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

[a1 Hashrate LLC2022]

When 32K?

[1714270833]

1714270833

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[death_wish]

When 32K?

When I switch my desktop wallpaper to the Bitcoin-in-a-Rollercoaster meme.

You seem to be well connected with the universe   

[Biodom]

For US based peeps...Sen. Lummis is about to introduce her bill (on Tuesday, I believe).

https://www.scribd.com/document/576008331/Lummis-Bill-Draft

TL;DR too complex to truly understand, but i noticed a couple of things:
1. $600 exception for payment (no tax on appreciation for tx less than $600).
2. Mining is not taxed until you sell btc for $ (or other coin, I suppose).

[death_wish]

Sen. Lummis is about to introduce her bill (on Tuesday, I believe).

https://www.scribd.com/document/576008331/Lummis-Bill-Draft

Thanks.  Is there a non-scribd link where a PDF or similar can be downloaded?

TL;DR too complex to truly understand, but i noticed a couple of things:
1. $600 exception for payment (no tax on appreciation for tx less than $600).
2. Mining is not taxed until you sell btc for $ (or other coin, I suppose).

I think the capital gains tax exemption for small purchases was expected.  That would remove one of the biggest obstacles to using Bitcoin as money.

I am worried about any possible attempt, by accident or otherwise, to redefine Bitcoin as something substantively different than a currency, for regulatory purposes.  Worst of all, anything that winds up twisting Bitcoin into a security.

Bitcoin has zero equity.  That’s an important feature.  It is also why it is perfectly fair to buy 10k BTC for 2 pizzas, or 1 BTC for $67k.  Bitcoin has no memory of what you paid for it.

(I may elaborate on this sometime, here or elsewhere.  Cryptic here, in a way.  I am deeply concerned about any attempt to redefine Bitcoin in this fashion, especially in the U.S. or other influential jurisdictions.  It would be easy to slip by the public, because most of the public stupidly thinks of Bitcoin as sort of like a stock.  STOP THAT!)

If you skimmed the bill, did you see the legal definitions that would apply to Bitcoin?

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[Biodom]

Sen. Lummis is about to introduce her bill (on Tuesday, I believe).

https://www.scribd.com/document/576008331/Lummis-Bill-Draft

Thanks.  Is there a non-scribd link where a PDF or similar can be downloaded?

TL;DR too complex to truly understand, but i noticed a couple of things:
1. $600 exception for payment (no tax on appreciation for tx less than $600).
2. Mining is not taxed until you sell btc for $ (or other coin, I suppose).

I think the capital gains tax exemption for small purchases was expected.  That would remove one of the biggest obstacles to using Bitcoin as money.

I am worried about any possible attempt, by accident or otherwise, to redefine Bitcoin as something substantively different than a currency, for regulatory purposes.  Worst of all, anything that winds up twisting Bitcoin into a security.

Bitcoin has zero equity.  That’s an important feature.  It is also why it is perfectly fair to buy 10k BTC for 2 pizzas, or 1 BTC for $67k.  Bitcoin has no memory of what you paid for it.

(I may elaborate on this sometime, here or elsewhere.  Cryptic here, in a way.  I am deeply concerned about any attempt to redefine Bitcoin in this fashion, especially in the U.S. or other influential jurisdictions.  It would be easy to slip by the public, because most of the public stupidly thinks of Bitcoin as sort of like a stock.  STOP THAT!)

If you skimmed the bill, did you see the legal definitions that would apply to Bitcoin?

This is a "view from above", so no coins are mentioned by name.
There are only "digital assets", "payment stablecoins" and "ancillary assets" (those are maybe tradable derivatives, like WBTC, for example).
Of interest, the bill specifically says that payment stablecoins CANNOT be backed by other "digital assets".
They also refer to "virtual currencies" and stipulate that those are NOT legal tender (of course, at this stage).
they also stipulate that "virtual currencies" have no backing by any financial assets (with the exception of "digital assets").
Specifically modifies language of 401K and 401a, allowing those to buy "digital assets". Wowza!
Specifically says that validators (miners), sellers of software and hardware, software developers are NOT brokers.
DAOs would be business entities, not disregarded entities.
Start of mark-to-market treatment of "digital assets", not forever intangibles anymore (not sure if this is good or bad).
NO cancellation of bank accounts for 'reputational risk'. "An appropriate Federal banking agency shall not restrict or discourage a depository institution from entering into or maintaining a banking relationship with a specific customer or group of customers based on reputation risk, including through the examinations and ratings of the depository institution."
This is nice as people lost accounts at some banks under the auspices of "reputational risk".

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[Richy_T]

OT: good for Wales, but there WAS a penalty (that was not given) to Ukraine.
There was a clear knock on (Yarmolenko's?) foot in the penalty area...maybe it was not fully intentional, but it is visible here:
https://youtu.be/XxfR-LtiiKM?t=259

Musta been Putin.

[serveria.com]

Wow.  While eating lunch, I put on a loop of the old “Slaying of the Bearwhale” video which I have been clinging to for comfort.

BTC price—cute little jump.

Could that be a coincidence?  Mere happenstance?  Random chance?  The hand of Fortuna dealing a joker on me?

Go Bitcoin go! 9 GREEN candles in a row now please! 

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[death_wish]

Sen. Lummis is about to introduce her bill (on Tuesday, I believe).

https://www.scribd.com/document/576008331/Lummis-Bill-Draft

Thanks.  Is there a non-scribd link where a PDF or similar can be downloaded?

The bill text that you linked is incorrect.  It has been explicitly disclaimed by Senator Lummis.  Please be more cautious.

https://nitter.net/SenLummis/status/1530281115247951872

I am working diligently with @sengillibrand to finalize bill text of our comprehensive digital asset legislation.

Any language circulating online is an incredibly outdated version from March 1. Stay tuned for our release of the actual bill on June 7th!

May 27, 2022 · 8:13 PM UTC · Twitter for iPhone

I found that tweet when searching for this about a week ago.  It was linked in a correction to an article by The Block.  The said article also linked to the exact same Scribd page—I didn’t notice earlier that it is the exact same link.

Here’s a full draft of Senator Cynthia Lummis' landmark crypto bill

by Kollen Post

[...]

In the months since the bill’s initial announcement, the senator’s staff has kept the actual text of the draft under wraps, using software that prohibits sharing and printing of the document. Various members of the crypto industry, lobby and Congressional staffers have expressed frustration about the limited access to the bill, which has changed frequently.

[...]

[Highlight of the following: https://archive.ph/TQcog#selection-785.0-815.10]

Following the publication of this story, Lummis said in a tweet that "any language circulating online is an incredibly outdated version from March 1," adding: "Stay tuned for our release of the actual bill on June 7th!"

According to a source with knowledge of the behind-the-scenes process, staffers have continued to update the bill’s contents.

Editor's Note: This story has been updated to reflect that, according to a post-publication comment from the Lummis team, the draft is dated March 1. Also adds a tweet from Lummis.

Lummis Bill Draft by Mike McSweeney on Scribd

Since The Block failed to fact-check this adequately before publication, I will make a mental note to be more skeptical of their articles (and of the byline “journalist”) in the future.


This is not only of interest to Americans.  Just as political pressure on mining in the E.U. affects American Bitcoiners, and just as 1990s-era U.S. export regulations on cryptography affected everyone in the world, I think that major American legislative activity about Bitcoin and cryptocurrency is of more general interest.

With all due respect to Senator Lummis, I’ll just say for now—this could be for better, or for worse.  If the bill released June 7 is anything like that early draft, I think it is overall much for the worse (despite a few improvements to the situation).  However, Senator Lummis obviously did not want to be held to whatever that text said.  Perhaps there may have been some major improvements.

[JayJuanGee]

UPSC Exams include Crypto-related stuff that seems good

Hory sssshhheeeeiiittt!!!!!


Any relation at all to this actual topic.. ?




Corns...




have you ever heard of dee corns?

 Rich people enjoy the benefits of debt.  Inflation favors indebtedness.  The system is rigged so that debt is extremely destructive to those with inadequate capital, but those with high capital and good access to the system can profit from borrowing money.  For those in a position that is favored by the way the whole system is set up, it is stupid not to be in debt!

That was a part of my thinking that got me in trouble.  I was trying to outsmart the system—to find clever ways to get the benefits of debt, when the system is stacked against me.  Compare my earlier discussion with Jay about Saylor’s use of debt to buy Bitcoin.  For him, that’s just savvy.  For me, it was catastrophic:  I thought I was being clever, but I was only finding creative ways to make all of the usual newbie mistakes.  I managed to stabilize it for awhile, and to hang on for much longer than a newbie could have; but after months of personal torture over this, I eventually lost most of my money anyway.

You are probably not saying anything different from what I am going to say in regards to the rich (and even regular folks with very decent cashflow) being able to use debt in ways that less cashflow rich folks are able to achieve... So sure, there is nothing wrong with having a lot of capital, but if you ONLY have capital, then you are fucked if you have not sufficiently/adequately figured out how to continue to service your debt during high downity asset depreciation liquidity events.

In other words, there still are needs to be able to draw cashflow from other sources, if primary cashflow sources dry up...

To me, it seems that a lot of people believe that they can just leverage their bitcoin (or whatever other asset) and get away with being richie.. but if they have not sufficiently planned for a variety of scenarios, they could end up transitioning back into pobre status after they had already presumed they were richie (or reached fuck you status before they actually did).

Inflation punishes savers, deflation punishes producers—that is Econ. 101.  To Keynesians, et al. (or worst of all, NMT lunatics), punishing savers is a feature, not a bug:  They call saving “hoarding money”.  Deflationary money is obviously a great store of value, and it makes for a sound reserve currency; the problem arises when some deflationary-money enthusiasts stick their heads in the sand about the well-known, entirely uncontroversial problems with deflationary currencies, while they hypocritically continue to use inflationary, centralized, permissioned altcioins (“fiat”) both directly, and as a unit of account.  I mention that because I think it’s no less than an historical tragedy that the whole concept of decentralized, permissionless price-stability has now been unfairly trashed by the actions of a scammer with a centralized blockchain.

(P.S., Jay, that relates to something I said earlier, which I think was misunderstood in your reply; I will try to circle back to that sometime.)

I don't necessarily claim to understand all points that you make, so perhaps sometimes I will end up going on my own tangent that I had thought responded to the presented issue(s).... Even in your paragraph above, you seem to be framing some of the LUNA matters as if they were structured in a way that anyone could actually logically and prudently involve their lil selfies in such scam products... so they are lured into earning massive gains, but there is no way to profit in those kinds of schemes unless you just have in and out gamblers luck (or maybe inside information or some kind of insured/assured closeness to the Cantillon effect distribution of the proceeds that are distributed while the rug is being pulled and/or the exit is being scammed).

By the way, if you (or anyone else) is attempting to completely stay away from increasingly KYC dollar systems, then you are trying to balance your BTC exposure with various "stable" currencies, you are likely making yourself vulnerable to a variety of exit scam issues because any of the ones that are "acceptable" by various governments including the USGovt, are forced to follow all kinds of KYC/Tracking procedures, so some of the coins that are trying to stay out of the KYC/Tracking procedures seem to have their own greater likelihoods to NOT provide you with the stability (or peggedness to the USD) that they proclaim to be providing.

Ok... I feel that I am going too much astray with some of this shitcoin discussions, and sure there might still be some ways to deal with USD (or other fiats) in a physical form, and surely engaging in some direct transactions with BTC can be quite good - but at the same time, any of us who might be attempting to balance some of our BTC exposure with something dollar/fiat pegged (maybe not exactly the dollar/fiat of your choice?), then there might be some limitations in what we can do without exposing ourselves to the scammers - if we do not have some KYC avenues.. that might be able to provide some of their own better security, even if there are then needs to retain some feet in legacy systems... and for me, I like options, and I don't really like having people steal my money because I thought that their system was not rug pull based.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[JayJuanGee]

Even though we probably should not be kissing the asses of anyone in bitcoin, even if they end up serving as a pretty BIG bitcoin spokesperson in a lot of ways.. And surely Saylor ended up coming to bitcoin in a way that was quite aggressive and assertive in terms of his investment of both money and time, as Gachapin pointed out.

He’s more than that.  MicroStrategy is a de facto national intelligence agency for Bitcoin.  Hello, what is their core business?  Their highly profitable business, the proceeds of which they have used to buy all those bitcoins?  Analytics and data mining to guide strategic business decisions.  Business Intelligence.

(This also relates to some points on the POW vs. POS thread, where I will reply later.)

I am dismayed that they apparently got blindsided together with everyone else, as someone out there quietly built up terrifically huge short positions and prepared to execute a multi-pronged trashing of the market, timed to hit right after the big Fed meeting.  But it’s not surprising.  MicroStrategy are no dummies—but (I infer/upon information and belief) Blackrock, Citadel, et al. are no dummies, either.  It is sharks vs. sharks, by analogy to “spy vs. spy”.

(Don’t forget that in mid-2020, Saylor himself very quietly built up MSTR’s initial long position.  IIRC, before he publicly announced it, he managed to scoop up something like 0.18% of the total then-existing BTC supply without anyone noticing.)

Not that timely intelligence on that would mean dumping BTC!  Not for someone who is in it for the long term.  If I had high capital and an inkling that a much higher-capital party was preparing to wreck the market, I would hold BTC long while shorting perps and dated futures, hedging with options, and taking other steps to batten down the hatches and secure my position with the goal of winding up with more BTC and more dollars at the bottom.

FYI, I also take it as highly significant that Saylor and his Business Intelligence company more or less suddenly exchanged their saved-up dollars to bitcoins in mid-2020.  (They essentially switched their savings account to BTC—before they started exchanging some of their ongoing income into bitcoins, and using debt to buy even more bitcoins.)  That is the action of an extremely well-informed investor, who had access to mountains of data that you and I have no idea about.

That’s much more significant than his tweets.  Helpful though those are (thx, @saylor).

I don't disagree with anything that you are saying, and surely Saylor was a fast studier into bitcoin, but I take him at his word in terms of his explanation that our March 2020 liquidity event (and governmental actions/reactions) surrounding that had triggered his looking into bitcoin.. so actually prior to March 2020 bitcoin was not on his radar.. except that he was largely dismissing it as a big nothing burger.

Sure, Saylor is smart.  Sure Saylor has a lot of sophisticated tools, and he articulates various bitcoin fundamentals quite well.

At the same time, he is not really saying anything new in terms of what OG bitcoiners had been saying for at least 6-8 years before he came onto the bitcoin scene... In some sense, the people coming into bitcoin are becoming smarter and smarter, but really they are building off the foundations of various giants and there is some symbioticness in regards to how the information builds, and for sure Saylor has put information together that is quite sophisticated in framing some of the bitcoin matters in new ways - so sure some aspects of bitcoin consciousness is likely changed and better informed and better able to parrot some of his talking points, too.

Maybe I am rambling a wee bit in my not disagreeing agreement with you.. and yeah, it sure is nice that we have Saylor on the bitcoin train.. and even though we can sometimes see his relatively BIG ego coming through some of his interviews, he does seem quite able to restrain various ego aspects and to ongoingly stay on message... and even he seems to recognize and appreciate that he is ONLY one cog in a bitcoin wheel that is much BIGGER than him.. while at the same time he seem to be doing his part to help spread the bitcoin message.. fairly regularly and much more than he needs to be doing.. as Gachapin mentioned he could be banging hot chicks all daylong from now until he kicks the bucket, but instead he chooses to spend his time talking about various aspects and angles of bitcoin 24/7-ish.

Jay, if you think I seem pessimistic now, you have no idea how I will personally redefine the whole concept of “pessimism” if Bitcoin fails.  The world needs Bitcoin.

You can only help yourself in regards to your own mental ways of dealing with the various ways that bitcoin continues to grow (or not), and even if I had used the word pessimism to describe you, I consider you to be overstating both the powers of any potential challengers who want to kill the golden goose, and understating bitcoin's already built in ability (even as a bunch of people) to stave off the various attacks that are likely to be thrown in the direction of bitcoin.

I have already responded to this point, so I doubt that I have much to add, and I doubt that I am even discounting that large attacks can be made onto bitcoin, but I question the extent to which we need to be living as scaredy cats in regards to such attack actions that they may well not be able to coordinate as well as you expect or to be successful.. yeah bitcoin is small and yeah bitcoin could get pushed underground....

I think the most important questions for each of us regards how we are going to allocate ourselves, and really, I had asked you at one point, DW, what is it that you want me (and others to do, exactly), and maybe I don't really want to know the answer to the extent that you have already provided some answers in that direction.

Please don’t incite the wannabe sleuths around here to start guessing which account is his.

On the other hand, it is an awful coincidence that I started sounding the alarm here in WO about POS being a serious threat to Bitcoin—and then, Saylor tweeted about it.  By wannabe-sleuth standards, that amounts to proof that I am Saylor’s super-secret Bitcoin Forum account!

oh gawd!!!!    

Is the idea really that ridiculous?  “Asking for a friend”—well, not for my friend.  My friends are not wannabe-sleuths who shoot off their mouths over irrelevant non-issues based on a few coincidences.  My friends are not possessed of such pettiness and poor judgment.

Needless to say, I myself am aware that the idea is ridiculous.  Nonetheless, rules are rules!

Pursuant to my strict policy in such matters, I neither admit nor deny the rumor that I am Saylor’s super-secret Bitcoin Forum account.

oh gawd!!!!    

[Khanvila78]

https://twitter.com/pete_rizzo_/status/1533392147738656769

[JayJuanGee]

It looks like it Happens every four years if BTC Follow the previous two. Then good Luck For 2023.
I believe Hodlers will never be upset, and they will try to accumulate more BTC If BTC hits the $20K-$25 Range or lower.
But, If BTC doesn't follow previous yearly patterns, It will put a smile on many people's faces. But, Holders will surely wait for some dips to make their DCA Cheaper.

Yes.. and they may well get fucked. if they put too much weight into getting BTC at prices cheaper than what has already been achieved.. already a 63% correction?   More is expected?

One way to screw a lot of folks waiting for cheaper bitcoin is to not allow the BTC price to go down as much as they expect.. then what?  Seen it plenty of times in the past.. folks looking for and waiting for lower BTC prices that do not end up happening.  What else is new?

[dragonvslinux]

RIP bearwhales. Many more short liquidations than the previous move to $31K last month. Not convinced this short squeeze is over yet if price can clear $32.4K previous lower high.



After 9 weeks of red came to an end yesterday with a Weekly doji reversal candle, today's upside shouldn't really come as any surprise. The wring was on the wall, written in big bold letters. Looks like it was also overdue by about 2 weeks imo. My only concern is that price remains in a bear flag on the 4hr, but the macro factors of Weekly oversold should override that eventually, even if takes a week or more. Between $35K and $40K things could really get interesting as sellers would again be trapped under $32K which we've seen twice before in January and Summer of 2021.

Weekly RSI is currently at a critical level, currently at 37.45. Closing above 37.5 would likely signal the end of the downtrend, similar to 2019 and 2020, but still 6 more days to go:



I also realise how bored and/or frustrated people are with various signals (particularly on-chain) that have signalled a bottom since the mid $30K range, basically 6 months ago. The fact that people are losing faith with various indicators is also a good thing though, the more people think this isn't the bottom then the more likely that it probably is. That said, enough indicators also suggest a bit more downside, so clearly various indicators aren't being as reliable as they usually are (or have been previously). Hence macro bull trap @ $69K followed by macro bear trap @ $25K by the looks of it.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation