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

[BitcoinBunny]

✨ Singer Lily Allen turning down 200,000 #Bitcoin  BTC  to play live on Second Life

Over $3,000,000,000 today  





Source

Wonder what she would do for 200,000 BTC today.



...

 Probably colour her hair.

I'll give her 0.1 BTC for wearing my cap for a year in public instead. Deadline offer: end of 2023.
Hopefully she will listen this time and not regret it again in 10 years when 1 BTC is $100 million.

[strawbs]

I know next to nothing about NFTs, which my question below might demonstrate.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/nft-influencer-falls-victim-to-cyberattack-loses-300k-cryptopunks

Surely one of the qualities of an NFT is that it is not fungible. Therefore, there is only one of its kind. So if this individual going by the name of "CryptoNovo" has had two "CryptoPunks" stolen and then apparently immediately sold onwards, surely the current owner is now in receipt of clearly stolen goods (since they are non-fungible)? Wouldn't the logical conclusion be that they therefore have no resale value and are therefore worth nothing? Much like the Mona Lisa being stolen - who would buy it when it's clearly been stolen?

I just don't get it. In fact, I just don't get NFT 'art' (if it can be called that) at all, but that's another point altogether. You could just do a screenshot of it, if you wanted it that badly, and pretend it was 'original....I dunno.

[nutildah]

Surely one of the qualities of an NFT is that it is not fungible. Therefore, there is only one of its kind. So if this individual going by the name of "CryptoNovo" has had two "CryptoPunks" stolen and then apparently immediately sold onwards, surely the current owner is now in receipt of clearly stolen goods (since they are non-fungible)? Wouldn't the logical conclusion be that they therefore have no resale value and are therefore worth nothing? Much like the Mona Lisa being stolen - who would buy it when it's clearly been stolen?

OpenSea does blacklist stuff if the original owner can clearly prove it was stolen. However, they can still be sold on other markets or P2P I suppose. CryptoPunks is one of the first series of "PFP collectible" NFTs on Ethereum, which is why they are worth big money. I think they look like crap but wouldn't say no if someone wanted to give me one.

I just don't get it. In fact, I just don't get NFT 'art' (if it can be called that) at all, but that's another point altogether. You could just do a screenshot of it, if you wanted it that badly, and pretend it was 'original....I dunno.

You could also do a screenshot of the Mona Lisa. No one's stopping you, go right ahead.

[BitcoinBunny]

I know next to nothing about NFTs, which my question below might demonstrate.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/nft-influencer-falls-victim-to-cyberattack-loses-300k-cryptopunks

Surely one of the qualities of an NFT is that it is not fungible. Therefore, there is only one of its kind. So if this individual going by the name of "CryptoNovo" has had two "CryptoPunks" stolen and then apparently immediately sold onwards, surely the current owner is now in receipt of clearly stolen goods (since they are non-fungible)? Wouldn't the logical conclusion be that they therefore have no resale value and are therefore worth nothing? Much like the Mona Lisa being stolen - who would buy it when it's clearly been stolen?

I just don't get it. In fact, I just don't get NFT 'art' (if it can be called that) at all, but that's another point altogether. You could just do a screenshot of it, if you wanted it that badly, and pretend it was 'original....I dunno.

Just a scam, like so many things these days.

Oh I know, I'll make a shitty drink, call it shitface and get it pumped to the heavens by a shit "celebrity", you "need this in your life". Another scam.

[test2026]

I know next to nothing about NFTs, which my question below might demonstrate.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/nft-influencer-falls-victim-to-cyberattack-loses-300k-cryptopunks

Surely one of the qualities of an NFT is that it is not fungible. Therefore, there is only one of its kind. So if this individual going by the name of "CryptoNovo" has had two "CryptoPunks" stolen and then apparently immediately sold onwards, surely the current owner is now in receipt of clearly stolen goods (since they are non-fungible)? Wouldn't the logical conclusion be that they therefore have no resale value and are therefore worth nothing? Much like the Mona Lisa being stolen - who would buy it when it's clearly been stolen?

I just don't get it. In fact, I just don't get NFT 'art' (if it can be called that) at all, but that's another point altogether. You could just do a screenshot of it, if you wanted it that badly, and pretend it was 'original....I dunno.

I also do not know much about NFT but their is digital signature kind of thing to prove ownership. You cannot screenshot it and claim it to be yours.

[strawbs]

You could also do a screenshot of the Mona Lisa. No one's stopping you, go right ahead.

Yup, that's my point!

[nutildah]

You could also do a screenshot of the Mona Lisa. No one's stopping you, go right ahead.

Yup, that's my point!

A bit different from owning the original tho innit.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[eXPHorizon]

I know next to nothing about NFTs, which my question below might demonstrate.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/nft-influencer-falls-victim-to-cyberattack-loses-300k-cryptopunks

Surely one of the qualities of an NFT is that it is not fungible. Therefore, there is only one of its kind. So if this individual going by the name of "CryptoNovo" has had two "CryptoPunks" stolen and then apparently immediately sold onwards, surely the current owner is now in receipt of clearly stolen goods (since they are non-fungible)? Wouldn't the logical conclusion be that they therefore have no resale value and are therefore worth nothing? Much like the Mona Lisa being stolen - who would buy it when it's clearly been stolen?

I just don't get it. In fact, I just don't get NFT 'art' (if it can be called that) at all, but that's another point altogether. You could just do a screenshot of it, if you wanted it that badly, and pretend it was 'original....I dunno.

Just a scam, like so many things these days.

Oh I know, I'll make a shitty drink, call it shitface and get it pumped to the heavens by a shit "celebrity", you "need this in your life". Another scam.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rwsqb4B1lKY

 POV: Logan Paul Steals Your Wallet



pretty funny 

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[xhomerx10]

I know next to nothing about NFTs, which my question below might demonstrate.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/nft-influencer-falls-victim-to-cyberattack-loses-300k-cryptopunks

Surely one of the qualities of an NFT is that it is not fungible. Therefore, there is only one of its kind. So if this individual going by the name of "CryptoNovo" has had two "CryptoPunks" stolen and then apparently immediately sold onwards, surely the current owner is now in receipt of clearly stolen goods (since they are non-fungible)? Wouldn't the logical conclusion be that they therefore have no resale value and are therefore worth nothing? Much like the Mona Lisa being stolen - who would buy it when it's clearly been stolen?

I just don't get it. In fact, I just don't get NFT 'art' (if it can be called that) at all, but that's another point altogether. You could just do a screenshot of it, if you wanted it that badly, and pretend it was 'original....I dunno.

Just a scam, like so many things these days.

Oh I know, I'll make a shitty drink, call it shitface and get it pumped to the heavens by a shit "celebrity", you "need this in your life". Another scam.

 What's in that stuff, Gwyneth Paltrow's urine?

[BitcoinBunny]

I know next to nothing about NFTs, which my question below might demonstrate.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/nft-influencer-falls-victim-to-cyberattack-loses-300k-cryptopunks

Surely one of the qualities of an NFT is that it is not fungible. Therefore, there is only one of its kind. So if this individual going by the name of "CryptoNovo" has had two "CryptoPunks" stolen and then apparently immediately sold onwards, surely the current owner is now in receipt of clearly stolen goods (since they are non-fungible)? Wouldn't the logical conclusion be that they therefore have no resale value and are therefore worth nothing? Much like the Mona Lisa being stolen - who would buy it when it's clearly been stolen?

I just don't get it. In fact, I just don't get NFT 'art' (if it can be called that) at all, but that's another point altogether. You could just do a screenshot of it, if you wanted it that badly, and pretend it was 'original....I dunno.

Just a scam, like so many things these days.

Oh I know, I'll make a shitty drink, call it shitface and get it pumped to the heavens by a shit "celebrity", you "need this in your life". Another scam.

 What's in that stuff, Gwyneth Paltrow's urine?

I hope she didn't eat asparagus.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[cygan]

i miss ya....

Explanation

[shahzadafzal]

i miss ya....

Explanation

I miss you too buddy!!!

Explanation

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[Unknown Op]

TWITTER

[OutOfMemory]

My perception is definitely things went down after the start of the pandemic, not only referring to this thread.

Most definitely covid had something to do with it. The pandemic caused a lot of conspiracy-prone inhabitants of this thread to fly totally off the chain, never to return to a state of mental balance...

sadly... many of the conspiracies became reality and we are not through that yet.
So who is to blame...

Not only conspiracies, there was a social shockwave going around the planet.
(i should not sound too dramatic, though)
This crisis has put our nerves and viewpoints to the test, not to mention the numerous facepalm events, that still make me feel like they left a slight groove on my forehead...
A good outlook how much we would fail in face of a real crisis of bigger magnitudes, and they definitely are already building up slowly.
Not to sound too negative, but humanity is very far from being able to "control" anything on this planet. Pretty risky for a "we shall address this later, let's just keep calm and continue observing". From an tech enthusiast's view like me, it's like looking at a historically overgrown piece of proprietary software, which every programmer is afraid to touch in fear of breaking things.

Imaginary developer: "Let's just let this thing run, it always worked in the past, so it will probably work forever. The smoke coming out of the vents should be nothing to worry about, right?"

Humans had always have to deal with crises and were never in control.  It's always been that way.
So far... we have come very far.  We were dying in our 30s not long time ago. Humanity is a huge success story in terms of development, if you ask me.

And if humanity doesn't make it, so bei it.  I'm sure we are not the only life in the universe.  

Like you said, it's all very complex.  And we sure know that central planning is not the way to go in society.  We all are the "programmers" you mention but not one of us has the perfect plan.  It's a process taking thousands of years. I'm not even sure that you or I could even evaluate that realistically within our 100 years lifetime....

... we can just individually rely on our intellect, intuition and feelings and guess what is best... we are just a kind of animal moving around and not the designer of it all  ...that would be nature or how you wanna call it

I think you mean what i would call "mankind". By "humanity" i was meaning our emotional, emphatic nature of our being. "humaneness" would be a synonym.
All other things you said are right, though.
The central problem here, i  guess, is that we are capable of thinking ahead, evaluating consequences of our planned actions, but we don't really do this, nor we know how to do this. Mankind, i mean...