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

[camolist]

finex now providing details on used and unused swaps:

https://twitter.com/flibbr/status/570656785377443841

what a surprise, >99% of all active swaps are already used in margin positions.

I actually would have never expected that high of a %

[mymenace]

What I meant is that "bitcoin insurance" can probably only be what circle and coinbase are offering, basically telling people that "it's all insured" but if your computer/account gets hacked you are screwed and they don't give you a penny.
Considering bitcoin is irreversible and all, good luck with actual consumer protection.

If I let my computer get hacked, and the thieves empty my fiat bank account, I'm screwed, too. No difference.

One of my neighbours had her bank card stolen after she went to an ATM. The thieves had seen her typing in her code. She got nothing from the bank.

Sounds like utter bullshit.  What country do you live in?

Entirely possible even in the US.

To expand on that: In the early years of ATM cards, the 4 digit pin-code was encrypted on the card, and it was easy to steal a card, read it, brute force the pin, and use it - the ATM's were not always online and you could always find one that was offline. The banks just assumed that nobody had access to card readers, and that the encryption formula was secret. Both turned out to be untrue after some years, but countless courts trusted the banks, and the conclusion was always that if the correct pin was entered, it had either to be the owner of the card who did it, or he had not secured his pin sufficiently (which he had to, according the contract). Money lost.

http://rt.com/news/232627-banks-hacked-russian-expert/

the public will pay for this regardless, the banks will put in higher fees etc and find a way to claw their money back

[NotLambchop]

...
To expand on that: In the early years of ATM cards, the 4 digit pin-code was encrypted on the card, and it was easy to steal a card, read it, brute force the pin, and use it - the ATM's were not always online and you could always find one that was offline. The banks just assumed that nobody had access to card readers, and that the encryption formula was secret. Both turned out to be untrue after some years, but countless courts trusted the banks, and the conclusion was always that if the correct pin was entered, it had either to be the owner of the card who did it, or he had not secured his pin sufficiently (which he had to, according the contract). Money lost.

Source?

[inca]

Since were braking up from here, if bull volume fails were probably ending up in 160$ around double bottom

Explain how? I don't see this as a possibility at all.
If the push is not strong enough at this time more sideways action is more likely than a dump.

The way I read the market there is absolutely no incentive to sell coins below $220.

Sideways action is usually bearish.

Depends. Sideways (on falling volume, even) could either lead to a sudden break of resistance like in May, or of support, like in November.





Your guess is as good as mine, although I'm slightly leaning towards upwards, because of the sheer size of the January capitulation.

Hope so. Finex shorts at 23k. Nothing to see here.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[Andre#]

What I meant is that "bitcoin insurance" can probably only be what circle and coinbase are offering, basically telling people that "it's all insured" but if your computer/account gets hacked you are screwed and they don't give you a penny.
Considering bitcoin is irreversible and all, good luck with actual consumer protection.

If I let my computer get hacked, and the thieves empty my fiat bank account, I'm screwed, too. No difference.

One of my neighbours had her bank card stolen after she went to an ATM. The thieves had seen her typing in her code. She got nothing from the bank.

Sounds like utter bullshit.  What country do you live in?

The things I say can't sound more like bullshit than the things you say. I live in the Netherlands. (Because you asked so nicely.)

[Andre#]

What I meant is that "bitcoin insurance" can probably only be what circle and coinbase are offering, basically telling people that "it's all insured" but if your computer/account gets hacked you are screwed and they don't give you a penny.
Considering bitcoin is irreversible and all, good luck with actual consumer protection.

If I let my computer get hacked, and the thieves empty my fiat bank account, I'm screwed, too. No difference.

One of my neighbours had her bank card stolen after she went to an ATM. The thieves had seen her typing in her code. She got nothing from the bank.

Sounds like utter bullshit.  What country do you live in?

Entirely possible even in the US.

Really?  I suppose everything's possible, but that's not really how things work.  Heard plenty of "happened to my neighbor" stories, usually turns out 2b bulshit tho.

Apparently, I have a way better relationship with my neighbour than you. Not surprising, now I think of it...

[damiano]

finex now providing details on used and unused swaps:

https://twitter.com/flibbr/status/570656785377443841

what a surprise, >99% of all active swaps are already used in margin positions.

I actually would have never expected that high of a %

Im shocked at the % and it's clear which ever way it blows the losses will be heavy

[NotLambchop]

...
The things I say can't sound more like bullshit than the things you say. I live in the Netherlands. (Because you asked so nicely.)

Not sure what you're talking about, since I seldom make controversial claims.  What, specifically, did you find difficult to believe?

[Erdogan]

Considering bitcoin is irreversible and all, good luck with actual consumer protection.

OMG! It's irreversible like the cash you pay in a brick and mortar! There is NO WAY consumer protection could exist with bitcoin.  

Oh wait!

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/mainstream-consumer-protection-meets-bitcoin-100900458.html

February 13th, 2014 -- While Bitcoin has been exploding worldwide, many have argued that for Bitcoin to reach the next level of mainstream adoption there needs to be a mechanism to protect Bitcoin users from scams and fraudsters. New innovative open source start-up Bitrated is doing just that – bringing the standards of consumer protection customers have come to expect from legacy payment systems to Bitcoiners worldwide. In a world first Bitrated offers consumer protection for the safe purchasing of Bitcoin and other goods with Bitcoin, an open arbitration marketplace, buyer fraud protection mechanisms, niche experts and more.

Are you even aware of what day of the week it is?

No wonder you are a wanderer  

Calm down, cultist. You are a little nervous.

I read this thing and I see "trusted third party". I thought bitcoin was supposed to avoid those evil ugly "trusted third parties" satoshi was talking about in his paper and that this was the whole narrative for bitcoin paranoid libertarians.

Now you are saying that trust is necessary?

Can you imagine a world, with improved Bitcoin security ,where some are , if they choose, able and willing to secure their own coins and devices, and then there are others, some individuals that use companies, third parties, and some companies are insured, so as to comply with standards that enable them to interact with the conventional financial system, in a way that satisfies peoples needs and the regulations that exist?

I can.

Looks like we are going at the very core issue of the whole bitcoin phenomenon.

First satoshi creates a technology that is supposed to avoid "trusted third parties" because apparently they are a problem.
Then we discover that trusted third parties are actually important and not a problem.
So we introduce trust in something that was supposed to avoid it?

Why not used centralised finance that works better in the first place I wonder (that sure can welcome some improvements for example with distributed ledger protocols)?

Basically we just discovered that the original satoshi endeavour of making money 100% decentralised and trust-less was kinda... bullshit because trust in necessary.

So you are saying you cannot imagine a world where some choose to use a third party, if that is their choice, and some choose not to, and instead choose to disintermediate?

The point is you now have the choice.

I have not bought a CD, or used blockbuster, or bought a DVD for nearly half a decade, I still can choose to do so, but now I download or stream all of my content. However if I wanted to I could pop down to the shop and pick it up and buy cash, or order online and get a hardcopy sent in the post and pay by credit card or by Bitcoin , but I choose not to, I choose to interact with the web (with the risks associated) and download or stream or p2p,  but the point is I have the choice. Whereas I remember very clearly getting all new release films from blockbuster or going to the cinema, because well I had no choice.

The advent of digital downloads and streaming and p2p, did disintermediate to a certain extent the businesses that used to be the largest providers of DVD/CD rentals, sales etc.

It provides the choice.

Plenty of people I know still buy DVDs and CD's and plenty of people p2p or stream, and industry is playing catchup all of the time with this.

Point is people have the choice, to use technology that disintermediates the middleman.

Also, solutions to problems are being found all the time, Bitcoin security being a problem that is getting a lot of focus, I expect to see better solutions relatively soon. Things change.

(ps "Middle men" is quite a good film anyone seen it?? it is actually quite relevant now that I think of it  i.e internet, payments, evolving tech, and dodgy dodgy fuckers ... but now years later turned into a "grown up" fully fledged global industry, which still has some dodgy fuckers no doubt)

The bogous assumption in these kinds of discussions, is that bitcoin is in competition with these bank like services. Bitcoin is not that, bitcoin is money, base money, like banknotes. The confusion stems from the fact that bitcoins are so easily transferrable, globally, instantly, that they seem to be something different from normal money. But they are money, only very easily transferrable.

The services of banking is of course possible for bitcoin, just as with any kind of fiat (and gold). So anything from the banking world that is useful, will be implemented by the market in due time.

[Bassica]

Since were braking up from here, if bull volume fails were probably ending up in 160$ around double bottom

Explain how? I don't see this as a possibility at all.
If the push is not strong enough at this time more sideways action is more likely than a dump.

The way I read the market there is absolutely no incentive to sell coins below $220.

Sideways action is usually bearish.

Depends. Sideways (on falling volume, even) could either lead to a sudden break of resistance like in May, or of support, like in November.





Your guess is as good as mine, although I'm slightly leaning towards upwards, because of the sheer size of the January capitulation.

Hope so. Finex shorts at 23k. Nothing to see here.

For some reason i expect the fireworks to go right into the sky instead of burning to the ground. Can't really say why, there's multiple indicators for both directions, somehow I really think it will be up.

Wishful thinking or intuition?

[NotLambchop]

^NO U!!1!

[empowering]

[Andre#]

The bogous assumption in these kinds of discussions, is that bitcoin is in competition with these bank like services. Bitcoin is not that, bitcoin is money, base money, like banknotes. The confusion stems from the fact that bitcoins are so easily transferrable, globally, instantly, that they seem to be something different from normal money. But they are money, only very easily transferrable.

The services of banking is of course possible for bitcoin, just as with any kind of fiat (and gold). So anything from the banking world that is useful, will be implemented by the market in due time.

Hear, hear! Bitcoin doesn't make banks redundant, only a few cash cows will disappear. Like international money transfers, which are now tediously slow, expensive, and complicated. But few people will like to have a lot of BTC at home. If banks offer deposit insurance, they will happily put their BTC at the bank in return for ease of mind (like Circle already does in a limited way).

And people will still need loans, mortgages, etc.

[empowering]

The bogous assumption in these kinds of discussions, is that bitcoin is in competition with these bank like services. Bitcoin is not that, bitcoin is money, base money, like banknotes. The confusion stems from the fact that bitcoins are so easily transferrable, globally, instantly, that they seem to be something different from normal money. But they are money, only very easily transferrable.

The services of banking is of course possible for bitcoin, just as with any kind of fiat (and gold). So anything from the banking world that is useful, will be implemented by the market in due time.

I do not believe I am making this assumption.

 

[Erdogan]

The bogous assumption in these kinds of discussions, is that bitcoin is in competition with these bank like services. Bitcoin is not that, bitcoin is money, base money, like banknotes. The confusion stems from the fact that bitcoins are so easily transferrable, globally, instantly, that they seem to be something different from normal money. But they are money, only very easily transferrable.

The services of banking is of course possible for bitcoin, just as with any kind of fiat (and gold). So anything from the banking world that is useful, will be implemented by the market in due time.

Hear, hear! Bitcoin doesn't make banks redundant, only a few cash cows will disappear. Like international money transfers, which are now tediously slow, expensive, and complicated. But few people will like to have a lot of BTC at home. If banks offer deposit insurance, they will happily put their BTC at the bank in return for ease of mind (like Circle already does in a limited way).

And people will still need loans, mortgages, etc.

Thanks for strengthening my exact point.

[oda.krell]

Since were braking up from here, if bull volume fails were probably ending up in 160$ around double bottom

Explain how? I don't see this as a possibility at all.
If the push is not strong enough at this time more sideways action is more likely than a dump.

The way I read the market there is absolutely no incentive to sell coins below $220.

Sideways action is usually bearish.

Depends. Sideways (on falling volume, even) could either lead to a sudden break of resistance like in May, or of support, like in November.





Your guess is as good as mine, although I'm slightly leaning towards upwards, because of the sheer size of the January capitulation.

Hopefully your correct.

Im hoping for another small drop so I can pickup some more, but at the same time i'm slightly short in futures atm, but I have a very tight stoploss incase something goes against me.

I really mean slightly leaning in that direction In a thread I opened a few weeks ago, inviting people to submit a 3 month prediction for High/Low/VWMA, I entered myself that I expect another sub-200 drop. Don't really think it'll be as smooth (relatively) as in April / May.

[Erdogan]

The bogous assumption in these kinds of discussions, is that bitcoin is in competition with these bank like services. Bitcoin is not that, bitcoin is money, base money, like banknotes. The confusion stems from the fact that bitcoins are so easily transferrable, globally, instantly, that they seem to be something different from normal money. But they are money, only very easily transferrable.

The services of banking is of course possible for bitcoin, just as with any kind of fiat (and gold). So anything from the banking world that is useful, will be implemented by the market in due time.

I do not believe I am making this assumption.

 

Right, it was the one you quoted, Wandererfromthenorth. I just think that bitcoin, being comparable primarily to fiat money, not to banking services, should be pointed out repeatedly.

[oda.krell]

The bogous assumption in these kinds of discussions, is that bitcoin is in competition with these bank like services. Bitcoin is not that, bitcoin is money, base money, like banknotes. The confusion stems from the fact that bitcoins are so easily transferrable, globally, instantly, that they seem to be something different from normal money. But they are money, only very easily transferrable.

The services of banking is of course possible for bitcoin, just as with any kind of fiat (and gold). So anything from the banking world that is useful, will be implemented by the market in due time.

Hear, hear! Bitcoin doesn't make banks redundant, only a few cash cows will disappear. Like international money transfers, which are now tediously slow, expensive, and complicated. But few people will like to have a lot of BTC at home. If banks offer deposit insurance, they will happily put their BTC at the bank in return for ease of mind (like Circle already does in a limited way).

And people will still need loans, mortgages, etc.

Dear diary. Today was a good day: I read a post by a newbie account that actually didn't make me want to claw my eyes out.

Seriously though, completely agreed.

Bitcoin (or crypto, in general) being innovative, and quite possibly highly disruptive to certain industries doesn't mean all existing customs and wants of mankind will go away or change.

Customer protection will continue to exist. Loans will continue to exist. Central banks will continue to exist. QE will continue to exist ^_^ ... I'm betting on a profitable (though not frictionless) coexistence of the above with crypto, not the former being replaced by the latter.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation