, 04:26:40 AM

JayJuanGoyim, your Mexican brain is not finely tuned enough to be able to comprehend any of these concepts.  There is no point discussing these topics with you.  There are Youtube videos of swarms of Mexicans that don't even know who Adolf Hitler is for God's sake.
jojo69
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1728


no FOMO


View Profile
March 25, 2019, 04:28:22 AM

fucks sake Jay
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974
Merit: 1166


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
March 25, 2019, 04:36:07 AM

Interesting stat: Belgium has a very high divorce rate (70%).

Nothing wrong with divorce.

True, but it won't add years to your life (in most cases) and would not make you richer (on paper) as well.
Guys would be limited in children visitation rights (and, yes, in more than 90% cases children stay with mom).
It's all theoretical, as I never divorced.


Which of these life phases are you up to? The marriage phase of your life, or the having kids phase?





Paashaas
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1780
Merit: 1307



View Profile
March 25, 2019, 04:51:01 AM

If you wanna say "Hi" to CSW, he's here :

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5120026

To bad mods already deleted the thread..

Pages: « 1 ... 23176 23177 23178 23179 23180 23181 23182 23183 23184 23185 23186 23187 23188 23189 23190 23191 23192 23193 23194 23195 23196 23197 23198 23199 23200 23201 23202 23203 23204 23205 23206 23207 23208 23209 23210 23211 23212 23213 23214 23215 23216 23217 23218 23219 23220 23221 23222 23223 23224 23225 [23226] 23227 23228 23229 23230 23231 23232 23233 23234 23235 23236 23237 23238 23239 23240 23241 23242 23243 23244 23245 23246 23247 23248 23249 23250 23251 23252 23253 23254 23255 23256 23257 23258 23259 23260 23261 23262 23263 23264 23265 23266 23267 23268 23269 23270 23271 23272 23273 23274 23275 23276 ... 23601 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!