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

[lightfoot]

I will say, Bill Gates is a dickhead. The shit he pulled on Paul in the 90's was just sad....

[Tash]

I will say, Bill Gates is a dickhead. The shit he pulled on Paul in the 90's was just sad....

Paul understood the code and made it all work, same with Monte Davidoff who was hired in 1975
Bill's roll is to play the young start-up, the wiz kid. Serious business is all done by father and other string pullers at that time,

Bill’s mother working at management at IBM was in a position to get the hands on the operating system as IBM hat develop the new much better Unix written in C. The old was of no use any-longer, to basic.

High shool friends.... or a kid watching a grown man do some work? Bill Gates born 1955


The story is that in 1969 after you sold a lemonade you went to the tech store and bought a ASR-33 Teletype


MS-DOS released on August 12, 1981
First windows was released in November 20, 1985
Windows 3.11 November 8, 1993
Windows 95
and then in a universe far far away
The Xerox Alto from 1 March 1973 with 3 button mouse, gui, overlaping windows, network startup/operation, lots of games,... Roll Eyes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9H79_kKzmFs

The Wang 2200 S from May, 1973
http://www.wang2200.org/images/cpu_2200s.jpg

[Biodom]

A sad trader story..

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/finance-isnt-worth-losing-your-life-over-the-heartbreaking-story-of-a-rookie-trader-who-racked-up-700000-in-debt-2020-06-14

Somehow, the guy levered his $16K account to get a $700K position
No leverage, please, unless you want to lose your btc.

[rdbase]

Havent been on the good ol' WO thread in a week and what I see first thing is about Kill Gates. Atleast that is his new nick name for some of the stuff he is trying to pull during the pandemic to have everybody chipped like dogs.
He has gotten bored in his old end of life I would assume.

A sad trader story..

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/finance-isnt-worth-losing-your-life-over-the-heartbreaking-story-of-a-rookie-trader-who-racked-up-700000-in-debt-2020-06-14

Somehow, the guy levered his $16K account to get a $700K position
No leverage, please, unless you want to lose your btc.

Some 20 year old kid committed suicide after going into negative $730k on his robinhood account. So it aint just crypto thats ruining lives right now.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/sergeiklebnikov/2020/06/17/20-year-old-robinhood-customer-commits-suicide-after-seeing-a-730000-negative-balance/#5e93cc155928
Might be the same person. Just saw it mentioned on mister down to $1300 livestream.
Anyways
Been on this for the past 1/2 hour watching Tone vays saying ethereum is a scam on his livestream from an hour ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PXU0thDHCU&t=1026s

"Tone vays is bearish saying down to $1k"

Scary times we all are living in right now.

[cAPSLOCK]

Hmm I have a bad feeling...   Like something around the corner.  Hope I'm wrong.

[jbreher]

having one or two million in silicon valley might just make you comfortable

I take it you've never been to (e.g.) Palo Alto?

[jbreher]

people who end up intubated stand a real chance of dying.

Hmm. I'm not really trying to argue that you are wrong. I'm currently hunkered down. While I resent what I feel is government overreach in the liberty/safety balance, I'm happy enough to be careful on my own recognizance. But the following had me scratching my head: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIDsKdeFOmQ

I realize that this is an uncorroborated report, and it is anecdotal if true, at that. But it seems sincere, and has me questioning the entire medical response to this thing. At least in my mind.


edit: I see Tash beat me to it. Whatevs.

[jbreher]

One more story that has given me a lot of courage, believe me, it is not over yet, more stories will be made.

Mr. Smith worked at a Silicon Valley tech company when he purchased $3,000 worth of Bitcoin in October 2010. “I had no idea how much to invest, but I was getting paid pretty well at the time, so I decided on $3,000.” Because Bitcoin was worth only $0.15 a piece at the time, his initial investment gave him around 20,000 Bitcoins.

From the very start, Mr. Smith knew that he was playing the long game, deciding to see just how high Bitcoin could go. For the next three years, he hodled his investment, only occasionally checking how Bitcoin is performing. But when Bitcoin hit $350, and then $800 just days later, Mr. Smith knew that it wouldn’t be wise to wait any longer.

He cashed out $2.3 million, quit his job

He should never have cashed out as thats worth $190,000,000 today.

OTOH, going from wage slave to 2.3M is categorically different from going from 2.3M and free to 190M and free.

[jbreher]

^^^If not cashed out what the point of investing, taking it with to the grave?  $190,000,000 today billionare tomorrow.

Try reading this thread and learn something.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5255623.0

Jeebus. Is there a tl;dr version?

[jojo69]

OTOH, going from wage slave to 2.3M is categorically different from going from 2.3M and free to 190M and free.

indeed

much like going from no electricity to a little light and comms is a waaaaaay bigger jump than going from a little light and comms to leaving the door open with the AC on

[JayJuanGee]

having one or two million in silicon valley might just make you comfortable

I take it you've never been to (e.g.) Palo Alto?

I have been there.

O.k.  Let me see if I can attempt to 'splain my assertion to you.

There are a lot of people who don't have shit in regards to investments or savings (even if we account for home ownership, too), and surely having any kind of investment portfolio is going to be a whole hell of a lot more than many people, even in the US of A, where we have way more access to credit and financial services than so many people on the planet. However, many of us still have a lot of difficulties building some kind of investment portfolio.

Here's a decent article on the topic of the lack of current investment savings on average, even including some of the better off categorizing.  

So, in that regard, even just having a mediocre investment portfolio of $1 million or $2million (Let's say 1.5 Million, which is in the middle) is going to put these kinds of people way in front of the vast majority of other people (maybe even 3x or more of the average of the better off of the folks coming on retirement), whether we are talking about silicon valley or other places in the country.    And, for sure, the cost of living for any particular area is going to hamper the extent to which the accumulated amount of wealth meets either "fuck you" status or "filthy rich" status.  

There are places in the world in which $1.5 million, (and maybe even some places in the USA - so long as a guy/gal has fairly humble needs) would allow a kind of entry level "fuck you" status, even if there might be some questions regarding future value of such dollar denominated amounts, but there still might be ways in which a BTC portfolio might have decent chances of being able to outperform the value of the dollar in terms of maintaining its value in dollar denominated terms.

You (picnic bear) and I could go on and on in regards to various details, but I maintain that my point still stands regarding the fact that having $1.5 million in investment capital still would allow someone to be much more comfortable than the average American who tends to have inadequately been able to build up any kind of meaningful investment portfolio, whether we are referring to bitcoin or to other assets that might be in their quasi-liquid portfolio... and whether we are referring to Palo Alto or any other place in the country... of course, they are going to need more in Palo Alto, yet $1.5 million puts them in a decent position.

Another problem that people have is to have a lot of their investment in their house, and I suppose I was presuming that quasi-liquid investment assets might have advantages over having assets in the personal home, presuming that the investment is actually owned (equity value) by the person, rather than being owned largely by the bank... but I was not really going into details regarding that, and merely presuming a kind of additional comfort that comes from having $1.5 million as compared to the average american that has little to no savings in terms of a quasi-liquid investment portfolio.

Can you find it deep down inside of ur little selfie (maybe the non-argumentative portion of picnic bear to the extent that it might exist way on the deep down inside? hahahahahahaha) to appreciate what I am saying, Picnic bear? I was not really trying to argue "fuck you" status, but just a kind of supplementation status that a $1.5million dollar investment portfolio provides that might end up putting such hypothetical person in a better position than the average american, even if living in an expensive part of the country (such as palo alto, and maybe even if it might be more prudent for them to move to San Jose or some outlying area that is going to be a bit less expensive than Palo Alto specifically, which was still in the silicon valley as I had mentioned in the first place.. rather than Palo alto, specifically).

[kellrobinson]

whomever whoever put this together.

[Biodom]

having one or two million in silicon valley might just make you comfortable

I take it you've never been to (e.g.) Palo Alto?

I have been there.

O.k.  Let me see if I can attempt to 'splain my assertion to you.

There are a lot of people who don't have shit in regards to investments or savings (even if we account for home ownership, too), and surely having any kind of investment portfolio is going to be a whole hell of a lot more than many people, even in the US of A, where we have way more access to credit and financial services than so many people on the planet. However, many of us still have a lot of difficulties building some kind of investment portfolio.

So, in that regard, even just having a mediocre investment portfolio of $1 million or $2million is going to put these kinds of people way in front of the vast majority of other people, whether we are talking about silicon valley or other places in the country.    And, for sure, the cost of living for any particular area is going to hamper the extent to which the accumulated amount of wealth meets either "fuck you" status or "filthy rich" status.  

There are places in the world in which $1million or $2 million, and maybe even some places in the USA (so long as a guy/gal has fairly humble needs) would allow a kind of entry level "fuck you" status, even if there might be some questions regarding future value of such dollar denominated amounts, but there still might be ways in which a BTC portfolio might have decent chances of being able to outperform the value of the dollar in terms of maintaining its value in dollar denominated terms.

<part deleted>

Never been to Palo Alto (been to many other places in Cali), but I imagine that I know what he is talking about as Houston also has very prosperous enclaves with houses that look like some kings ought to live there. I straddle "the great divide" of both of these arguments.
IMHO, in most of US, $1-2 mil remains a pretty good investment portfolio AS LONG as you have a steady job that pays reasonably well (or an equivalent income stream) AND your job gives you a decent health plan. If you don't have a job and you are not close to at least getting Medicare and SocSec, $1-2 mil is woefully insufficient. "Gambler" (the movie) claims that 2mil is enough (F U money), but it is not. The movie is based on the 1974 screen play. Back then, $2mil was certainly F.U. money. Not anymore.

[jbreher]

having one or two million in silicon valley might just make you comfortable

I take it you've never been to (e.g.) Palo Alto?

So, in that regard, even just having a mediocre investment portfolio of $1 million or $2million (Let's say 1.5 Million, which is in the middle) is going to put these kinds of people way in front of the vast majority of other people

With your subsequent clarification, I think we're largely aligned, JJG. I think I was mostly reacting to your choice of silicon valley as an exemplar. Sure, Coeur D'Alene could be a fine place to live out a comfy life on 2M (I'm spitballing here). But Silicon Valley? Nuh-uhnh. Not Palo Alto, not San Fran, not San Jose, not Santa Ana, not Milpitas, not Los Gatos, not...

Ok, maybe Gilroy.

[JayJuanGee]

having one or two million in silicon valley might just make you comfortable

I take it you've never been to (e.g.) Palo Alto?

I have been there.

O.k.  Let me see if I can attempt to 'splain my assertion to you.

There are a lot of people who don't have shit in regards to investments or savings (even if we account for home ownership, too), and surely having any kind of investment portfolio is going to be a whole hell of a lot more than many people, even in the US of A, where we have way more access to credit and financial services than so many people on the planet. However, many of us still have a lot of difficulties building some kind of investment portfolio.

So, in that regard, even just having a mediocre investment portfolio of $1 million or $2million is going to put these kinds of people way in front of the vast majority of other people, whether we are talking about silicon valley or other places in the country.    And, for sure, the cost of living for any particular area is going to hamper the extent to which the accumulated amount of wealth meets either "fuck you" status or "filthy rich" status.  

There are places in the world in which $1million or $2 million, and maybe even some places in the USA (so long as a guy/gal has fairly humble needs) would allow a kind of entry level "fuck you" status, even if there might be some questions regarding future value of such dollar denominated amounts, but there still might be ways in which a BTC portfolio might have decent chances of being able to outperform the value of the dollar in terms of maintaining its value in dollar denominated terms.

<part deleted>

Never been to Palo Alto (been to many other places in Cali), but I imagine that I know what he is talking about as Houston also has very prosperous enclaves with houses that look like some kings ought to live there. I straddle "the great divide" of both of these arguments.
IMHO, in most of US, $1-2 mil remains a pretty good investment portfolio AS LONG as you have a steady job that pays reasonably well (or an equivalent income stream) AND your job gives you a decent health plan. If you don't have a job and you are not close to at least getting Medicare and SocSec, $1-2 mil is woefully insufficient. "Gambler" (the movie) claims that 2mil is enough (F U money), but it is not. The movie is based on the 1974 screen play. Back then, $2mil was certainly F.U. money. Not anymore.

Ok.  Let's play with $2million.  I was not referring to any movie, and sure of course, if you are  talking about 1974 as compared to today, then you have to 3x the referred to amount in order to get somewhere close to 2020 dollars.

I do believe, however, a person can live decently well off of $2million, which would provide a passive income of $6,666 per month.  That is assuming a 4% withdrawal rate that would largely allow the withdrawal of appreciation while maintaining the principle.

We have had this conversation before, and of course, you are not going to have any kind of baller lifestyle on $6,666 per month, but it should be enough to get by pretty decently as a kind of passive income, and surely, $2million is better than $1million because it is double the amount of $3,333... even $1million is doable in some parts of the USA and of course certain parts of the world will even allow for better living on that amount of passive income per month.   We can agree to disagree if you believe that entry level of fuck you status is absolute more than $1million, because I know all kinds of poor fucks who live off way less than $3,333, and some of them live off less than $1k per month and are able to get by, so $3,333 is going to be much better for them, than $1k, especially passive income.

Of course, many of us consider that we want to have a cushion and all those kinds of considerations that involve volatility and making sure that we are planning based on worse case scenarios, but if we can assume either $1million or $2million in principle that is steady, then a lot of people are going to be bat shit excited by that level of principle to be able to generate their 4% per month of a withdrawal rate that would produce $3,333 per month for $1million and $6,666 for $2million.

having one or two million in silicon valley might just make you comfortable

I take it you've never been to (e.g.) Palo Alto?

So, in that regard, even just having a mediocre investment portfolio of $1 million or $2million (Let's say 1.5 Million, which is in the middle) is going to put these kinds of people way in front of the vast majority of other people

With your subsequent clarification, I think we're largely aligned, JJG. I think I was mostly reacting to your choice of silicon valley as an exemplar. Sure, Coeur D'Alene could be a fine place to live out a comfy life on 2M (I'm spitballing here). But Silicon Valley? Nuh-uhnh. Not Palo Alto, not San Fran, not San Jose, not Santa Ana, not Milpitas, not Los Gatos, not...

Ok, maybe Gilroy.

I only brought up silicon valley because the initially referred to article was talking about the guy who cashed out like around half of his BTC stash of about 2,200 bitcoin at $11,000 in 2017, which generated somewhere around $25 million, and he bought a house for $7million in silicon valley and he bought a few other consumer items and a business, but anyhow, I was referring to more modest cashing out scenarios that might generate way less revenue, and suggesting that the amount of money that the guy in the article had was in the filthy rich status rather than either fuck you status or even a more reasonable expected amount that brought me to mentioning a $1million to $2million dollar investment portfolio for some other hypothetical (and less rich) person who might be trying to get by in silicon valley. 

Anyhow, since you are conceding that we had some moment of being "largely aligned," we probably don't need to bat around too many more details, because it would likely just push us out of such alignment, which I would rather just enjoy our temporary alignment status, even if it may not be anything very solid to grasp onto.   

[Biodom]

having one or two million in silicon valley might just make you comfortable

I take it you've never been to (e.g.) Palo Alto?

I have been there.

O.k.  Let me see if I can attempt to 'splain my assertion to you.

There are a lot of people who don't have shit in regards to investments or savings (even if we account for home ownership, too), and surely having any kind of investment portfolio is going to be a whole hell of a lot more than many people, even in the US of A, where we have way more access to credit and financial services than so many people on the planet. However, many of us still have a lot of difficulties building some kind of investment portfolio.

So, in that regard, even just having a mediocre investment portfolio of $1 million or $2million is going to put these kinds of people way in front of the vast majority of other people, whether we are talking about silicon valley or other places in the country.    And, for sure, the cost of living for any particular area is going to hamper the extent to which the accumulated amount of wealth meets either "fuck you" status or "filthy rich" status.  

There are places in the world in which $1million or $2 million, and maybe even some places in the USA (so long as a guy/gal has fairly humble needs) would allow a kind of entry level "fuck you" status, even if there might be some questions regarding future value of such dollar denominated amounts, but there still might be ways in which a BTC portfolio might have decent chances of being able to outperform the value of the dollar in terms of maintaining its value in dollar denominated terms.

<part deleted>

Never been to Palo Alto (been to many other places in Cali), but I imagine that I know what he is talking about as Houston also has very prosperous enclaves with houses that look like some kings ought to live there. I straddle "the great divide" of both of these arguments.
IMHO, in most of US, $1-2 mil remains a pretty good investment portfolio AS LONG as you have a steady job that pays reasonably well (or an equivalent income stream) AND your job gives you a decent health plan. If you don't have a job and you are not close to at least getting Medicare and SocSec, $1-2 mil is woefully insufficient. "Gambler" (the movie) claims that 2mil is enough (F U money), but it is not. The movie is based on the 1974 screen play. Back then, $2mil was certainly F.U. money. Not anymore.

Ok.  Let's play with $2million.  I was not referring to any movie, and sure of course, if you are  talking about 1974 as compared to today, then you have to 3x the referred to amount in order to get somewhere close to 2020 dollars.

I do believe, however, a person can live decently well off of $2million, which would provide a passive income of $6,666 per month.  That is assuming a 4% withdrawal rate that would largely allow the withdrawal of appreciation while maintaining the principle.

We have had this conversation before, and of course, you are not going to have any kind of baller lifestyle on $6,666 per month, but it should be enough to get by pretty decently as a kind of passive income, and surely, $2million is better than $1million because it is double the amount of $3,333... even $1million is doable in some parts of the USA and of course certain parts of the world will even allow for better living on that amount of passive income per month.   We can agree to disagree if you believe that entry level of fuck you status is absolute more than $1million, because I know all kinds of poor fucks who live off way less than $3,333, and some of them live off less than $1k per month and are able to get by, so $3,333 is going to be much better for them, than $1k, especially passive income.

Of course, many of us consider that we want to have a cushion and all those kinds of considerations that involve volatility and making sure that we are planning based on worse case scenarios, but if we can assume either $1million or $2million in principle that is steady, then a lot of people are going to be bat shit excited by that level of principle to be able to generate their 4% per month of a withdrawal rate that would produce $3,333 per month for $1million and $6,666 for $2million.

I assume that 6.66K number came from doing 4%?
Assume that you are doing this 4%, suddenly, a health issue. No job, no insurance and you are billed $500K.
Plus, subtract taxes on RE, etc, etc.
6.6K and moving to less expensive place like Spain or Portugal-maybe.
As far as some people getting excited-sure..it turned out that meager donation of $600/wk from CARES act increased "earnings" for more than 60% people on UE ABOVE their previous pay.

[Icygreen]

When in doubt, trust the late George Carlin. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Germs, immune system:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X29lF43mUlo

[bucciarati]

A sad trader story..

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/finance-isnt-worth-losing-your-life-over-the-heartbreaking-story-of-a-rookie-trader-who-racked-up-700000-in-debt-2020-06-14

Somehow, the guy levered his $16K account to get a $700K position
No leverage, please, unless you want to lose your btc.

or you can lever 10 USD and play with them.. never go all in!!

[serveria.com]

Hmm I have a bad feeling...   Like something around the corner.  Hope I'm wrong.

HODLers not affected. 

[Wekkel]

[...]

High shool friends.... or a kid watching a grown man do some work?

I'm no expert on this, but from reading Paul Allen's book Idea Man (2012) I certainly do not think of Bill Gates as a side-guy to Microsoft's success story but a key player together with others. They saw an opportunity, acted on it and worked their butts of with just the right mix of people.

Well done.

Anyone well versed in the ascent of computers is advised to read this book if not already done so.