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

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Perfectbaby]

A lot off topic but had to share with someone cos I'm trying to stay strong for my wife at the moment. Children for us are off the cards due to medical reasons so we've got two beautiful dogs. Unfortunately, our eldest, Nismo, well he's fallen very ill and in a few hours barring a miracle I'll likely be saying goodbye to him for the last time. Back in 2020 he had to have spinal surgery which cost a lot of money (would spend it again in a heartbeat) and BTC helped him there too. Sadly, doesn't look like money will solve the problem today.

If you have dogs, hold them extra tight for me tonight, they really are the greatest gift and best friend. I truly am lucky to have had his light shine on our lives for the last 14 years. I'll post a picture of him later just so everyone can appreciate him and how amazing he was/is

Anyway sorry for the off topic but yeah.... I'm just heartbroken

I just saw this and very sorry for your loss/upcoming loss.
Some people clone their beloved pets.
I could see both sides of the argument: it would be the same dog genetically, but it would have to learn to love you again.
Cost is about 0.5 btc, give or take ($50,000).
I was just recently reading an article about it.
EDIT: just for description..I think the article was saying that they need an ear from the recently deceased pet (not frozen). I don't recall much else apart from the fact that cloning is now very efficient, but dogs are more challenging to clone.
Not sure if i have seen this article or another one:
https://nypost.com/2024/11/14/lifestyle/the-50000-dog-cloning-business-is-booming/

I could never do that, he'd never be the same personality and that's what and where the real love came from but thank you for your condolences. Here are two pictures that capture him perfectly, I know most won't care but that's ok. If any of you do have dogs, please hold them tight for me. Little Nismo is gone now but he lives on in all the treasured memories he left behind

Seeing this pictures you posted just reignited the memory of our dog and I am already tearing right away. But anyway, I will find a place to hold my tears and I hope you do the same as well. Btw he is very smart looking, and how I wish tears could  bring him back then I could have cried to make sure I restore ours.

Death is a painful thing which after they leave we can never see them forever. Take heart and be Man.

He was a very handsome boy and will be missed forever but you're right, if only tears could bring him back I would have him here already with what I've cried today.

Thank you for the kind words and I'm sure your dog was amazing as well!

Yes it's, I don't know if I am also permitted to have his picture posted here as I don't want to deviate from the main purpose of this mega thread.

Anyway thank you.

Send it to me via PM, I'd love to see him

Done.. please confirm.
Though it's actually painful to lose him, because of the harden dried weather (harmattan) which was so severed to him that caused his death.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[goldkingcoiner]

A lot off topic but had to share with someone cos I'm trying to stay strong for my wife at the moment. Children for us are off the cards due to medical reasons so we've got two beautiful dogs. Unfortunately, our eldest, Nismo, well he's fallen very ill and in a few hours barring a miracle I'll likely be saying goodbye to him for the last time. Back in 2020 he had to have spinal surgery which cost a lot of money (would spend it again in a heartbeat) and BTC helped him there too. Sadly, doesn't look like money will solve the problem today.

If you have dogs, hold them extra tight for me tonight, they really are the greatest gift and best friend. I truly am lucky to have had his light shine on our lives for the last 14 years. I'll post a picture of him later just so everyone can appreciate him and how amazing he was/is

Anyway sorry for the off topic but yeah.... I'm just heartbroken

I just saw this and very sorry for your loss/upcoming loss.
Some people clone their beloved pets.
I could see both sides of the argument: it would be the same dog genetically, but it would have to learn to love you again.
Cost is about 0.5 btc, give or take ($50,000).
I was just recently reading an article about it.
EDIT: just for description..I think the article was saying that they need an ear from the recently deceased pet (not frozen). I don't recall much else apart from the fact that cloning is now very efficient, but dogs are more challenging to clone.
Not sure if i have seen this article or another one:
https://nypost.com/2024/11/14/lifestyle/the-50000-dog-cloning-business-is-booming/

I could never do that, he'd never be the same personality and that's what and where the real love came from but thank you for your condolences. Here are two pictures that capture him perfectly, I know most won't care but that's ok. If any of you do have dogs, please hold them tight for me. Little Nismo is gone now but he lives on in all the treasured memories he left behind

I am sorry to hear about your dog. Losing a pet is the same as losing a family member.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[d_eddie]

OT: Google's quantum computer.
https://techcrunch.com/2024/12/10/google-says-its-new-quantum-chip-indicates-that-multiple-universes-exist/
and
https://blog.google/technology/research/google-willow-quantum-chip/

Willow’s performance on this benchmark is astonishing: It performed a computation in under five minutes that would take one of today’s fastest supercomputers 1025 or 10 septillion years. If you want to write it out, it’s 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years. This mind-boggling number exceeds known timescales in physics and vastly exceeds the age of the universe. It lends credence to the notion that quantum computation occurs in many parallel universes, in line with the idea that we live in a multiverse, a prediction first made by David Deutsch.

The logic of this is difficult to follow for me: they claim that the fact that their quantum computer is so much faster than the regular computer (does something in 5min that "regular"supercomputer can only do in 10^25 years, which is roughly 1 million billion times longer than our Universe existed somehow indicates that the quantum computer uses parallel universes to do the calculations. This just does not seem right to me.

However, I can imagine the quantum computer "spawning" those universes, maybe virtually, to "help" it's calculations.
Otherwise, it is not clear to me how it managed to link up with those preexisting universes as there is nothing there that one might consider an interface.
I read the D. Deutsch book, but the argument there was just as unclear. Perhaps, I am just not getting it.

One could make an algorithm arbitrarily slow, so that it could take several times the age of our universe (which is an estimate based on our current understanding) to compute. Think of using an abacus to solve a complex problem. The fact that a modern computer (quantum or not) can solve the same problem near-infinitely faster does not mean it's somehow using parallel universes to solve it.

I'm not buying it.

I'm pretty sure you are familiar with this, Biodom. And probably AlcoHoDL, too. But I'm laying this down for those who might not be.

The fastness/slowness of an algorithm does not depend on the hardware used to run its implementation (i.e., abacus vs fast CPU). "Time complexity" - that's what it's called - is measured as the number of steps the algorithm must go through depending on the size of its input. The same number of steps performed by an abacus or by a CPU take different times, of course, but what's relevant is the rate of growth of the number of steps as the size of the input grows. That's why doubling the key length does not double the number of steps to brute force it, but turns it into its square. For example: if it takes 1000 steps to break a 100 bit key, a 200 bit key would take 1,000,000. Bring the key length to, say, 1000 bits and you're set for a few decades. Or centuries.

Quantum computing's breakthrough is not about a device faster than abacus, or faster than the best CPU. It is about a new paradigm of computation that introduces different algorithms with a smaller time complexity. For example, if all possible 100 bit keys could be tested in just one operation, that would require constant time, and this could be cleverly exploited to speed up the brute forcing of longer keys by suitable grouping or whatnot.

That's why I called out to Google hoping they publish a paper with statements of

1. The problem to be solved
2. The classical (non quantum) algorithm
3. The quantum algorithm

If/when they do, the scientific community will be able to evaluate the complexity speedup. Until that day, it's hype and uninformed journalists - people who say "exponentially" thinking it means "much".

[GIF-JOBS]

https://x.com/MarioNawfal/status/1866035508549202063


But in future.... 

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[philipma1957]

candle go up!

[GIF-JOBS]

candle go up!

Green candles are going to the moon.

[Paashaas]

Economictimes.

[Ziskinberg]

back to $100k

[hisslyness]

[hisslyness]

OT: Google's quantum computer.
https://techcrunch.com/2024/12/10/google-says-its-new-quantum-chip-indicates-that-multiple-universes-exist/
and
https://blog.google/technology/research/google-willow-quantum-chip/

Willow’s performance on this benchmark is astonishing: It performed a computation in under five minutes that would take one of today’s fastest supercomputers 1025 or 10 septillion years. If you want to write it out, it’s 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years. This mind-boggling number exceeds known timescales in physics and vastly exceeds the age of the universe. It lends credence to the notion that quantum computation occurs in many parallel universes, in line with the idea that we live in a multiverse, a prediction first made by David Deutsch.

The logic of this is difficult to follow for me: they claim that the fact that their quantum computer is so much faster than the regular computer (does something in 5min that "regular"supercomputer can only do in 10^25 years, which is roughly 1 million billion times longer than our Universe existed somehow indicates that the quantum computer uses parallel universes to do the calculations. This just does not seem right to me.

However, I can imagine the quantum computer "spawning" those universes, maybe virtually, to "help" it's calculations.
Otherwise, it is not clear to me how it managed to link up with those preexisting universes as there is nothing there that one might consider an interface.
I read the D. Deutsch book, but the argument there was just as unclear. Perhaps, I am just not getting it.

One could make an algorithm arbitrarily slow, so that it could take several times the age of our universe (which is an estimate based on our current understanding) to compute. Think of using an abacus to solve a complex problem. The fact that a modern computer (quantum or not) can solve the same problem near-infinitely faster does not mean it's somehow using parallel universes to solve it.

I'm not buying it.

I'm pretty sure you are familiar with this, Biodom. And probably AlcoHoDL, too. But I'm laying this down for those who might not be.

The fastness/slowness of an algorithm does not depend on the hardware used to run its implementation (i.e., abacus vs fast CPU). "Time complexity" - that's what it's called - is measured as the number of steps the algorithm must go through depending on the size of its input. The same number of steps performed by an abacus or by a CPU take different times, of course, but what's relevant is the rate of growth of the number of steps as the size of the input grows. That's why doubling the key length does not double the number of steps to brute force it, but turns it into its square. For example: if it takes 1000 steps to break a 100 bit key, a 200 bit key would take 1,000,000. Bring the key length to, say, 1000 bits and you're set for a few decades. Or centuries.

Quantum computing's breakthrough is not about a device faster than abacus, or faster than the best CPU. It is about a new paradigm of computation that introduces different algorithms with a smaller time complexity. For example, if all possible 100 bit keys could be tested in just one operation, that would require constant time, and this could be cleverly exploited to speed up the brute forcing of longer keys by suitable grouping or whatnot.

That's why I called out to Google hoping they publish a paper with statements of

1. The problem to be solved
2. The classical (non quantum) algorithm
3. The quantum algorithm

If/when they do, the scientific community will be able to evaluate the complexity speedup. Until that day, it's hype and uninformed journalists - people who say "exponentially" thinking it means "much".

Just to also add on to this...

They were using "random circuit sampling (RCS) benchmark" as the performance test....

https://research.google/blog/validating-random-circuit-sampling-as-a-benchmark-for-measuring-quantum-progress/

"This mind-boggling number exceeds known timescales in physics and vastly exceeds the age of the universe. It lends credence to the notion that quantum computation occurs in many parallel universes".... this statement is a little misleading as well.... Sure, if you were using SC, but you are not, you are using QC, just as d_eddie stated above "abacus vs CPU"....

I am still reading through it, to understand it a little more, but to draw conclusion that quantum computer operates in a multiverse because it is fast at doing it, is a bit of a stretch!...

[psycodad]

And also: Yay, once again crossed 100k.

Edited to add: I wonder what Scrooge McDuck said in the english original really, I only know the german translation (and the honorable Erika Fuchs took quite some freedom in translating, i.e. Scrooge was in Germany Dagobert Duck).
In german the original above sentence was "Wer den Kreuzer nicht ehrt, ist des Talers nicht wert") and it was truely something I learned to adhere to when I was like 7 or 8 in the 70s.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[BitcoinBunny]

Last time sub 100K.
I'm willing to bet my stupid alpaca on it.

[d_eddie]

Last time sub 100K.
I'm willing to bet my stupid alpaca on it.

I'm as bullish as the next guy, but it might not be that easy.

The pullback in the next bear could well go under 100k again, just to stay on a midterm viewpoint. I'd like JJG to provide his personal 2-significant-digits-after-the-decimal-point estimate of such probability.

Additionally, as an esteemed and knowledgeable bitcoiner friend of mine recently said, "we must run over 100k and back so many times that it becomes just like any other number". Only then can 100k be properly thrown in the roadkill bucket.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[serveria.com]

Back to six digits! Next target 100k EUR.