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

[rolling]

https://news.bitcoin.com/analyst-1500-bitcoins-lost-every-day-less-than-14-million-coins-will-ever-circulate/

While I am of the opinion that 21 mil "theoretical" coin number should not be touched, this number '1500" lost every day is actually quite interesting.
If true, this means 600 (from 1500-900)X1304 (days until April 15, 20024, which is the midpoint between Feb and June 2024, theoretical timing for next halving)=782K coins lost until next halving.
After that, if losses at 1500 a day continue, we would be losing roughly 1050 a day on balance or about 1.5 mil more coins until 2028 halving.
8 cycles (~30 years) at this level or slightly increasing due to halvings and ALL coins would be gone, poof, evaporated.

Maybe his 1500 number is incorrect, though, it is difficult to pin down.

EDIT:
As a purely theoretical exercise, I can see the following happening if most or almost all coins are really lost in 30-40 years:
1. Remember the "stone" money (Rai stones)? In one curious occasion one stone accidentally drowned, but was still used by villagers to do transactions in a "virtual" chain of custody. They were referring to it as if it was present even when it was not accessible.
2. If losses of coins will exceed certain %, I am sure that there will be a proposal to make some reference to Satoshi's coins (if they are still not moved) to be such lost "stone".
3. Of course, that would be fractional reserves and the "bad" cycle would start anew.

The 21 million number is not theoretical. If any version tried to change it, that would be a fork and no longer BTC.

The number of coins in circulation is irrelevant. For every lost coin, you can view it as a redistribution of its value across all remaining coins. Even if there was a single coin left, it would still work. If that means a satoshi is worth more than people want it to be, the devs could create a unit of account less than a satoshi and all would be well.

This is a non-issue.

[1603655989]

1603655989

[1603655989]

1603655989

[1603655989]

1603655989

[1603655989]

1603655989

[1603655989]

1603655989

[LFC_Bitcoin]

@Mistuhbailey
Bitcoin halving fractal pattern playing out.







https://twitter.com/mistuhbailey/status/1307344551359766529?s=21

[Biodom]

https://news.bitcoin.com/analyst-1500-bitcoins-lost-every-day-less-than-14-million-coins-will-ever-circulate/

While I am of the opinion that 21 mil "theoretical" coin number should not be touched, this number '1500" lost every day is actually quite interesting.
If true, this means 600 (from 1500-900)X1304 (days until April 15, 20024, which is the midpoint between Feb and June 2024, theoretical timing for next halving)=782K coins lost until next halving.
After that, if losses at 1500 a day continue, we would be losing roughly 1050 a day on balance or about 1.5 mil more coins until 2028 halving.
8 cycles (~30 years) at this level or slightly increasing due to halvings and ALL coins would be gone, poof, evaporated.

Maybe his 1500 number is incorrect, though, it is difficult to pin down.

EDIT:
As a purely theoretical exercise, I can see the following happening if most or almost all coins are really lost in 30-40 years:
1. Remember the "stone" money (Rai stones)? In one curious occasion one stone accidentally drowned, but was still used by villagers to do transactions in a "virtual" chain of custody. They were referring to it as if it was present even when it was not accessible.
2. If losses of coins will exceed certain %, I am sure that there will be a proposal to make some reference to Satoshi's coins (if they are still not moved) to be such lost "stone".
3. Of course, that would be fractional reserves and the "bad" cycle would start anew.

The 21 million number is not theoretical. If any version tried to change it, that would be a fork and no longer BTC.

The number of coins in circulation is irrelevant. For every lost coin, you can view it as a redistribution of its value across all remaining coins. Even if there was a single coin left, it would still work. If that means a satoshi is worth more than people want it to be, the devs could create a unit of account less than a satoshi and all would be well.

This is a non-issue.

sure...from a protocol point of view, but not from a practical usage point of view.
the fact that you would make progressively smaller and smaller units for it to work on a planetary basis strikes me as odd.
Mathematically it can work, of course, but what is the practicality of having 10^-3 btc for all earthlings to use while considering 21mil as 'unobtanium'?
Imagine in such economy someone suddenly digging up a bottle in their backyard that great-great-grandpa has buried and which has 1 "full" btc in it, private code perfectly preserved and unaffected by whatever happened in the interim. Suddenly, there is a X1000 world-wide inflation. It is all theoretical, of course, but worthy of pondering over.

EDIT: an interesting "thought" experiment would be to launch a few thou (or more) btc with the private code protected by a strong encryption (or strong multisig) into Sun-Earth L2 spot. Just in case if btc losses would be catastrophic at some point in the decades ahead. If needed, future humanity can retrieve such btc.

[600watt]

https://news.bitcoin.com/analyst-1500-bitcoins-lost-every-day-less-than-14-million-coins-will-ever-circulate/

While I am of the opinion that 21 mil "theoretical" coin number should not be touched, this number '1500" lost every day is actually quite interesting.
If true, this means 600 (from 1500-900)X1304 (days until April 15, 20024, which is the midpoint between Feb and June 2024, theoretical timing for next halving)=782K coins lost until next halving.
After that, if losses at 1500 a day continue, we would be losing roughly 1050 a day on balance or about 1.5 mil more coins until 2028 halving.
8 cycles (~30 years) at this level or slightly increasing due to halvings and ALL coins would be gone, poof, evaporated.

Maybe his 1500 number is incorrect, though, it is difficult to pin down.

EDIT:
As a purely theoretical exercise, I can see the following happening if most or almost all coins are really lost in 30-40 years:
1. Remember the "stone" money (Rai stones)? In one curious occasion one stone accidentally drowned, but was still used by villagers to do transactions in a "virtual" chain of custody. They were referring to it as if it was present even when it was not accessible.
2. If losses of coins will exceed certain %, I am sure that there will be a proposal to make some reference to Satoshi's coins (if they are still not moved) to be such lost "stone".
3. Of course, that would be fractional reserves and the "bad" cycle would start anew.

I remember a scientific study about this topic. the researchers came to the conclusion that bitcoin is far too safe and rare to be used as money since people make mistakes and people die and in both cases coins are lost forever, the number of circulating bitcoin would shrink so drastically that it would be rendered useless. this was coming out around 2013, can't find it via google.

[friends1980]

https://news.bitcoin.com/analyst-1500-bitcoins-lost-every-day-less-than-14-million-coins-will-ever-circulate/

While I am of the opinion that 21 mil "theoretical" coin number should not be touched, this number '1500" lost every day is actually quite interesting.
If true, this means 600 (from 1500-900)X1304 (days until April 15, 20024, which is the midpoint between Feb and June 2024, theoretical timing for next halving)=782K coins lost until next halving.
After that, if losses at 1500 a day continue, we would be losing roughly 1050 a day on balance or about 1.5 mil more coins until 2028 halving.
8 cycles (~30 years) at this level or slightly increasing due to halvings and ALL coins would be gone, poof, evaporated.

Maybe his 1500 number is incorrect, though, it is difficult to pin down.

EDIT:
As a purely theoretical exercise, I can see the following happening if most or almost all coins are really lost in 30-40 years:
1. Remember the "stone" money (Rai stones)? In one curious occasion one stone accidentally drowned, but was still used by villagers to do transactions in a "virtual" chain of custody. They were referring to it as if it was present even when it was not accessible.
2. If losses of coins will exceed certain %, I am sure that there will be a proposal to make some reference to Satoshi's coins (if they are still not moved) to be such lost "stone".
3. Of course, that would be fractional reserves and the "bad" cycle would start anew.

The 21 million number is not theoretical. If any version tried to change it, that would be a fork and no longer BTC.

The number of coins in circulation is irrelevant. For every lost coin, you can view it as a redistribution of its value across all remaining coins. Even if there was a single coin left, it would still work. If that means a satoshi is worth more than people want it to be, the devs could create a unit of account less than a satoshi and all would be well.

This is a non-issue.

sure...from a protocol point of view, but not from a practical usage point of view.
the fact that you would make progressively smaller and smaller units for it to work on a planetary basis strikes me as odd.
Mathematically it can work, of course, but what is the practicality of having 10^-3 btc for all earthlings to use while considering 21mil as 'unobtanium'?
Imagine in such economy someone suddenly digging up a bottle in their backyard that great-great-grandpa has buried and which has 1 "full" btc in it, private code perfectly preserved and unaffected by whatever happened in the interim. Suddenly, there is a X1000 world-wide inflation. It is all theoretical, of course, but worthy of pondering over.

Hear hear. Another example is finding back some written-down private key or seeds in some forefather's archive or in a safe or a book (or in a hidden compartment in the wooden framework of your great-great-grandmother's horrible self-portrait for which you simply didn't have the heart to throw it away because of the emotional value), and if you think about it, it's absolutely not as theoretical as you would think at first glance. It's on the contrary perfectly imaginable and similar cases will most certainly happen in the future.

[rolling]

https://news.bitcoin.com/analyst-1500-bitcoins-lost-every-day-less-than-14-million-coins-will-ever-circulate/

While I am of the opinion that 21 mil "theoretical" coin number should not be touched, this number '1500" lost every day is actually quite interesting.
If true, this means 600 (from 1500-900)X1304 (days until April 15, 20024, which is the midpoint between Feb and June 2024, theoretical timing for next halving)=782K coins lost until next halving.
After that, if losses at 1500 a day continue, we would be losing roughly 1050 a day on balance or about 1.5 mil more coins until 2028 halving.
8 cycles (~30 years) at this level or slightly increasing due to halvings and ALL coins would be gone, poof, evaporated.

Maybe his 1500 number is incorrect, though, it is difficult to pin down.

EDIT:
As a purely theoretical exercise, I can see the following happening if most or almost all coins are really lost in 30-40 years:
1. Remember the "stone" money (Rai stones)? In one curious occasion one stone accidentally drowned, but was still used by villagers to do transactions in a "virtual" chain of custody. They were referring to it as if it was present even when it was not accessible.
2. If losses of coins will exceed certain %, I am sure that there will be a proposal to make some reference to Satoshi's coins (if they are still not moved) to be such lost "stone".
3. Of course, that would be fractional reserves and the "bad" cycle would start anew.

The 21 million number is not theoretical. If any version tried to change it, that would be a fork and no longer BTC.

The number of coins in circulation is irrelevant. For every lost coin, you can view it as a redistribution of its value across all remaining coins. Even if there was a single coin left, it would still work. If that means a satoshi is worth more than people want it to be, the devs could create a unit of account less than a satoshi and all would be well.

This is a non-issue.

sure...from a protocol point of view, but not from a practical usage point of view.
the fact that you would make progressively smaller and smaller units for it to work on a planetary basis strikes me as odd.
Mathematically it can work, of course, but what is the practicality of having 10^-3 btc for all earthlings to use while considering 21mil as 'unobtanium'?
Imagine in such economy someone suddenly digging up a bottle in their backyard that great-great-grandpa has buried and which has 1 "full" btc in it, private code perfectly preserved and unaffected by whatever happened in the interim. Suddenly, there is a X1000 world-wide inflation. It is all theoretical, of course, but worthy of pondering over.

Worthy of pondering but I think the more valuable it gets, the fewer lost coins there will be.

On the other hand, it might be a good idea to bury a bottle in the backyard with one full BTC in it for the great-great-grandkids.

[nullius]

  BTC Dominance

 

Needs illustration.

[nullius]

If you can't sum up your argument in a few sentences, you're pulling a JJG and trying to prove your point with walls of text rather than logical argument.

Evasion of my logical argument with cliché stock stupidity gets my stock answer, with text enlarged to aid comprehension.

My mistake was presuming a literacy level above that of Twitter.

I am here for substance.  I am willing to invest my time in substance (and without a paid signature—for freedom, not “for free”).  If you are not reading it, then it is not for you.

[philipma1957]

like, who gives a f--k..it is not 2017 anymore...that is done..and what's done is done.

While true, it may be the mirror image of 2016 again.

we are matching 2016 very closely.

runup for btc is being assisted by the eth runup.

mining eth with gpus using nicehash to autovert to btc is far better then mining btc directly.


4600 in gear asics and 6000 watts an hour earns 17 usd. direct btc mining on viabtc.

4600 in gear gpus  and 2000 watts an hour earns 24 usd on nice hash via auto vert to btc

these obviously pro gpu ratios almost never happen.

last time was most of 2016 2017 and some of 2018.

[Hueristic]

Story of my life:

Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it

Cassandra was so accursed as punishment for sexually rejecting a god.  What the fuck did you do?

The question is rhetorical—none of my business.  And don’t ask what I did.

Refused to live a lie and keep my mouth shut.


What did you do?

[Paashaas]

Ancient modern history dates back to ancient Greece? Mhe... when great Greek cholars like Thales, Hippocrates, Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle arrived in Egypt the great pyramids of Egypt where already ancient.

Perhaps that may be why the Greeks accorded the Egyptians a great respect for their antiquity.

Why the need to discount the Greeks?

The Greeks invented the philosophical, naturalistic way of thinking that is the foundation of modern science.  Other great civilizations existed; but outside of a few relatively isolated instances of inspired thinkers, their investigations of the natural world were mostly pragmatic, and they never even thought to be objective.  Insofar as is known to history, only the Greeks developed a trend toward doing what later became science and moreover, doing it for its own sake.  Thus, the modern world does indeed descend from the Greeks.

Without the Greeks, you would not now have the Internet with which to make that post, and there would be no TV and smartphones...  Wait, now I hate the Greeks.  Damn it, they also invented democracy.  Lunatics.  The ancient Egyptians, Hindus, and Chinese were much wiser and moreover, saner!

I love history it gets really crazy the more i search.

Most of what you think you know about history is wrong.

That’s not personal.  It is just a general observation.  Most of what people believe to be “history” is fake news, either twisted or just made up by somebody with an agenda somewhere along the line—the Bible being only the worst and most notorious example.  Indeed, if you want a neat demonstration of just how bad the problem is, peruse the idiot-bait on Wikipedia and follow the “verifiable” citations to so-called “scholars” who crank out arrant nonsense “supporting” or “investigating” the historicity of completely fictional stories.

They had indeed great respect for their antiquity, they where stunned how they build the pyramids while they had not the capabilities to do the same. It was build in pre-dynastic/mesolithic time period atleast 5,000-10,000 years old. (It could be much older i mean Göbekli Tepe in Turkey is already 12,000 years old)

I never believed ancient Egyptians where the ones who constructed the megalithic sites with a hammer and a chisel same with the maya's they didn't made those tempels incl. the ones in India.(Ironically the word megalith originates from two ancient Greek words: megas meaning great, and litos, meaning stone). A chisel is made from copper and copper is to soft to handle granite/basalt ore even solid bedrock. They carved hundreds of meters into the ground of solid bedrock in the valley of the kings. Drill holes in granite blocks.. Ore how they even lift those supermassive stones of 100 to 1000+ tons blocks? All in middle of the desert... Zahi Hawass is lying just because of national pride and religion. I want to know we all have the right to know it is oure legacy.

You see megalithic sites all over the world from South America, Europe, Africa, Middle East and Asia. I say a much more advanced civilizations that we have seen before while the rest where practically cavemen but they a
re gone for some reasons. The awnser might holding in written Sumerian texts. That is when it gets really crazy, same with texts from South America and India. You need to have an open mind for that kind of material.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

BS taken from https://bitcoinist.com/analyst-bitcoin-may-first-tank-to-9700-before-rallying-to-fresh-highs/

[Last of the V8s]

huh. St. Michael of Saylor also does free courses god bless his soul
https://www.saylor.org/about/
https://twitter.com/saylordotorg

Learn new skills, earn credit toward a degree, or advance your career at your own pace. Build your bridge to better anywhere, at any time, with free courses at Saylor Academy.

[PoolMinor]

Since wordy man and I already agree on no more 4 digits ever in Bitcoin:$USD.

I present the following query:

On which page of this WO thread will the price on Bitstamp again reach parity with page number of this thread?
The last time it occurred was near December 19 2017.

[philipma1957]

Since wordy man and I already agree on no more 4 digits ever in Bitcoin:$USD.

I present the following query:

On which page of this WO thread will the price on Bitstamp again reach parity with page number of this thread?
The last time it occurred was near December 19 2017.

So when do we go over 27720?

hint that is my guess
page
27720

[cAPSLOCK]

Something to ponder tho...

What is the difference between ?

1. A banking system that issues IOUs backed by Gold/Silver.

2. A future with "bitcoin banks" that issue private digital currencies backed by Bitcoin.

^{A: Nothing, nada, zilch. First it's backed 1:1 to build and insure public confidence and trust. Then it gets fractionally reserved. And finally they go off the "Bitcoin standard" (i.e., The "Gold standard" of the future) and back their private digital shitcoins with literally nothing, while they inflate them to infinity. Repeating history all over again.}

But there is a difference. Bitcoin is bitcoin.  And if a bank or anyone issues something else it is not bitcoin anymore. 

Let's use Cash App as an example.  When they make bitcoin transfers between accounts a thing, then they can do this with little to no fees because they are the custodian.  I give Torque .5 BTC, and it shows up in his account and is debited in mine.  Torque wants to get his BTC out of @Jack's hands as quickly as possible, and does a withdrawal, pays a fee and poof is in custody of his own bitcoin.

Why does this not work?  Any differntly than banks do now.  Aside from being faster and more convenient.

Will this mean there is counter party risk?  KYC/AML?  Risk that funds can be frozen... yes yes and yes.  And no one will force the mountain men like you and I to hold any meaningful amount of Bitcoin there.  But the masses most definitely will.

There IS a difference.  It is easy to withdraw bitcoin.  It is hard to withdraw gold.

[jojo69]

[noormcs5]

[kurious]

The end game is bitcoin becomes the settlement layer for the world. Transaction costs are going way up in the future, you're not going to want to do on-chain transactions when it costs $1000+ to do so, but if you're settling a billions dollars, that's a tiny price to pay.

The fact is, whether we like it or not, very few individuals (other than those of us here) will hold private keys in 10 years. The transaction costs alone will ensure it.

**A little Saturday read inspired by your post... I will merit you, but I just dumped all my merit on Hal Finney.  You can't be mad about that right?***

This is a very hard thing for the old school bitcoiner to accept.  And some will reject it outright. In fact that is why Roger Ver went the way he did.  I think CSW is an actual pathological conman, but I think Ver fell in love with a version of Bitcoin that he began to see as doomed, ironically as it began to become successful. But I want to put forth a couple reasons I think what you said above is important and inevitable.  

1.  The banking infrastructure  and concept is STILL useful.
2.  We actually NEED it.

The first bitcoin transaction I did in 2011 was to a poker site (bitco.in, as Seals with Clubs did not even exist yet!)  The whole reason I went to the trouble to get my hands on some bitcoin was to play online poker with it.  But like so many of us, along this path I suddenly saw what being able to transact value without a middleman FELT LIKE.  The lightbulb turned on... one pill will make you smaller, etc.  And it stuck.  My poor wife.  She has had to listen to a decade of it.

For some reason it is not as hard for me to accept as it seems to be VER.  It is inevitable.  Bitcoin, if it does indeed begin to serve the world as even a semi-niche store of value will grow to magnitudes of it's current resource usage.  And I am not going to crank the blocksize debate up again, but to put it simply we can either keep bitcoin validation decentralized and thereby enforce the consensus, or we can let it be taken over by a small minority, and end up with a digital panopticon that would make most fundamentalist evangelical's vision of the "mark of the beast" look like Monopoly.  The fight is over which resource use grows... and the market has, in some way against all odds, chosen correctly: Fees.

I agree with the market here and I realize the future is not what, even Satoshi, seemed to have seen.  Although Hal got it.  And WAAAAAY back then too...

I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash. Most Bitcoin transactions will occur between banks, to settle net transfers. Bitcoin transactions by private individuals will be as rare as... well, as Bitcoin based purchases are today.

2010, y'all!

And we are watching this unfold right under our noses.  But most people don't really see it yet.  There are a lot of contenders, and people tend to look at the exchanges and talk about them being the bitcoin banks... and behold JUST THIS WEEK the news hit that Kraken was granted the whatever-it-is regulatory powers to become a BANK.  But even more than that, I think the underestimated and EXTREMELY Savvy @jack is already a little ahead of them in some ways with Square/Cash App. Not only is it one of the best places to buy bitcoin, but he is laying the groundwork for all commerce to be done using his application.  They just introduced some sort of payroll feature.  This makes Wells Fargo look like a fucking brontosaurus looking at the curious bright streak coming through the sky called Cash App. "Oooh pretty!"

And then we have Jack Mallers, the grandson of one of the founding fathers of the Chicago Board Options Exchange who is doing one of the most interesting projects laying down a REAL, WORKING payment layer for Bitcoin using the lightning network.  This ultra laid back hoodie wearing millennial (Gen Z-er?) stands to create an even bigger legacy than either of his ancestors.  He is quietly laying the groundwork for a bulletproof bitcoin payment network, that SETTLES on the main chain.

Boom.

Credit card terminals are not going away.  Banks are not going away. Loans and mortgages and myriad other financial instruments are not going away.  The vision of each bitcoiner living in a citadel guarding his 8 of 15 multisig seed word stashes served by his farm of nodes all running mixing protocols and so on is a "Mountain Man Fantasy".  And some of those mountain men will doubtless exist.  But in reality the VAST majority of humans could never handle that amount of responsibility.  They want to pay someone else to guard their value for them.  Someone who is an expert in the kind of security needed to safeguard value, and now with the added wrinkles and challenges presented by cryptography.  Perhaps someone who offers insurance against a failure or theft. Someone who does all the dirtywork behind the scenes so you can buy your iconic cup of coffee without having to remember a 19 character password.  

Those someones are called "banks".  Or, at least that's what they used to be called.  This level of disruption is big enough that they COULD end up with a different name.

Actually there is a very good reason for Bitcoin-backed banks to exist, issuing their own digital cash currency, redeemable for bitcoins. Bitcoin itself cannot scale to have every single financial transaction in the world be broadcast to everyone and included in the block chain. There needs to be a secondary level of payment systems which is lighter weight and more efficient. Likewise, the time needed for Bitcoin transactions to finalize will be impractical for medium to large value purchases.

Bitcoin backed banks will solve these problems. They can work like banks did before nationalization of currency. Different banks can have different policies, some more aggressive, some more conservative. Some would be fractional reserve while others may be 100% Bitcoin backed. Interest rates may vary. Cash from some banks may trade at a discount to that from others.

That was a very wise man seeing the rise of Cash App, Strike, and Kraken back when everyone else was just wanting to figure out how to get around all the regulations that made it hard to play online poker.  Insert Ver's scrunched up face here as he foams at the mouth taking about PEER TO PEER CASH!!! AND I AM SORRY I JUST GET SO EMOTIONAL!

No one can stop you from using the chain.  Ever.  That is CERTAINLY one of the things that makes bitcoin a "zero to one" invention.  But if you really want to compete for the kind of VALUE that Bitcoin will command and REQUIRE for on chain transactions??? ...better get that business plan ready.  And there are some fairly smart folks out there with a good head start on you already.  Bitcoin is not replacing credit cards... Bitcoin is replacing FedWire.

If we want Bitcoin to be successful then this is where we are going.  And we should really be glad.  It might not look like what we all thought it would 10 years ago (or 7 or 3 or last week), and part of the reason for that is our vision is limited.  We get hung up, like Ver, on shiny things that look more important than they are.

That feeling you got when you did your first few Bitcoin transactions?  It's not going away.  It's just changing form.  And you are one of the lucky ones that got to experience that first.  Most people will have the much more ho-hum feeling of just watching the mover and shakers roll out the new world for them...

Personally, I'm pulling out the champaign that market behaviour is indeed producing activity levels that can pay for security without inflation, and also producing fee paying backlogs needed to stabilize consensus progress as the subsidy declines.

-Greg Maxwell around the BTC all time high Dec 2017. https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-December/015455.html

Happy Saturday!

Happy indeed.

Am far away from home taking a break just now, but even in the wildest remote places (thankfully) these days a cellular signal allows me to catch up with the WO.

Have to say today's pages have been a joy, with some intelligent, thoughtful posts.  I have to single this post out though. 

It is superb; insightful, open minded and persuasive in its radical and positive vision - it has even persuaded me to see things a little differently, which I am grateful for. It more than deserves the merit it has been showered with. 

Jeez cAPSLOCK, you are on fire. Keep it up. I am now just feeling a huge urge to sell everything I can possibly sell to buy more bitcoin.

And props for crediting Hal.  If i ever have the pleasure of meeting you the beers are on me.

[Toxic2040]

the evening wall report

Bitcoin finished strong today at $11,077.22 with light volume. Closing above the eleven thousand mark has been something it has been unable to do since the beginning of the September. Continued upwards bias with increasing volatility expected next week.  #dyor

4h


D

#stronkhands