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

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[1680200012]

1680200012

[1680200012]

1680200012

[1680200012]

1680200012

[ThemePen]

Damn it it’s going down again!!!

[MusaPk]

Michael Saylor's take on SBF and the FTX collapse -- Apologies if already posted.

Michael Saylor Destroys Sam Bankman-Fried From FTX

An interesting watch.

Excellent explanation by Michael Saylor's on mess created by SAM. The interview tells how important it is holding keys of your bitcoin.

The best part I like is at 3:40 "... he (SAM) runs a bank at FTX. He applied for a loan from himself . He granted himself a loan ..."

[Cryptotourist]

You believe that your examples are the same?  You've got logical fallacy (or would it be called analogy-choosing deficiencies?) issues.  No?

No I don’t, I just don’t appreciate your uie pooie jumping onto any kind of SOMA prediction, and trying to make it look extra silly.
It’s silly by default, even if it turns out true.

Why get so emotional?

Because I’m a Bitcoiner, and you called me a no coiner. Makes sense? No?

I cannot really know for sure, but maybe if you have less than what you should have in BTC in accordance with your finances and psychology measurements that you have to make.  I tend to recommend an investment portfolio that is between 1% and 25% for newbies starting out, yet each person has to figure out his her proper balance.. so a low coiner would be someone who is being overly whimpy whether intentionally or accidentally.

My investment portfolio is 99% Bitcoin. [and a little of that other shitcoin I won’t mention]
I’ve also made efforts to sell some RE in the last couple of years, only to enhance my position on Bitcoin even further, and tip the scale between Bitcoin and my net worth.

Stop enjoying it... whether pleasantly or otherwise.  

Come on Jay, get a grip.
Bitcoin is going to do Bitcoin, regardless.

Wow.  That's a lot.  Selling that much might well 'splain some of your good mood, currently.

Actually dismissed 75% and 100% because … I love Bitcoin, AND I’m not that greedy.

Are you trying to suggest that you are on a higher plane than everyone else here?

No.

Have you realized that we are in a thread in which we are talking about bitcoin.. which is a form of money?.. sure it has other characteristics too, but bitcoin is the topic of this thread.

Sure, Bitcoin is sound money.
I only want what I think I need in my bubble though, nothing more, nothing less.

1) do you believe that it is beneficial or even desirable to delegate all things?

I believe humour is essential.

2) have we established that this cat happens to be a higher coiner than any other cat, including you?

Don’t get cocky now, or I’ll have to bat slap you back into your senses.

In theory, that would be great.

Errr, gosh, whatever!

For what am I choosing?  Are you trying to undermine OPsec of a peep?  Shame on uie-pooie.

Grip, grip it, get a grip.

That's pretty specific.

Indeed it is, didn’t you just love it?

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[philipma1957]

...



AT this particular moment, it is hard to argue with that kind of a scenario... .. but now that you wrote it down, it is NOT likely to happen..

 


You shouldn't have said anything.

I am considering that we might well be in a period that might be close to bottom for fiat-related bullshit.. .. so in essence fiat is largely sideways. and bitcoin does not necessarily do bad in "fiat sideways" kinds of scenarios... so "fiat sideways" bitcoin trickling up and trickling up.. and if bitcoin trickles up too much, then that becomes problematic for no coiners, low coiners and bitcoin naysayers.. because value ends up gravitating in bitcoin's direction.. so higher levels of desperation, attacks and battles against bitcoin could be part of the messy short term.. .. but the word is still getting out.. seems to me... trickle, trickle trickle.. starts to add up after a while.. no?

We can agree on this above.

Thus A new era for BTC could be its: a boring sideways asset linked to silver, gold and stocks.

Yet another toy for the wealthy to play with as they make their pile of wealth get bigger.

[Torque]

OT:

California cuts payments to homeowners for solar panels feeding energy back to the grid
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/15/california-lowers-solar-energy-incentives-for-homeowners.html

[bct_ail]

Damn it it’s going down again!!!

I think it is because Mc Affee lost his bet. "He" is easier to eat with lesser hardness.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[Richy_T]

Well, that's a shame.

[BobLawblaw]

[d_eddie]

What's up with Arthur?

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[WhyFhy]

Any of yall messed with GPT with primed constraints?
Or tried primed constraints through organic conversational flow?
I'm curious about the deductive reasoning and correlation skills this has as they are mind blowing if you can get it to speculate and ask it why on an "opinion".
On another note, they have nerfed it sooo much the last 2 weeks, without conversational manipulation its a diluted canned response feel.

[Lucius]

Why are we going up ?

Probably because today is December 13, and some farts in the US will announce some new numbers today and probably cause a new mini crash - and some others in that case will not miss the opportunity to dump their BTC at a higher price - as laymen would say, a classic trap for the naive

It's not that I'm happy to quote myself, but it must be admitted that this was a very good trap

[philipma1957]

OT:

California cuts payments to homeowners for solar panels feeding energy back to the grid
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/15/california-lowers-solar-energy-incentives-for-homeowners.html

Sad state.

Here in NJ we have 1 to 1 kwatt credit.

It build a 280 kwatt solar array like we did. burn 55 kwatts 24/7/365. is 1260 kwatts burned

feed the grid the extra 225 kwatts for and average of 5 or 6 hours a day. yeah days are longer but 5-6 is the full power average daily.

so 5 x 230 = 1125 kwatts credited back.

1260-1125 = 135  you owe this much kwatts

 55 x 5 = 275 used directly when sun is up

so  135-275 = -140 net kwatts daily  so burn just a little more than 55 kwatts to mine each day. As your goal is to be net 0 or + very little kwatts each day.


This should be federal law as the minimum any grid can pay.

While solar will never zero out carbon. it could drop carbon for electrical use by more than 45%.

Rather than the meager 10% or so it does now.

[fillippone]

Hello gang,
Observing 16,964@stamp.

I just wanted to post an analysis by @Plutosky, a fierce contributor to the Italian board, who is reluctant to post in English.
As I think he produces excellent content, I used a little force on him and translated one of his posts.
Do you think it is worthy material? If so, drop son love merit on him!

This graph is beautiful: it shows how the probability that a UTXO will be spent in the following X days from its creation (where X, according to the curve, is equal at 7,14,30,60,90 and 120 days) is a function (decreasing) of the age of the UTXO.



In other words, when some BTC is spent, there is a high probability that it will be quickly spent again. If they don't, the likelihood of them being spent drops quickly over time.

The very interesting thing is that regardless of the time interval considered and, therefore, of the curve represented on the graph, the lines all tend to "become horizontal" after about six months (vertical dashed line).

On average, after six months, the probability that bitcoins will be re-spent in the following X days (where X ranges from 7 to 120 days) stabilises and becomes almost constant.

We can therefore define the six months of UTXO immobilisation as the watershed that separates the Short Term Holders (i.e. speculators or those who use BTC for purchases, remittances and, in general, any type of "dynamic" use) from the real Long Term Holders).

The next step is to ask yourself: how do UTXOs that have been idle for at least 6 months change over time?

Here we go:



Beyond momentary declines associated with the phases of euphoria of the bullish markets, the amount of BTC has been hodled for at least 6 months, it always grows in the long run, especially during bear markets

The curious thing is that this greater general immobilisation of bitcoins is associated with the more frenetic activity of younger bitcoins. The UTXOs spent are close to their all-time highs:



this is mainly explained by the fact that the volume of BTC spent with less than 6 months of seniority is at very high levels from a bull market



For me, the conclusions that can be drawn from this set of information are the following:

1- The share of BTC that go from dynamic use (Hodl< 6 months) to outright hodl (last movement > 6 months). This growth is slow but constant, and increases in bear markets

2- The dynamic uses of BTC are increasing both as utxo spent (at the maximum despite the doom and gloom atmosphere) and as volumes spent.

3- the first two statements, which seem to contradict each other, can be explained by an increase in the dynamics of the most recently spent BTC.

In a nutshell, the separation between immobilised and dynamic BTCs is increasingly clear-cut: the former are increasingly "stationary" (and grow over time) the latter are increasingly "moved" (and decrease over time).

The two souls of BTC (SoV and MoE+speculation) seem alive and kicking, despite the period we are experiencing.  

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[philipma1957]

Hello gang,
Observing 16,964@stamp.

I just wanted to post an analysis by @Plutosky, a fierce contributor to the Italian board, who is reluctant to post in English.
As I think he produces excellent content, I used a little force on him and translated one of his posts.
Do you think it is worthy material? If so, drop son love merit on him!

This graph is beautiful: it shows how the probability that a UTXO will be spent in the following X days from its creation (where X, according to the curve, is equal at 7,14,30,60,90 and 120 days) is a function (decreasing) of the age of the UTXO.



In other words, when some BTC is spent, there is a high probability that it will be quickly spent again. If they don't, the likelihood of them being spent drops quickly over time.

The very interesting thing is that regardless of the time interval considered and, therefore, of the curve represented on the graph, the lines all tend to "become horizontal" after about six months (vertical dashed line).

On average, after six months, the probability that bitcoins will be re-spent in the following X days (where X ranges from 7 to 120 days) stabilises and becomes almost constant.

We can therefore define the six months of UTXO immobilisation as the watershed that separates the Short Term Holders (i.e. speculators or those who use BTC for purchases, remittances and, in general, any type of "dynamic" use) from the real Long Term Holders).

The next step is to ask yourself: how do UTXOs that have been idle for at least 6 months change over time?

Here we go:



Beyond momentary declines associated with the phases of euphoria of the bullish markets, the amount of BTC has been hodled for at least 6 months, it always grows in the long run, especially during bear markets

The curious thing is that this greater general immobilisation of bitcoins is associated with the more frenetic activity of younger bitcoins. The UTXOs spent are close to their all-time highs:



this is mainly explained by the fact that the volume of BTC spent with less than 6 months of seniority is at very high levels from a bull market



For me, the conclusions that can be drawn from this set of information are the following:

1- The share of BTC that go from dynamic use (Hodl< 6 months) to outright hodl (last movement > 6 months). This growth is slow but constant, and increases in bear markets

2- The dynamic uses of BTC are increasing both as utxo spent (at the maximum despite the doom and gloom atmosphere) and as volumes spent.

3- the first two statements, which seem to contradict each other, can be explained by an increase in the dynamics of the most recently spent BTC.

In a nutshell, the separation between immobilised and dynamic BTCs is increasingly clear-cut: the former are increasingly "stationary" (and grow over time) the latter are increasingly "moved" (and decrease over time).

The two souls of BTC (SoV and MoE+speculation) seem alive and kicking, despite the period we are experiencing.  

this is a good post. gives me a lot to think about.

his analysis justifies my idea in this thread.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5427871.msg61436890#msg61436890


if only new coins recirculating like mad we could lose btc circulation by 2056

my idea of streching the time from 4 to 8 years would likely help continue that new coin circulation action

well past 2056