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

[God Of Thunder]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[_Hiloveua_]

https://news.bitcoin.com/fed-chair-powell-signals-more-rate-hikes-this-year-as-taming-inflation-has-long-way-to-go/

Fed Chair Powell on Future Rate Hikes and Inflation.

Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell signaled more interest rate hikes this year in his prepared remarks before the House Financial Services Committee Wednesday. His speech was part of his appearance on Capitol Hill to present the Federal Reserve’s semiannual Monetary Policy Report. During the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting last week, Fed officials decided to pause raising interest rates after 10 consecutive rate hikes.

“In light of how far we have come in tightening policy, the uncertain lags with which monetary policy affects the economy, and potential headwinds from credit tightening, the FOMC decided last week to maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 5 to 5-1/4 percent and to continue the process of significantly reducing our securities holdings,” the Fed chair detailed, elaborating.

[machasm]

I found this story fascinating:

Apparently, there was a 'bug" (or rather technically undefined area) in the original bitcoin code that would produce ANOTHER 21 mil btc starting in the year 256 from the get-go.
The "bug" was eradicated in BIP-42, which was done post-Satoshi.
Without BIP-42, rewards of 50BTC would restart in 256 years, then halvings would continue again (from 50btc/reward to down).

A bit of 'conspiracy' theory on my side, but how do we know that this was not the Satoshi's intent?
I keep reading about 4 mil 'lost" already in just 14 years.
What if Satoshi surmised that this loss in 256 years (with issuance stopping by year 2140) would bring available bitcoin numbers too low and actually designed the "bug" to revitalize bitcoin about a century after. Interesting, but would not affect things in our lifespan, perhaps.

See the discussion of BIP-42 here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4r878s/in_case_you_missed_it_two_years_ago_bip_42_is/

You have a relatively creative imagination, yet what you are describing could not have been Satoshi's intent.

It does not make any sense to start the issuing of blockrewards over again at 50 coins per ever 10 minutes... that would really fuck up incentives and overall value... so that's a bug.. not a "hidden - true intention" of satoshi.

Perhaps it was not his intent, albeit we would never know, I assume, but, then, how to deal with bitcoin "evaporation"?
We, as a humanity, seem to have lost about 20% of ALL bitcoins that would ever be in a short 14 years.
I know that people dismiss it and say that the rest are just getting more valuable. True, but only in a short time.
However, think about it long term: a complete loss is inevitable within relatively short historical time frames.
So far, we were losing btc at a 1.36% 0.286% (of the total supply) a year.
With the same rate of loss going forward, it would be 59.5 350 years until all btc is lost.
If the loss would decrease by a factor of 10, then it is 595 3500 years.

I find it amusing that the original code of Satoshi had in it a "revitalization" of bitcoin by a new issuance cycle after 256 years.
As 256 is < than 350 (my original number), but > than 59.5 there might would still be some non-zero btc remain when the new "cycle' would supposedly start, according to the original code, therefore, bitcoin never 'evaporates' fully and instead, revitalizes. If the rate of loss remains at 1.36% a year, all bitcoin evaporates before even the original Satoshi's solution (or omission/caveat) can work.

There could be another solution (but I like Satoshi's better):
1. Change to the address system so everybody has to send their btc every, say, 50 100 years.
2. From that, surmise the actual "losses" and make a small random seepage of new btc, so total number never exceeds 21 mil. Not sure how to do it in code.

TL;DR All bitcoin will eventually "evaporate" according to the current code and historical human behavior. BIP-42 might have been detrimental to the future (hundreds of years from now).

EDIT: the math is even worse: 1.36% loss a year, see correction. We would need to know the average loss per year pretty soon, maybe in the next couple of decades.

Be reminded of this quote:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=198.msg1647#msg1647

Your solution to a problem, that very well may or may not happen, will be more of a detriment to the Bitcoin ecosystem.

Forcing people to act a certain way in order to keep participating?.. where to next?

Changing the rules mid game is the reason why we are in this situation. Dollar back by faith not gold, money printer go brrr! de-valuation of your money and time, etc etc.

I have to strongly disagree with you that bitcoin will eventually "evaporate". If we humans are so dumb to "lose access" to every single bitcoin, every single sat, then we have bigger issues to worry about.

Historical human behavior, relatively short in the grand scheme of things, has shown, we are exceptionally good at doing what humans do, and that is survive!

Considering how often humanity changes what it believes to be 'money' then I think something would have been put in place by then to mitigate this problem. Also I don't believe that we would continue to lose BTC at the rate described as we understand how valuable it really is. Perhaps a unit smaller than a sat might eventually exist?
Who knows.
I certainly don't lose any sleep over it considering the immediate hurdles bitcoin faces. I am feeling pretty smug right now though knowing that adoption is inevitable.

[somac.]

30k is nice

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[eXPHorizon]

I found this story fascinating:

Apparently, there was a 'bug" (or rather technically undefined area) in the original bitcoin code that would produce ANOTHER 21 mil btc starting in the year 256 from the get-go.
The "bug" was eradicated in BIP-42, which was done post-Satoshi.
Without BIP-42, rewards of 50BTC would restart in 256 years, then halvings would continue again (from 50btc/reward to down).

A bit of 'conspiracy' theory on my side, but how do we know that this was not the Satoshi's intent?
I keep reading about 4 mil 'lost" already in just 14 years.
What if Satoshi surmised that this loss in 256 years (with issuance stopping by year 2140) would bring available bitcoin numbers too low and actually designed the "bug" to revitalize bitcoin about a century after. Interesting, but would not affect things in our lifespan, perhaps.

See the discussion of BIP-42 here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4r878s/in_case_you_missed_it_two_years_ago_bip_42_is/

You have a relatively creative imagination, yet what you are describing could not have been Satoshi's intent.

It does not make any sense to start the issuing of blockrewards over again at 50 coins per ever 10 minutes... that would really fuck up incentives and overall value... so that's a bug.. not a "hidden - true intention" of satoshi.

Perhaps it was not his intent, albeit we would never know, I assume, but, then, how to deal with bitcoin "evaporation"?
We, as a humanity, seem to have lost about 20% of ALL bitcoins that would ever be in a short 14 years.
I know that people dismiss it and say that the rest are just getting more valuable. True, but only in a short time.
However, think about it long term: a complete loss is inevitable within relatively short historical time frames.
So far, we were losing btc at a 1.36% 0.286% (of the total supply) a year.
With the same rate of loss going forward, it would be 59.5 350 years until all btc is lost.
If the loss would decrease by a factor of 10, then it is 595 3500 years.

I find it amusing that the original code of Satoshi had in it a "revitalization" of bitcoin by a new issuance cycle after 256 years.
As 256 is < than 350 (my original number), but > than 59.5 there might would still be some non-zero btc remain when the new "cycle' would supposedly start, according to the original code, therefore, bitcoin never 'evaporates' fully and instead, revitalizes. If the rate of loss remains at 1.36% a year, all bitcoin evaporates before even the original Satoshi's solution (or omission/caveat) can work.

There could be another solution (but I like Satoshi's better):
1. Change to the address system so everybody has to send their btc every, say, 50 100 years.
2. From that, surmise the actual "losses" and make a small random seepage of new btc, so total number never exceeds 21 mil. Not sure how to do it in code.

TL;DR All bitcoin will eventually "evaporate" according to the current code and historical human behavior. BIP-42 might have been detrimental to the future (hundreds of years from now).

EDIT: the math is even worse: 1.36% loss a year, see correction. We would need to know the average loss per year pretty soon, maybe in the next couple of decades.

Be reminded of this quote:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=198.msg1647#msg1647

Your solution to a problem, that very well may or may not happen, will be more of a detriment to the Bitcoin ecosystem.

Forcing people to act a certain way in order to keep participating?.. where to next?

Changing the rules mid game is the reason why we are in this situation. Dollar back by faith not gold, money printer go brrr! de-valuation of your money and time, etc etc.

I have to strongly disagree with you that bitcoin will eventually "evaporate". If we humans are so dumb to "lose access" to every single bitcoin, every single sat, then we have bigger issues to worry about.

Historical human behavior, relatively short in the grand scheme of things, has shown, we are exceptionally good at doing what humans do, and that is survive!

Considering how often humanity changes what it believes to be 'money' then I think something would have been put in place by then to mitigate this problem. Also I don't believe that we would continue to lose BTC at the rate described as we understand how valuable it really is. Perhaps a unit smaller than a sat might eventually exist?
Who knows.
I certainly don't lose any sleep over it considering the immediate hurdles bitcoin faces. I am feeling pretty smug right now though knowing that adoption is inevitable.

Last part of the Picture is when Bljatcoin comes in with its com. Catastrophic

[BitcoinBunny]

UK interest rates up by 0.50 basis points to 5%

I can see them going to 7% easily.

[Who is John Galt?]

30k is nice

300k will be even better!

[God Of Thunder]

30k is nice

300k will be even better!

That will be a dream. BTC

[_Hiloveua_]

30k is nice

300k will be even better!

That will be a dream. BTC

That's not dream, 300k Hit Halving 2024.

50k end of June.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[BobLawblaw]

[El duderino_]

https://twitter.com/neiljacobs/status/1671832763467542537?s=46&t=1pkPzC1FtXIsCLMoTb1G1Q

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[xhomerx10]

https://twitter.com/neiljacobs/status/1671832763467542537?s=46&t=1pkPzC1FtXIsCLMoTb1G1Q

 Honey badger DGAF; especially when it comes to talking heads.

[Hueristic]

https://twitter.com/neiljacobs/status/1671832763467542537?s=46&t=1pkPzC1FtXIsCLMoTb1G1Q

All 500 of Ethereum's Co Founders

That bit's pretty funny LOL

[ivomm]

30k is nice

https://twitter.com/i/status/1671544201081937920

[JayJuanGee]

...I don't claim to know...

If you ever do the math it would be an interesting read.

Are you trying to cause me to do work?

 


I will probably go through it a bit more thoroughly at some point  --- I am still kind of shocked that it happened.. and still making little adjustments here and there to account for having that extra money (windfall).. ..


Ok... I cannot resist doing a little something right now.. .so here's another ballpark quickie assessment:

If the totality of the amount of my BTC that I had on that exchange was ONLY in the 2%-ish territory of my BTC portfolio, there is ONLY so much that I could have had profited from even crazy-ass price moves, yet those sell orders filled all the way up the line from $29.5k-ish to $129.5k-ish (in varying increments..and even varying amounts) to then end causing almost all of the BTC that I had on that exchange to sell (that's because I had already decided awhile back to mostly remove from exchanges the excessive BTC that I was not putting into sell orders or at least contemplating that I would put such BTC into a sell order in the near future).

Therefore, when the BTC price went shooting up to $138k on that I exchange I ended up selling almost all (minus some slivers of coin) of the coin that I then had on that exchange, and so when I bought back around $28.8k-ish, I more than doubled the coins (something like a 1.5x increase in the value that I held on that exchange, but I did not use all the money yet to buy back BTC with it..

So far, I just bought back the BTC that I had sold plus an additional 30%-ish).  Still since the total amount that I held there was ONLY 2%-ish of my total BTC stash.. so it seems to me that I profited by increasing the value in that account by something in the ballpark of 3%.. which would be a 1.5x increase of the stash on that account.. so it moved from around 2% of my total BTC stash to maybe in the ballpark of 5% of my total stash..

Of course, some of it is still in play because so far it did not get converted to BTC, and even though currently we see a lot  of seeming FOMO going on right now, I have no reason to FOMO because I have plenty of BTC, and I had plenty of BTC prior to this incident - yet who is going to refuse receiving some freebies?

Ok.. you tricked me into saying most of what I might be able to say right now.. even though I do sometimes create charts for myself regarding various statuses of where my BTC/fiat holdings (or even other investments) might stand (especially if decently sized changes have occurred in recent times), so sometimes when I create those new assessment charts, I will thereafter become motivated to tweak aspects of my investment portfolio or even my investment or my consumption strategies... not everything needs to be investment, to the extent that hookers, lambos and blow might be considered as investments rather than arguably maniacal consumption.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com