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

[rdbase]

The hackers were able to withdraw 7000 BTC in this one transaction: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/e8b406091959700dbffcff30a60b190133721e5c39e89bb5fe23c5a554ab05ea
The above transaction is the only affected transaction. It impacted our BTC hot wallet only (which contained about 2% of our total BTC holdings). All of our other wallets are secure and  unharmed.
https://binance.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360028031711

The hack attack on binance caused a dip in price about the same time.

Curious how the market will respond in the next hours to the hack.

This is why I saw the price drop so sharply last night to around $5700 from it reaching nearly $6000 at $5946 just when I checked 30 minutes before.

CZ...you said safu?  
apparently the hot wallet at Binance lost 7k corn...ouch.

The price is already recovering with it reaching over $5880 now so the btc market seems to be use to these happening often common as a cold it just brushes them off.

[El duderino_]

WTF

AJAAAAAAAAX


WaaaaaaaaaaaaaaauW

[MrFreeRoMan]

....
Then notice we WO's already don't care for much longer as that 

Because WO has become great HODLers!


And as Bob Loukas said:
    “Bitcoin will go up and down in price, sometimes violently!

    If you’re in this for the long haul, you DO NOT CARE!

    You do not try and time the short-term market because a big bull market will out-smart you. Take your position (I’ve been saying this for 5 months) and get into a strong HODL position. Stop trying to save $500 per coin because it could cost you $5,000 paying at a higher price.”

[MrFreeRoMan]

WTF

AJAAAAAAAAX


WaaaaaaaaaaaaaaauW

Ahahaha!
Yesterday's script?)

[Last of the V8s]

oh can we not with the football again
pleeeeeze it's too boring

[Biodom]

I read the above and still don't get the problem. What type of address was needed before sending to Bech32 and why was it unspendable? And how can it be unspendable if it is sent back to the company's wallet and thus "proves" it's an inside job?

My understanding is that if you send coins from address starting with '1' (legacy) to bech 32 address (starting with 'bc1'), then you might have difficulty spending the coins, although I am not 100% sure because Coinomi claims that in their wallet you can "upgrade" legacy account to bech32.
In any case, if you send from '1 to '3' first, then to 'bc1', it should be OK.
Read here:

https://coinomi.freshdesk.com/support/solutions/articles/29000009746-what-are-default-compatibility-and-legacy-addresses-all-about-segwit-

Re sending back at Binance-it is a puzzle and if true (I did not check), then the whole thing is definitely their own error.
That guy at binance...I would not listen to one word outta his mouth one way or another any more.

[mrdeposit]

Notice the pattern: bitcoin stopped caring about bad news. $BTC



https://twitter.com/krugermacro/status/1126148438868021248

Then notice we WO's already don't care for much longer as that 

A good sign for filtering the bad news and FUD in the long term. It is useless to check every news site and find a piece of hack news on social media.

[El duderino_]

oh can we not with the football again
pleeeeeze it's too boring

I'll bet we have our Final 

[El duderino_]

Hello 5900

Again

[Last of the V8s]

oh can we not with the football again
pleeeeeze it's too boring

I'll bet we have our Final  

yup NZ to thrash ENG again. Probably by 3 tries or so. Can't wait

[JayJuanGee]

Next major green dildo will likely top out near $6,300.

Hodl.

Bawb?

[Bitcoinaire]

In 2016 when bitfinex got hacked we dropped at least 20%. This price action looks uber bullish.

[d_eddie]

I read the above and still don't get the problem. What type of address was needed before sending to Bech32 and why was it unspendable? And how can it be unspendable if it is sent back to the company's wallet and thus "proves" it's an inside job?

My understanding is that if you send coins from address starting with '1' (legacy) to bech 32 address (starting with 'bc1'), then you might have difficulty spending the coins, although I am not 100% sure because Coinomi claims that in their wallet you can "upgrade" legacy account to bech32.
In any case, if you send from '1 to '3' first, then to 'bc1', it should be OK.
Read here:

https://coinomi.freshdesk.com/support/solutions/articles/29000009746-what-are-default-compatibility-and-legacy-addresses-all-about-segwit-

Re sending back at Binance-it is a puzzle and if true (I did not check), then the whole thing is definitely their own error.
That guy at binance...I would not listen to one word outta his mouth one way or another any more.

The way I understand it, the problem isn't with the address, but with the wallet software. Not all wallets deal bith 'bc1' (bech32) addresses yet. Bech32 is supposed to be the new universal format after the segwit fork. Legacy (B2SH) non-segwit addresses begin with '1'. Legacy (B2SH) multi-sig addresses begin with '3'.

'1' addresses can only receive funds in non-segwit (old-style) transactions. '3' and 'bc1' can receive funds in segwit transactions too.

[rdbase]

In 2016 when bitfinex got hacked we dropped at least 20%. This price action looks uber bullish.

This was around the price before the hack happened so yeah uber thor like bullish!

Next major green dildo will likely top out near $6,300.

Hodl.

Bawb?

He has BobLawblaw going down the street with the price pumping again as if binance gate never happened.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

oh can we not with the football again
pleeeeeze it's too boring

I'll bet we have our Final  

yup NZ to thrash ENG again. Probably by 3 tries or so. Can't wait

Fucking egg chasing

[MrFreeRoMan]

oh can we not with the football again
pleeeeeze it's too boring

I'll bet we have our Final  

yup NZ to thrash ENG again. Probably by 3 tries or so. Can't wait

Fucking egg chasing

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

oh can we not with the football again
pleeeeeze it's too boring

I'll bet we have our Final  

yup NZ to thrash ENG again. Probably by 3 tries or so. Can't wait

Fucking egg chasing

@V8 it's the season ending time and also LFC is in the final so I am afraid you will hear about it more 🤪
Bitcoin, football, hot girls, dildo, tits (fake one by the way 🤣) what else?

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

Oh wait! wait!!
Were you talking about Rugby 😝

Damn! it's confusion LOL

[AlexGR]

I read the above and still don't get the problem. What type of address was needed before sending to Bech32 and why was it unspendable? And how can it be unspendable if it is sent back to the company's wallet and thus "proves" it's an inside job?

My understanding is that if you send coins from address starting with '1' (legacy) to bech 32 address (starting with 'bc1'), then you might have difficulty spending the coins, although I am not 100% sure because Coinomi claims that in their wallet you can "upgrade" legacy account to bech32.
In any case, if you send from '1 to '3' first, then to 'bc1', it should be OK.
Read here:

https://coinomi.freshdesk.com/support/solutions/articles/29000009746-what-are-default-compatibility-and-legacy-addresses-all-about-segwit-

Re sending back at Binance-it is a puzzle and if true (I did not check), then the whole thing is definitely their own error.
That guy at binance...I would not listen to one word outta his mouth one way or another any more.

The way I understand it, the problem isn't with the address, but with the wallet software. Not all wallets deal bith 'bc1' (bech32) addresses yet. Bech32 is supposed to be the new universal format after the segwit fork. Legacy (B2SH) non-segwit addresses begin with '1'. Legacy (B2SH) multi-sig addresses begin with '3'.

'1' addresses can only receive funds in non-segwit (old-style) transactions. '3' and 'bc1' can receive funds in segwit transactions too.

Hmm.. so if the above applies then the software must be able to pick the right transaction style. If it doesn't then it's broken software so to speak.

[JayJuanGee]

Notice the pattern: bitcoin stopped caring about bad news. $BTC



https://twitter.com/krugermacro/status/1126148438868021248

Then notice we WO's already don't care for much longer as that 

There are some folks, including WO regulars, who either buy into the FUD or allow the bullshit shenanigans (and "fuckery," as asserted by V8) to overly influence their BTC strategy, either causing them to sell, fail to buy or perhaps go so far as to short, our lil friend, aka BTC.

Whether we buy into manipulation or not, as Torque rightfully asserted, the more bullshit FUD spreading desperations might be a kind of condition precedent for the price to go up, while the weak hands shed their coins too early, and the no coiners sit on the sidelines waiting, waiting and waiting for a dip that will come much later than they had expected.. or perhaps after they finally choose to buy.