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

[d_eddie]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

Thank god it's Sunday
Buddy's a broken record?
Is this a haiku?




#haiku

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[nutildah]

"Write me a sad haiku about the price of Bitcoin being suppressed"

Bitcoin's value weighed,
Suppression casts a dark veil,
Dreams deferred, hearts pained.

"Write me a happy haiku about the price of Bitcoin being suppressed"

Underneath the weight,
Bitcoin's strength, a happy fate,
Resilience creates.

[AlcoHoDL]

"Write me a sad haiku about the price of Bitcoin being suppressed"

Bitcoin's value weighed,
Suppression casts a dark veil,
Dreams deferred, hearts pained.

"Write me a happy haiku about the price of Bitcoin being suppressed"

Underneath the weight,
Bitcoin's strength, a happy fate,
Resilience creates.

Looks like AI can't yet count syllables... Good. Mankind is safe for now.

[Pingrapole]

"Write me a sad haiku about the price of Bitcoin being suppressed"

Bitcoin's value weighed,
Suppression casts a dark veil,
Dreams deferred, hearts pained.

"Write me a happy haiku about the price of Bitcoin being suppressed"

Underneath the weight,
Bitcoin's strength, a happy fate,
Resilience creates.

Looks like AI can't yet count syllables... Good. Mankind is safe for now.

Bitcoin's sad haiku, it only sounds like it is nothing but bitcoin's happy haiku is the actual and eternal thing about bitcoin.Many measures are currently being developed to combat this and many are putting off dreams, in fact they are not putting off your next haiku is more acceptable to those who is patient.Bitcoin happy and resilient currency it is permanent and a reliable dream address.

[xhomerx10]

"Write me a sad haiku about the price of Bitcoin being suppressed"

Bitcoin's value weighed,
Suppression casts a dark veil,
Dreams deferred, hearts pained.

"Write me a happy haiku about the price of Bitcoin being suppressed"

Underneath the weight,
Bitcoin's strength, a happy fate,
Resilience creates.

Looks like AI can't yet count syllables... Good. Mankind is safe for now.

 No, it's good - that's 5 - resilience is 3 syllables.  Scary that it can add rhyming words now too - it's a new variation on Haiku.

edit: I'm basing that on the fact that ChatGTP comes from an American company so it likely uses American pronunciation. 

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[AlcoHoDL]

"Write me a sad haiku about the price of Bitcoin being suppressed"

Bitcoin's value weighed,
Suppression casts a dark veil,
Dreams deferred, hearts pained.

"Write me a happy haiku about the price of Bitcoin being suppressed"

Underneath the weight,
Bitcoin's strength, a happy fate,
Resilience creates.

Looks like AI can't yet count syllables... Good. Mankind is safe for now.

 No, it's good - that's 5 - resilience is 3 syllables.  Scary that it can add rhyming words now too - it's a new variation on Haiku.

edit: I'm basing that on the fact that ChatGTP comes from an American company so it likely uses American pronunciation.  

Maybe you (and the AI) are right. I just checked a few online syllable counters, some report 3, others 4 syllables for resilience... Re-sil-i-ence sounds right to me, but what do I know...

[OgNasty]

First time September was positive since 2016!

There’s definitely a feeling in the market that the last cycle was depressed with fraud and maybe this will be the most explosive cycle yet. I’m not sure if that is what will happen or not, but for now it seems like the downward pressure is starting to subside a little bit as we inch up from here over the $27K level.

[BobLawblaw]

Why would it be their last? Depeche Mode is going to last forever

Fletch was really the only thing keeping Martin and Dave in check.

With him being gone, I don't see what motivates them to continue.

Perhaps the two new band-members are acting as good intermediaries, but Gahan and Gore mix about as well as oil and water behind the scenes.

[AlcoHoDL]

Socrates once said:
"I know that I know nothing."
Yet he knew so much...

To know is to prove.
Christians, Muslims, atheists,
All slaves of dogma.

Craig Wright got the sack?
Should we really be surprised?
We knew that he sucked.

The bear on the bench,
Made me keep my Bitcoin Cash,
Until I saw sense.

Saylor buys again...
Leave some for us, hornet man!
You greedy HoDLer!

Why change ChartBuddy?
Phil keeps it under control.
Just use your scroll-wheel.

Thank you for showing,
Where we HoDLers are going,
OutOfMemory.

#7wodigestsundayhaikus

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[philipma1957]

[...]

I figured that the 2020 to 2021 1/2 ing and bull were great distorted by covid measures.

[...]

FTFY

yeah you snipped and left out what china did when they shut down ½ the miners in the world.

So you simply distorted the post I did.

BTW my wife still had damage lungs 3 years and 10 months after she got covid in dec 2019.

And while my peryonies disease has changed from this shape C to this shape ( every hard on I get shows me what covid can do.

Don't mention the vaccine as both my wife and I got it in Dec 2019.

[SamReomo]

The more you guys talk about the details including how many percent might be a sufficient threshold, the more it seems to be not broken the way that it is, and also Jimbo made a good point about buddy still providing interesting data because it is showing the the walls.

So why be fucking around with a good thing merely because some members seem to not know how to use a scroll wheel.

Fair enough I agree with you. Although it's not a problem for many users of the thread and surely a few people find it interesting to have awareness about the price of the Bitcoin by looking at the charts that our beloved Buddy generates. Let's stick with the old school method of scrolling wheel to avoid multiple charts of Buddy!



If I'm not wrong then we are still at least 10-14 months away from the next bull run. Although, the halving event will take within next 7-8 months but still the bull run may need some more time to start. I'm in firm belief that history will repeat itself once again this time.

[AlcoHoDL]

Black Pumas - Colors

#wosundayfeelgoodtune

[sirazimuth]

....
I never thought about bitcoin as a gamble, but I did consider it a risky bet initially, less so now with all that happened.
Never played scratch tickets, but sometimes buy a ticket when lottery is over a billion...don't know why, really, lol.

Gambling in Vegas is typically not for me either...but I have a funny story about it...many many years back, on my first and the last trip there, in my first game, I put a quarter in the machine and it gave me a royal flush-$250 worth of tokens. I spent some time in the next couple of days (was there on some symposium) gambling away about 2/3 of it in small games, but still went back with almost $100 of free money in my pocket.

Good times...but too much light everywhere.

Reminds me of this "fun fact?"...

Imagine Random Joe goes into the casino and decides to play the roulette wheel until he is up using this simple method...
He bets a dollar on red  (50/50 or thereabouts .The house has a slight edge of course as O is neither red nor black)
and loses when black comes up. He's down a dollar.  He then doubles up and bets red , loses again, down 3 dollars (he's unlucky apparently) so he doubles up again
and bets  $4 on red and finally! Red comes up!  After all, red comes up almost 50% of the time. Joe is now up 1 dollar! (I think, do the math, lol)
Joe now pockets the  dollar walks away and never enters a casino again. That's pretty feasible yes? (well maybe not, most folks gamble away all their "house money" and then some and the casino wins in the end, lol)
But now lets imagine there are a hundred different random joes walking into a casino and doing the exact same thing,
i.e., betting one dollar on the red and doubling up until they win, going up whatever amount, and walk out,
never to walk into or gamble in a casino again. Collectively they would be up one hundred times the amount they each won, lets say for arguments sake, $100.
Ok, now lets take this one more step and just say they are all the same Random Joe. Random Joe is up $100 dollars! (For that matter, you could scale it up any amount)
This leads to the obvious conclusion that random Joe can always win.... right?  
Can anyone point out the fallacy in this scenario because I cant. I even put it to the test years ago and walked out of the casino up 5 dollars. True story.

[Torque]

Everything worthwhile in life is a risk.

Risk nothing, gain nothing.

My whole entire life I've been surrounded by "fence sitters"; they have gained nothing except for the great bullshit powers of pontificating on either what they are going to do, or what they should have done. They do this endlessly as they watch life pass them by.

They consider the risk takers that have gained something as merely "lucky", not as disciplined and with vision and conviction.

[AlcoHoDL]

....
I never thought about bitcoin as a gamble, but I did consider it a risky bet initially, less so now with all that happened.
Never played scratch tickets, but sometimes buy a ticket when lottery is over a billion...don't know why, really, lol.

Gambling in Vegas is typically not for me either...but I have a funny story about it...many many years back, on my first and the last trip there, in my first game, I put a quarter in the machine and it gave me a royal flush-$250 worth of tokens. I spent some time in the next couple of days (was there on some symposium) gambling away about 2/3 of it in small games, but still went back with almost $100 of free money in my pocket.

Good times...but too much light everywhere.

Reminds me of this "fun fact?"...

Imagine Random Joe goes into the casino and decides to play the roulette wheel until he is up using this simple method...
He bets a dollar on red  (50/50 or thereabouts .The house has a slight edge of course as O is neither red nor black)
and loses when black comes up. He's down a dollar.  He then doubles up and bets red , loses again, down 3 dollars (he's unlucky apparently) so he doubles up again
and bets  $8 on red and finally! Red comes up!  After all, red comes up almost 50% of the time. Joe is now up 5 dollars! (I think, do the math, lol)
Joe now pockets the 5 dollars walks away and never enters a casino again. That's pretty feasible yes? (well maybe not, most folks gamble away all their "house money" and then some and the casino wins in the end, lol)
But now lets imagine there are a hundred different random joes walking into a casino and doing the exact same thing,
i.e., betting one dollar on the red and doubling up until they win, going up whatever amount, and walk out,
never to walk into or gamble in a casino again. Collectively they would be up one hundred times the amount they each won, lets say for arguments sake, $500.
Ok, now lets take this one more step and just say they are all the same Random Joe. Random Joe is up $500 dollars! (For that matter, you could scale it up any amount)
This leads to the obvious conclusion that random Joe can always win.... right? 
Can anyone point out the fallacy in this scenario because I cant. I even put it to the test years ago and walked out of the casino up 5 dollars. True story.

You missed an intermediate bet ($4). Yes, Joe will eventually win exactly $1. The problem is that the bets increase exponentially, and this can quickly bankrupt him in case of a long losing streak.

It's called Martingale. More here:

Martingale (betting system)

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Biodom]

....
I never thought about bitcoin as a gamble, but I did consider it a risky bet initially, less so now with all that happened.
Never played scratch tickets, but sometimes buy a ticket when lottery is over a billion...don't know why, really, lol.

Gambling in Vegas is typically not for me either...but I have a funny story about it...many many years back, on my first and the last trip there, in my first game, I put a quarter in the machine and it gave me a royal flush-$250 worth of tokens. I spent some time in the next couple of days (was there on some symposium) gambling away about 2/3 of it in small games, but still went back with almost $100 of free money in my pocket.

Good times...but too much light everywhere.

Reminds me of this "fun fact?"...

Imagine Random Joe goes into the casino and decides to play the roulette wheel until he is up using this simple method...
He bets a dollar on red  (50/50 or thereabouts .The house has a slight edge of course as O is neither red nor black)
and loses when black comes up. He's down a dollar.  He then doubles up and bets red , loses again, down 3 dollars (he's unlucky apparently) so he doubles up again
and bets  $8 on red and finally! Red comes up!  After all, red comes up almost 50% of the time. Joe is now up 5 dollars! (I think, do the math, lol)
Joe now pockets the 5 dollars walks away and never enters a casino again. That's pretty feasible yes? (well maybe not, most folks gamble away all their "house money" and then some and the casino wins in the end, lol)
But now lets imagine there are a hundred different random joes walking into a casino and doing the exact same thing,
i.e., betting one dollar on the red and doubling up until they win, going up whatever amount, and walk out,
never to walk into or gamble in a casino again. Collectively they would be up one hundred times the amount they each won, lets say for arguments sake, $500.
Ok, now lets take this one more step and just say they are all the same Random Joe. Random Joe is up $500 dollars! (For that matter, you could scale it up any amount)
This leads to the obvious conclusion that random Joe can always win.... right?  
Can anyone point out the fallacy in this scenario because I cant. I even put it to the test years ago and walked out of the casino up 5 dollars. True story.

You missed an intermediate bet ($4). Yes, Joe will eventually win exactly $1. The problem is that the bets increase exponentially, and this can quickly bankrupt him in case of a long losing streak.

It's called Martingale. More here:

Martingale (betting system)

Huh! Interesting...especially the anti-martingale.
Consider this quote: "If on the other hand, real-life stock returns are serially correlated (for instance due to economic cycles and delayed reaction to news of larger market participants), "streaks" of wins or losses do happen more often and are longer than those under a purely random process, the anti-martingale strategy could theoretically apply and can be used in trading systems (as trend-following or "doubling up").

There was some youtuber/twitterati ("That Martini Guy") who claimed to "win" big using something similar in the last bull run, but it is probably just the "gambler's fallacy". Besides, one person winning does not make this a valid "strategy", however, if you read the "Reminiscences of a stock operator" (great book!), you would see that Jesse Livermore (who is, apparently, the person the book is based on) always suggested to increase bullish bets when stocks are going up. It worked for him until it didn't in the end, but he actually came up with an interesting mod to the scheme: during the bull streak and as he was "pyramiding" (the word they used for increasing margin), he periodically pinched off a large sum and put it into a irrevocable trust (because he could not stop himself using the money otherwise).
Personally, I gave up on using margin more than 20 years ago (after the "Internet" crash).

TL;DR I did not realize that our bet on cycles repeating is basically a modified anti-martingale strategy.