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

[kkaspar]

Like I said. Go buy more of your precious rocks. Check back in 5 years and either gloat or ask for forgiveness. We will be waiting either way.

Nah, I will stick around and observe the development of this community as well. Maybe even say some things again to bring people closer to earth.
Like I said, I'm quite intrigued by the idea that bitcoin brought forward. I'll probably also invest some money into it when the price isn't held up only by desperation. I truly believe that bitcoin still has about 1-2 years of life and 1-2 bubbles left in it, before the hype finally settles.

[1714660334]

1714660334

[1714660334]

1714660334

[1714660334]

1714660334

[1714660334]

1714660334

[1714660334]

1714660334

[kkaspar]

KKaspar:

I do NOT necessarily disagree with you, but to me it sounds as if your post is filled with a lot of hate and resentment for poor people.

I was merely trying to describe a dynamic that exists with deflationary currency, and you and I seem to have some agreement about a potential incentive that could be created in which people may NOT have the incentive to work.   We agree on that, but I CANNOT bring myself to agree with some of the other seemingly hateful and assumption aspects of your post.... that seems to assume that rich people are entitled to more than poor people... and a bunch of the other assumptions that goes along with those kinds of striving to maintain the status quo and the current wealth distribution.

You also seem to be asserting some kind of assumption about trickle down economics actually working, which I CANNOT bring myself to agree with those kinds of assumptions, either.

Anyhow, if bitcoin is going to be successful, you and I agree that it would change social dynamics.  Accordingly, you seem to assert that it is NOT in line with human nature, and I would assert that some social, economic and political institutions may need to adapt to these new dynamics to find a way to work.... especially, if governments and companies are NOT able to get rid of bitcoin, then they will have to work on ways to adapt... which may create growing pains for a lot of us... NO matter what our previous conceptions of the ways of the world and human nature and politics, productivity and wealth distribution.

I don't have hatred against poor people. I also believe that one can be better off without wealth but with a healthy spirit.
But I do dis-like poor people who blame their situation on others. People who say that rich people are to blame that they didn't decide to get good grades, that they didn't decide to go to college, that they didn't make the right career choices etc.

Bitcoin wouldn't change social dynamics, it would only make everyone poorer, both the rich and the poor. The ratio will be the same and there will still be rich people who have gotten rich by either work or by exploitation of others. Trade will just be more ineffective and people would be motivated to sit on their ass more. Not just blue-collared workers, but also the CEOs and managers.
I think that an country could actually adopt bitcoin if it doesn't care about it's economic strength. There are also countries like that. Not a lot tho..
It would be absurd that major powers couldn't overcome bitcoin though. Take a team of good 100 python coders and give them a year and there would be a coin that would surpass bitcoin in every quality aspect. Right now only students and hobbyists are coding bitcoin source based altcoins, because the big boys are still planning their entrance strategy.

[Erdogan]

We need lots of buy-hold-buy-mores, and lots of successful daytraders.

... and we need the bad daytraders to feed the good daytraders, and we need the ignorant nay-sayers to slow down the rise, so the visionary late-comers have a chance.  

for such a nice person you sure make a terrible president of turkey.

What's wrong about peacefully (for us) removing a million armenians from the surface of the earth?

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[Wekkel]

If nobody would spend money because of a rising value of money, that money would - in the end - buy less again because the economy is not growing but shrinking. Of course, this is a contradiction. No such thing will happen. Instead, an equilibrium will exists that indeed differs from our current system.

Nobody will hoard money indefinitely. There is a simple reason for this: time.

Nobody lives forever, right?

Well, someone will always buy something. Just less people buy something.
When inflation motivates people to consume more, then you can be sure that deflation will motivate people to consume less. Of course there won't be radical outcomes that no money will be spent, but a country that runs on deflationary currency, will fall behind in economic development compared to countries with inflationary currency.

It's like with communism or just plain old socialism, where everyone will work less and work is less important in society in general, but everyone are also poor because the lack of quality production.
I have lived in Soviet Union, so I know how childish economic dreams can create deficit in even the most regular goods.

Well, we know for sure that we do not become richer because of money printing (inflation). Second, stimulating demand by borrowing from the future is not bringing a net positive in the longer run. Finally, my purchase decisions are not affected by a few percent of inflation. I buy if I need or want something. Inflation is mostly an annoyance to me (saving is impossible in our current system).

So to me the artificial inflation argument does nothing right. Its just a gimmick that leads to a redistribution of existing wealth. Communism has nothing to do with this.

[Mythul]

Take a team of good 100 python coders and give them a year and there would be a coin that would surpass bitcoin in every quality aspect.

I strongly disagree with this statement. I'm not sure if you know how to code but in Computer Science you can't brute force yourself to innovation.

If that were true than Microsoft, Apple and Google would be the only successful tech companies and we all know that is not the truth and they buy small companies like crazy.

1 genius computer scientist can do more that 1000 good computer scientists. Did you even look at the Bitcoin code ? It is pretty light. You could write some 1000 lines of code that could change the world forever if you have the skill. And usually in IT, bigger teams are always worst that smaller teams. At least that is my point of view.

[BTC5OOO]

BTC//^springboard off rock bottom tomorrow !!!  

[OldGeek]

^^  Cool.  I'm up for some of that.

[kkaspar]

Finally, my purchase decisions are not affected by a few percent of inflation. I buy if I need or want something. Inflation is mostly an annoyance to me (saving is impossible in our current system).

You are contradicting yourself there. Because saving up in cash has been made impossible, as you say, you save less and buy more. The point is that people should save wealth in production, not in money.

[marcus_of_augustus]

Take a team of good 100 python coders and give them a year and there would be a coin that would surpass bitcoin in every quality aspect.

I strongly disagree with this statement. I'm not sure if you know how to code but in Computer Science you can't brute force yourself to innovation.

If that were true than Microsoft, Apple and Google would be the only successful tech companies and we all know that is not the truth and they buy small companies like crazy.

1 genius computer scientist can do more that 1000 good computer scientists. Did you even look at the Bitcoin code ? It is pretty light. You could write some 1000 lines of code that could change the world forever if you have the skill. And usually in IT, bigger teams are always worst that smaller teams. At least that is my point of view.

hahaha, kkapser's a blowhard ... he's not writing 1000 lines of anything except pure unadulterated FUD.

1) every communist regime known has had rampant monetary inflation

2) the most prosperous nation and period known in economic history is the free market capitalism under the deflationary gold standard period of the 1800's in USA.

[JayJuanGee]

Accordingly, capitalism works by exploiting people and creating an incentive for people to work.  For example, if any schmuck can get a bitcoin (or fraction of a bitcoin) when he is a baby (and then stashes it away), then he would never have to work a day in his life by the time he is 18 years old.  

Maybe I am being too narrow minded to think that way, but compounding interest is a powerful thing and if BTC is guaranteed to go up every year by even as little as 10-15% (and those are conservative numbers based on the supply issue and I would think that the guaranteed price increase would be greater than 15% annually).  BTC would change the whole dynamics of the world and incentives for labor......

why do you think it's deflationary? the price is currently rising with adoption and confidence and by the time bitcoins stop being created we should be at peak adoption, there may be a bit of deflation through coin loss but by then we may also see population decrease if 3rd world countries are brought up to 1st world level where birth rates have fallen below the replacement rate.

I may be using the wrong term... but deflationary, means exactly that the currency buys more with the passage of time compared with goods and services.  So let's say a kid is born in 2020 and his parents invest 1 bitcoin into a stored wallet.  At that point, the bitcoin is equal to the equivalence of $10,000 in today's dollars.  Even if the value of the bitcoin goes up by 15% per year (which I believe is fairly modest), then in 20 years that bitcoin would be worth about $200,000 and in 30 years, $900K.  

oh and why focus on it as a currency anyway, if used in parallel to other currencies as a payment method the price and volatility don't really matter.

I am NOT concerned about volatility.... I am just making a point about the issue of the deflationary aspect of the asset.. whether it is a currency or a commodity or just a storage of value.

[octaft]

I don't have hatred against poor people. I also believe that one can be better off without wealth but with a healthy spirit.
But I do dis-like poor people who blame their situation on others. People who say that rich people are to blame that they didn't decide to get good grades, that they didn't decide to go to college, that they didn't make the right career choices etc.

Bitcoin wouldn't change social dynamics, it would only make everyone poorer, both the rich and the poor. The ratio will be the same and there will still be rich people who have gotten rich by either work or by exploitation of others. Trade will just be more ineffective and people would be motivated to sit on their ass more. Not just blue-collared workers, but also the CEOs and managers.
I think that an country could actually adopt bitcoin if it doesn't care about it's economic strength. There are also countries like that. Not a lot tho..
It would be absurd that major powers couldn't overcome bitcoin though. Take a team of good 100 python coders and give them a year and there would be a coin that would surpass bitcoin in every quality aspect. Right now only students and hobbyists are coding bitcoin source based altcoins, because the big boys are still planning their entrance strategy.

Wow, the last time I read this much bullshit in a single post, it ended by telling me a story about the Fresh Prince of Bel-Air.

[ShroomsKit_Disgrace]

I don't have hatred against poor people. I also believe that one can be better off without wealth but with a healthy spirit.
But I do dis-like poor people who blame their situation on others. People who say that rich people are to blame that they didn't decide to get good grades, that they didn't decide to go to college, that they didn't make the right career choices etc.

Bitcoin wouldn't change social dynamics, it would only make everyone poorer, both the rich and the poor. The ratio will be the same and there will still be rich people who have gotten rich by either work or by exploitation of others. Trade will just be more ineffective and people would be motivated to sit on their ass more. Not just blue-collared workers, but also the CEOs and managers.
I think that an country could actually adopt bitcoin if it doesn't care about it's economic strength. There are also countries like that. Not a lot tho..
It would be absurd that major powers couldn't overcome bitcoin though. Take a team of good 100 python coders and give them a year and there would be a coin that would surpass bitcoin in every quality aspect. Right now only students and hobbyists are coding bitcoin source based altcoins, because the big boys are still planning their entrance strategy.

Wow, the last time I read this much bullshit in a single post, it ended by telling me a story about the Fresh Prince of Bel-Air.

The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air taught me more valuable lessons than my whole degree plus master thesis at Stanford.

[octaft]

The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air taught me more valuable lessons than my whole degree plus master thesis at Stanford.

That uncle Phil did have some wisdom.

[kkaspar]

I strongly disagree with this statement. I'm not sure if you know how to code but in Computer Science you can't brute force yourself to innovation.

If that were true than Microsoft, Apple and Google would be the only successful tech companies and we all know that is not the truth and they buy small companies like crazy.

1 genius computer scientist can do more that 1000 good computer scientists. Did you even look at the Bitcoin code ? It is pretty light. You could write some 1000 lines of code that could change the world forever if you have the skill. And usually in IT, bigger teams are always worst that smaller teams. At least that is my point of view.

Well, you can brute force your way into innovation in the IT field, and Android is one of the latest examples of it. They took a well known and innovative idea about an efficent and mobile OS and they perfected it on their own platform. Just as iOS took it over after Symbian.
Yes, 1 computer scientist can be more productive then 1000, but it doesn't matter if you can buy that 1 just as well as you could buy the 1000.
Small teams.are more effective in every fields, but some projects are just so work intensive that you cant settle with a small team.


Im logging off for today, will reply tomorrow when needed.

[Erdogan]

[...]
Actually it is production that creates wealth and production is stimulated by consumption.

and consumption is made possible by production.

When world currency would be deflationary then consumption will slow because everyone will be motivated to hold onto their money,

[...]

... which means that in the current inflationary environment, nobody would ever sell anything, because they would get more money tomorrow.

This is nonsense, every trade have two parties, that include you selling your work-hours.
Inflationary means the seller will quickly turn his new money into something of real value. Deflationary means that the buyer will quickly sell more to recoup his money. None of these forces have more weight than the other.

The difference is that in an environment with inflation, it is more rational to hold no or a negative amount of money when you want to save. With deflation, it is more rational to hold money, and value will be souped up in the money system in stead of real assets.

Inflation is wasteful because of all the unnecessary resources you take up when you save, and it takes power away from you because you are in constant debt. Deflation economises real resources and allows you to use your saved resources more freely.

Even more important, the value lost from the money in inflation ends up somewhere, but not in your pockets.

[Erdogan]

[...]
Actually it is production that creates wealth and production is stimulated by consumption.

and consumption is made possible by production.

When world currency would be deflationary then consumption will slow because everyone will be motivated to hold onto their money,

[...]

... which means that in the current inflationary environment, nobody would ever sell anything, because they would get more money tomorrow.

This is nonsense, every trade has two parties, that include you selling your work-hours.
Inflationary means the seller will quickly turn his new money into something of real value. Deflationary means that the buyer will quickly sell more to recoup his money. None of these forces have more weight than the other.

The difference is that in an environment with inflation, it is more rational to hold no or a negative amount of money when you want to save. With deflation, it is more rational to hold money, and value will be souped up in the money system in stead of real assets.

Inflation is wasteful because of all the unnecessary resources you take up when you save, and it takes power away from you because you are in constant debt. Deflation economises real resources and allows you to use your saved resources more freely.

Even more important, the value lost from the money in inflation ends up somewhere, but not in your pockets.

Oh shit, not the deflation problem again.

[JayJuanGee]

I was actually assuming an expansion rate of 0%. If the BTC supply is fixed, its value will be determined by the size of the economy. If the economy grows (more goods and services per BTC), BTC will rise. If the economy shrinks (fewer goods and services per BTC), BTC will fall.

The rapid rise we've seen so far has been due to the rapid growth of the bitcoin economy, but that won't go on forever.

I think part of my point is that if BTC is so valuable as compared with other asset classes, then it holds its value better than other asset classes, then people will flock to BTC rather than currencies ... and then there is a snowball effect where the BTC is holding its value too well and more and more people are flocking to it b/c it is holding its value so well.

I don't have hatred against poor people. I also believe that one can be better off without wealth but with a healthy spirit.
But I do dis-like poor people who blame their situation on others. People who say that rich people are to blame that they didn't decide to get good grades, that they didn't decide to go to college, that they didn't make the right career choices etc.

surely I also believe in personal responsibility.. but there are also social systems that screw certain people... NOT everyone has an equal chance, contrary to the lore.

Bitcoin wouldn't change social dynamics, it would only make everyone poorer, both the rich and the poor. The ratio will be the same and there will still be rich people who have gotten rich by either work or by exploitation of others. Trade will just be more ineffective and people would be motivated to sit on their ass more. Not just blue-collared workers, but also the CEOs and managers.

NO HATING>>>>>> but You seem to be talking out of your ass to some extent about a prediction that everyone will be poorer.... You are trying to extrapolate some simple dynamics and paint a simple picture.... I just DONT buy it, but it does NOT seem to be worth arguing about.

I think that an country could actually adopt bitcoin if it doesn't care about it's economic strength. There are also countries like that. Not a lot tho..
It would be absurd that major powers couldn't overcome bitcoin though. Take a team of good 100 python coders and give them a year and there would be a coin that would surpass bitcoin in every quality aspect. Right now only students and hobbyists are coding bitcoin source based altcoins, because the big boys are still planning their entrance strategy.

You are leaving a lot of holes in your scenario... but there is some truth to the fact that the big guns may have a lot of money to throw against bitcoin and to develop competition... so that will be interesting to see how that plays out... and how many people die because of this battle.

 Your description of their planning their entrance strategy is a bit off base, though... b/c probably they are just a bit overwhelmed and confused and do NOT really know what to do about BTC.

[600watt]

Just like html was to the development of the internet.

Please stop comparing bitcoin to html, e-mail or tcp/ip. These protocols didn't have the baggage of unit cost on their back.
If HTML would be like bitcoin, then new HTML adopters would have to pay monetary tribute to the earlier adopters of HTML to start using it.
Then HTML wouldn't have developed very far and people would have been motivated to create alternative options, without the baggage of those early adopters, who just want to earn on your expense, without doing anything themselves.

nonsense. when a person wants to use the bitcoin protocol, he or she can just do so. it´s free. (almost) no fees. if i decide to buy some sneakers and pay with bitcoin, well yes, i have to take some of my money and convert it into bitcoin. but that money is just the price of the sneaker - not the price for bitcoin. i don´t have to pay a premium because i use bitcoin. it´s free.

if one year later i decide to pay another pair of sneakers, and the price of bitcoin went up 10 fold, i would not pay more or less for those sneakers. the bitcoin network is free to use for everyone. you are mixing up bitcoin as a payment method with bitcoin as an investment in a strange way. and it sounds like you are bitter about the fact that you do not belong to those earlier adopters.

don´t be bitter. be thankful you did find out about it. you are an early adopter. join us & be happy.  

[kuzza]

Just sharing something http://www.bitlisten.com/