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

[anthonycamp]

well form what i read above it can move up or dwon lol this its a non answer what soo ever i dont need to read just see the signs that chrspmasts its going to put it more to the down

[needmoney]

I think bitcoin price will be between $330 - $350 in two weeks.
But maybe it will decrease at the last week of the December.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[makeacake]

...
There is a different dynamic for down versus up, and part of the reason for the different dynamics likely has to do with differing levels of ease to move BTC in comparison to moving fiat (and who may have access to mechanisms to move fiat quickly - surely, these days almost anyone has access to mechanisms to move BTC really quickly), which considerably changes the dynamics for each of two binary possible price directions.

The entities moving the market are not the entities who have problems with moving BTC/fiat onto exchanges quickly. There's little evidence that much money is actually moving in & out of exchanges. The fiat you sell (for BTC) is the fiat you buy (with BTC). It's simply a question of timing.

Well you may not have to really move very much fiat if you buy BTC in one location and sell BTC on an exchange (mostly thinking about Stamp).  And, really how do you know about money moving off and onto various exchanges, is there some public way of verifying such beyond attempting to infer such info from the order books and/or trade volume?

No, there isn't. At best, the only thing to be inferred from volume is the sum spent on making the volume look like it does. Not even that, in reality.
There's one thing that hodlers say that I agree with: you will lose money if you trade (unless you're a 'market maker'). The reason legacy real trading is regulated is to prevent exactly what's going on on BTC exchanges now.
Financial fraud develops & advances, just like any other field. Regulators manage to plug one loophole, manipulators figure out another, and the game goes on.

Now imagine this wealth of experience, this boatload of scams that got invented and burnt down IRL over *centuries*, and, suddenly ...unregulated market!!1! Everything old is new again, you don't even have to figure out new ways to do shit -- just recycle. Hard to get this across, but another way to look at it is imagine some bacterial strain that becomes more and more antibiotic-resistant as new antibiotics are introduced, and then... stop taking antibiotics.
Good luck.

[JayJuanGee]

...
There is a different dynamic for down versus up, and part of the reason for the different dynamics likely has to do with differing levels of ease to move BTC in comparison to moving fiat (and who may have access to mechanisms to move fiat quickly - surely, these days almost anyone has access to mechanisms to move BTC really quickly), which considerably changes the dynamics for each of two binary possible price directions.

The entities moving the market are not the entities who have problems with moving BTC/fiat onto exchanges quickly. There's little evidence that much money is actually moving in & out of exchanges. The fiat you sell (for BTC) is the fiat you buy (with BTC). It's simply a question of timing.

Well you may not have to really move very much fiat if you buy BTC in one location and sell BTC on an exchange (mostly thinking about Stamp).  And, really how do you know about money moving off and onto various exchanges, is there some public way of verifying such beyond attempting to infer such info from the order books and/or trade volume?

No, there isn't. At best, the only thing to be inferred from volume is the sum spent on making the volume look like it does. Not even that, in reality.
There's one thing that hodlers say that I agree with: you will lose money if you trade (unless you're a 'market maker'). The reason legacy real trading is regulated is to prevent exactly what's going on on BTC exchanges now.
Financial fraud develops & advances, just like any other field. Regulators manage to plug one loophole, manipulators figure out another, and the game goes on.

Now imagine this wealth of experience, this boatload of scams that got invented and burnt down IRL over *centuries*, and, suddenly ...unregulated market!!1! Everything old is new again, you don't even have to figure out new ways to do shit -- just recycle. Hard to get this across, but another way to look at it is imagine some bacterial strain that becomes more and more antibiotic-resistant as new antibiotics are introduced, and then... stop taking antibiotics.
Good luck.

What the fuck are you talking about?

You are the one who made the claim suggesting that there was NO real evidence of money moving in and out of exchanges, and I asked you, more or less, how you would know... then you agree that you do not know and subsequently babble on in some side and distracting irrelevant tangent.

In other words, you do not appear to be really attempting any substantive discussion regarding any of your off-the-wall assertions.

[Cconvert2G36]

Huobi ded?

edit: back up

[ssmc2]

Huobi ded?

Yep. Crypto too.

[makeacake]

...
There is a different dynamic for down versus up, and part of the reason for the different dynamics likely has to do with differing levels of ease to move BTC in comparison to moving fiat (and who may have access to mechanisms to move fiat quickly - surely, these days almost anyone has access to mechanisms to move BTC really quickly), which considerably changes the dynamics for each of two binary possible price directions.

The entities moving the market are not the entities who have problems with moving BTC/fiat onto exchanges quickly. There's little evidence that much money is actually moving in & out of exchanges. The fiat you sell (for BTC) is the fiat you buy (with BTC). It's simply a question of timing.

Well you may not have to really move very much fiat if you buy BTC in one location and sell BTC on an exchange (mostly thinking about Stamp).  And, really how do you know about money moving off and onto various exchanges, is there some public way of verifying such beyond attempting to infer such info from the order books and/or trade volume?

No, there isn't. At best, the only thing to be inferred from volume is the sum spent on making the volume look like it does. Not even that, in reality.
There's one thing that hodlers say that I agree with: you will lose money if you trade (unless you're a 'market maker'). The reason legacy real trading is regulated is to prevent exactly what's going on on BTC exchanges now.
Financial fraud develops & advances, just like any other field. Regulators manage to plug one loophole, manipulators figure out another, and the game goes on.

Now imagine this wealth of experience, this boatload of scams that got invented and burnt down IRL over *centuries*, and, suddenly ...unregulated market!!1! Everything old is new again, you don't even have to figure out new ways to do shit -- just recycle. Hard to get this across, but another way to look at it is imagine some bacterial strain that becomes more and more antibiotic-resistant as new antibiotics are introduced, and then... stop taking antibiotics.
Good luck.

What the fuck are you talking about?

You are the one who made the claim suggesting that there was NO real evidence of money moving in and out of exchanges, and I asked you, more or less, how you would know... then you agree that you do not know and subsequently babble on in some side and distracting irrelevant tangent.

Not sure what you mean. I said there's no evidence, and you expect me to ...offer you evidence? Of what, pray tell? Of there being no evidence? How would one go about doing that?

[Fatman3001]

Bitcoin XT is officially ded...

http://www.bizjournals.com/newyork/news/2015/11/20/bitcoin-core-developer-joins-blockchain-consortium.html

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Bitcoin XT is officially ded...

http://www.bizjournals.com/newyork/news/2015/11/20/bitcoin-core-developer-joins-blockchain-consortium.html

Anybody read the whitepaper yet?

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/55f73743e4b051cfcc0b02cf/t/564ca429e4b0a9e90a947ba2/1447863337472/Watermarked-tokens-and-pseudonymity-on-public-blockchains-Swanson.pdf

Thoughts?

[Cereberus]

There was so much hysteria about it, this is good for development going forward.

[hdbuck]

Bitcoin XT is officially ded...

http://www.bizjournals.com/newyork/news/2015/11/20/bitcoin-core-developer-joins-blockchain-consortium.html

Anybody read the whitepaper yet?

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/55f73743e4b051cfcc0b02cf/t/564ca429e4b0a9e90a947ba2/1447863337472/Watermarked-tokens-and-pseudonymity-on-public-blockchains-Swanson.pdf

Thoughts?

So, hearn is definitaly not interested in financial freedom.

Banks and their Monopoly can go fork themselves.

[JorgeStolfi]

Bitcoin XT is officially ded...

http://www.bizjournals.com/newyork/news/2015/11/20/bitcoin-core-developer-joins-blockchain-consortium.html

Well, not quite dead.  In induced coma for now, but the Doctor promised to drop by and check from time to time:

https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3tfwd1/mike_hearn_now_working_for_r3cv_blockchain/cx5wnwe

[AlexGR]

So, hearn is definitaly not interested in financial freedom

I'm willing to bet that all the money he'll get from the mega-banks will afford him quite a lot of financial freedom. Not sure about the rest 7bn people though

[hdbuck]

So, hearn is definitaly not interested in financial freedom

I'm willing to bet that all the money he'll get from the mega-banks will afford him quite a lot of financial freedom. Not sure about the rest 7bn people though

Monetary sovereingty.

[ssmc2]

Hearn's a pussy and will go down with the rest of the antiquated 20th century establishments when BTC inevitably smothers them.

[Fatman3001]

Mike's final "Fuck You!!!" to Bitcoin:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3tftas/mike_hearn_now_working_for_r3cv_blockchain/cx5wwwu

"The current Bitcoin system, I mean the system we actually use today with the block chain, isn't going to change the world at all due to the 1mb limit.
Unless the community changes direction very clearly (which in practice will require getting rid of Bitcoin Core completely), then "the system" will simply wither on the vine whilst the community waits for Lightning, or whatever solution they're being sold. But Lightning bears no resemblance to the Bitcoin I signed up to work on 5 years ago. It's an entirely different design which looks very much like the existing model of banking - nodes that hold people's money (i.e. may end up regulated), route it between them, no support for smart contracts, byzantine complexity due to being built on a 'legacy' layer that wasn't designed for it, occasional settlement between parties etc. Assuming it even works at all.
So if I have a choice between helping the existing financial system build something better than what they have today that resembles Bitcoin, or helping the Bitcoin community build something worse than what they have today that resembles banking, then I may as well go where the users are and work with the banks."

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[Cconvert2G36]

I don't completely agree with the tactical decisions Hearn made over the last year, and I'd be fine with slower increases than BIP101, but I'm 100% certain he did more for Bitcoin on his worst day than Nov 2013 hdbuck ever will.

If we're still (inexplicably?) stuck at 1MB popescu pogs through the majority of 2016, I'll be lacing up my shoes too.

[Fatman3001]

I don't completely agree with the tactical decisions Hearn made over the last year, and I'd be fine with slower increases than BIP101, but I'm 100% certain he did more for Bitcoin on his worst day than Nov 2013 hdbuck ever will.

If we're still (inexplicably?) stuck at 1MB popescu pogs through the majority of 2016, I'll be lacing up my shoes too.

Hear, hear!