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

[empowering]

I was trying to think who the Fonz reminded me of...and then it hit me.. 

"more bad news" 



Cheer up it might never happen.

[1714616422]

1714616422

[1714616422]

1714616422

[Arcas]

Indeed. How about if one replaces "US dollar" with "dollar"

I bought a pack of those, and I hand them out to people, to remind them of the value of a hard-earned dollar.

Every fiat currency in history has ended at zero.  That's the alternative future which Jorge prefers:  All of your savings, all of your labor, all of your power in this world, is to be converted into material wealth in the hands of your superiors, your masters, your owners.  

My great-grandparents used hard currency.  They were free.  My grandparents lived under the FRB.  They were perhaps 90% free.  My parents never saw gold circulate.  They were perhaps 75% free.   I saw the end of silver circulation.  I have been perhaps 50% free.   My daughter has never seen hard currency.  The excruciating trend is that she will be perhaps 25% free, that my grandchildren will only see plastic and digits, and will be nigh 100% enslaved.  

Bitcoin and the collapse inherent in exponential debt systems gives me hope that there is another possible future.  One in which, for a time, in a place, the boot will not come down on our faces, or the faces of our children.  People have given their lives for lesser hopes.

My opinion isn't popular here, but fiat currencies are backed by national governments. Isn't that worth more than lumps of conductive metals?

[Davyd05]

I don't see how people are posting that sepa withdrawals are being processed, yet many are still screaming insolvency

[Arcas]

I don't see how people are posting that sepa withdrawals are being processed, yet many are still screaming insolvency

Shhhh... My wire doesn't arrive until Monday. MtGox can be solvent after Monday. 

[Syke]

Indeed. How about if one replaces "US dollar" with "dollar"

Exactly. The presence of AltCoins has about as much effect on Bitcoins as Zimbabwe dollars effect US dollars. It doesn't matter how many Trillion Altcoins are out there, they aren't accepted at LamboNB, they aren't accepted at Gyft, they aren't accepted at Overstock, they aren't accepted at TigerDirect, etc.

[Richy_T]

I'm inclined to call Godwin on this.

That's what Hitler would have done.

[billyjoeallen]

And if I your kneecaps were replaced by fish, you'd have a hard time standing up as well.  It doesn't matter, however, because you stand on kneecaps.  There are infintely many Dogecoin.  If anything that only increases the value of Bitcoin, as you have to acquire Bitcoin in order to buy Dogecoin.  The absurdity of your argument is manifest by its own conclusion:  Since there are infinitely many cryptocoins, and this does not in fact render Bitcoin worthless, the argument that the existence of infinitely many cryptocoins renders Bitcoin worthless is a fallacious argument, of no more relevance than the imaginary fish which seek to render you paralegic.

Indeed. How about if one replaces "US dollar" with "dollar"

So these critics say Bitcoin will fail because there aren't enough of them (21 mil at the most) and also that Bitcoin will fail because there are an infinite supply if you count the alts. They said Bitcoin will fail because the price was too high and now they say it will fail because the price is down.

Whales have too much market clout and also they aren't using their market clout in sufficiently beneficial ways. They are not stabilizing the price enough and also they are making the price too stable to allow many small traders to profit from instability.

Bitcoin is being coopted by banksters who are also ignoring us. Centralized exchanges are too powerful but also don't have enough market depth and volume.

The Bitcoin adoption rate is too fast and too slow. It goes on and on.

[Richy_T]

My opinion isn't popular here, but fiat currencies are backed by national governments. Isn't that worth more than lumps of conductive metals?

Check the charts and then you tell me.

[Davyd05]

I don't see how people are posting that sepa withdrawals are being processed, yet many are still screaming insolvency

Shhhh... My wire doesn't arrive until Monday. MtGox can be solvent after Monday.  

best of luck I wish I had a verified account with gox, even a 1000 can become something significant quite quickly

[aminorex]

Ditto for the "network effect" and "first-player advantage" that were supposed to prevent the appearance of alternative coins.  

Supposed by whom?  Clearly these factors do not inhibit the creation of infinitely many worthless coins.  Nor do those worthless coins inhibit the aggregation of value to the Bitcoin economy.  

supposed  suggested by many in 2011/12

Deluded they were, then, as Litecoin has been around since 2011.

Or the myths about crypto-payments being untraceable and impossible for governments to restrict, tax, or regulate.

These are media myths, and have never been promulgated as such by any knowledgable members of bitcoin community, during the history of my involvement.  They have little enough bearing on the value of Bitcoin.

You've only actually been registered here since September, so that's quite a short time.  Irregardless, I think you under-estimate the value of perception (as opposed to the 'truth').

I prefer to think in terms of reality.  Here in the speculation domain we're interested in prices.  Value is the long-term attractor of price.  Perception affects price, but not value.  Perception is temporary.  Reality persists.

Anonymity is profoundly beneficial to those who need it, and of no import to those who do not.  

I believe everyone has an implicit right to anonymity -- your statement infers an explicit or ulterior motive for wanting anonymity.

On the part of the users?  Clearly some are motivated, and others uninterested.  They are demographics which are served by Bitcoin.

And, of course, a newbie who does not own any bitcoins will probably have a more dispassionate view of probabilities and possibilities than an old-timer who invested several years of work in the project, and owns a few thousand coins.

However, we know that you are not dispassionate in the least, as your extensive postings have proven.  You have an anti-Bitcoin agenda.  Pretending otherwise is disingenuous.

I think Jorge made it clear his distinction between applications for the tech v investing in Bitcoin/Bitcoin as a speculative vehicle.
I see no pretence.

I definitely see a pretence that his view is dispassionate, disinterested, and therefore unclouded by the venial passions of those who disagree.  I think it is a contemptible rhetorical device.

But perhaps you should make clear your view of libertarianism.  I could seek a definition online but I know my 'perceptions' from the media, here in Australia, so the contrast should be interesting between what you think I should know v. my perception of the 'local' information.  

It is diverse, but the centroid is something like this:  It is wrong to do violence to others.  The state is institutionalized violence.  Minimizing that violence without creating other greater evils is desirable.  Freedom to transact, to contract, is a fundamental right, as are property rights. 

You seem to conflate libertarianism with anarcho-capitalism.  They are neighbors, but I suspect they appreciate a tall fence between their estates.

I have hope that when banks and governments collapse in chaos, bitcoin will provide an independent anti-fragile means of promoting trade and well-being in their absence.  Indeed I am quite certain that it is an effective safety-net for us all in that regard. Bitcoin may yet save your life.  And you will be resentful, I suspect.

If banks and governments collapse then there will be wars, death, social unrest, more death, poverty -- perhaps there will be a perfect storm as the effects of climate change impact causing famine and mass migration.  But wait....here's Bitcoin.
Melodrama.

Bitcoin is well able to fulfill most if not all of the useful roles of fiat in a technological society.  Hard currency can't do that.  And fiat is past its sell-by date.  It's really the only game in town now.  Mocking it won't change reality, only perception.

"governments"  and "banks"  are not malign monolithic conspiracies.  They are made of people doing their jobs and pursuing their agendas.  Your view is paranoid.  

So "governments"  and "banks" are valuable and efficient organisations....but they are going to collapse? I'm confused.

I'm beginning to believe you are.  Banks fulfill some functions.  They have also established an ecological moat, and are sucking oxygen out of the room.  People don't go into banking because they want to do evil.  I'm sure Lloyd Blankfein was serious when he called the work of Goldman-Sachs "God's work".  They are efficient machines for sucking the blood out of their victims.  They perform lifecycle functions which improve social organization by rationalizing markets.  They are, however, a largely obsolete social technology, which has outlived its usefulness, and only persist because of incumbency and the immaturity of their competition.  Whatever displaces the banks we know will probably be called "banks"  but will have very different impact.  On some of these points, similar statements might be made about governments.

But they will get out the guns out before they will allow the edifice to fall.  History shows us this.

I've never seen a failing bank resort to artillery.

[aminorex]

My opinion isn't popular here, but fiat currencies are backed by national governments.

How so?  They always take them to zero.  I'm not sure I'd call that "backing".

[JorgeStolfi]

Or the myths about crypto-payments being untraceable and impossible for governments to restrict, tax, or regulate.

These are media myths, and have never been promulgated as such by any knowledgable members of bitcoin community, during the history of my involvement.  They have little enough bearing on the value of Bitcoin.  Indeed the fact that taxes are imposed on fiat is often used as an argument in favor of the value of fiat.  (Hopefully we can agree that it is a specious argument.)

As I wrote before, those claims were and still are being made by some bitcoin enthusiasts.  Ditto for the claim that Governments cannot stop bitcoin.   I was arguing with one such enthusast on twitter a couple of days ago, and have seen people write that somewhere in this forum.

And those claims were believed, obviously, by all the clients of SilkRoad and other similar sites.

There are occasions and places were anonymous and untraceable communications, including payments, would be necessary. (Wikileaks, Arab spring, ...) However, it is precisely where anonymity and privacy would be most necessary, that they are least likely to be possible.   In those situations, the mere attempt to use a secure channel will make you a criminal.  I wish there was a way to get around that problem, but there seems none in sight.

we know that you are not dispassionate in the least, as your extensive postings have proven.  You have an anti-Bitcoin agenda.  Pretending otherwise is disingenuous.

I have already stated what part of bitcoin I am extremely "anti" about.

I think you are a libertarian, for your self, and a fascist, for others.  I doubt you even understand what "libertarian" means [ ... ] "governments"  and "banks"  are not malign monolithic conspiracies.  They are made of people doing their jobs and pursuing their agendas.  Your view is paranoid.  

I suppose I do not know what libertarianism is exactly.   I have read two short bios of Ayn Rand, which included a summary of her ideas, and a lot of statements by people who declare themselves "libertarians".  Some of the latter sounded like they hated any form of government.  For example, some people on this forum were against suing MtGOX, and I understood that it was because that would be an "un-libertarian" thing.  I have seen many oppose any form of regulation of exchanges and such, apparently for that reason.  Perhaps I was mistaken?

From what those people say, I got the impression that libertarians are rather varied in their views.  Would you agree that some of them, at least, are against any form of government, or want extremely reduced governments (e.g. with no support for education, health, trasportation, etc)?

Would you agree that some libertarians, at least, are rooting for the collapse of governments and banks?

[billyjoeallen]

My opinion isn't popular here, but fiat currencies are backed by national governments. Isn't that worth more than lumps of conductive metals?

Fait currencies are backed by guns. Our currency is backed by math. Which is more reliable?

[Arcas]

My opinion isn't popular here, but fiat currencies are backed by national governments.

How so?  They always take them to zero.  I'm not sure I'd call that "backing".

They are legal tender, so businesses are required by law to accept it. That has as much value as any shiny stone or metal. You can't eat gold or diamonds.

[Adrian-x]

Here's an interesting nugget from /r/bitcoinmarkets



I was just looking at the one week charts and noticed we've hit 6 consecutive weeks in the red, this hasn't happened since 2011 when it dropped from $30 to $1.

If Gox keeps its bullshit up we could hit a record 7 red weeks which would be the first time in Bitcoins history! WOOO

7 conservative weeks of decline = worst bear market in the history of Bitcoin = wow

[Arcas]

My opinion isn't popular here, but fiat currencies are backed by national governments. Isn't that worth more than lumps of conductive metals?

Fait currencies are backed by guns. Our currency is backed by math. Which is more reliable?

Guns are pretty convincing when you are the one staring down the barrel.

And Bitcoin isn't backed by math, it's backed by faith. Numbers have no inherent value. There is no mathematical reason for Bitcoin to be valuable besides the trust we place in it.

Every Shitcoin in the alt board is backed by math as well. It doesn't make them valuable.

[KFR]

Bitcoin is backed by maths and its functionality.

[seleme]

Here's an interesting nugget from /r/bitcoinmarkets



I was just looking at the one week charts and noticed we've hit 6 consecutive weeks in the red, this hasn't happened since 2011 when it dropped from $30 to $1.

If Gox keeps its bullshit up we could hit a record 7 red weeks which would be the first time in Bitcoins history! WOOO

7 conservative weeks of decline = worst bear market in the history of Bitcoin = wow

Looks like we're close to the bottom 

[TERA]

Here's an interesting nugget from /r/bitcoinmarkets



I was just looking at the one week charts and noticed we've hit 6 consecutive weeks in the red, this hasn't happened since 2011 when it dropped from $30 to $1.

If Gox keeps its bullshit up we could hit a record 7 red weeks which would be the first time in Bitcoins history! WOOO

7 conservative weeks of decline = worst bear market in the history of Bitcoin = wow

Looks like we're close to the bottom 

How about no.

[billyjoeallen]

I suppose I do not know what libertarianism is exactly.   I have read two short bios of Ayn Rand, which included a summary of her ideas, and a lot of statements by people who declare themselves "libertarians".  Some of the latter sounded like they hated any form of government.  For example, some people on this forum were against suing MtGOX, and I understood that it was because that would be an "un-libertarian" thing.  I have seen many oppose any form of regulation of exchanges and such, apparently for that reason. 

The way you think is so arrogant. Market regulation is regulation. Government regulation is just central planning. You think because we oppose central governments that we oppose governance, as if society needs no rules. True rule of law, REAL rule of law can only come from decentralized governance. Otherwise, we effectively have rule of man who arbitrarily interprets and enforces those laws.

Central planners do not have the information or processing power to make efficient regulations. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem This is true for trade policy, monetary policy and pretty much everything else.  And that assumes the government agents have good intentions, which is giving them too much credit in many cases.