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

[marcus_of_augustus]

It's the same faggots dribbling the same nonsense in this thread.

some Juan Juan faggot, some billyjean faggot, i can't even remember your stupid names.

I can't even be bothered ignoring you retards, I just scroll down past whatever you idiots say.

Why don't you faggots get a hobby or something, you're the kings of the special olympics, absolute fucking retards.

Sell your coins or don't i dont give a fuck, i'll be the one having the last laugh when Bitcoin goes through the roof.

lol, this is the best!

[JayJuanGee]

Furthermore, initially, I had been thinking that if I get into this thing (bitcoin), what are my liquidation possibilities and potential exit strategies.

I don't think in terms of liquidation or exit. In my planning, I have built a number of laddered 'diversification points', none of which, itself, divests a large percentage of my stash. Risto codified this as his 'SSS' strategy, though the concept is obvious in and of itself. The basics being 'every time BTC value increases by N*, sell M%', where N and M are constants of your choosing. In my case, each diversification point is enough to make a significant upgrade in lifestyle, without depleting principal.

Either this thing goes where there is no reason to exit, or it crashes to nothing. For me, there is no in between.

Actually, I am on the same page as you too, regarding the mostly accumulating and holding, and strategically and intermittently cashing out as the price is likely to increase.

I read the SSS plan, and I have created my own variation of that involving both cashing out and trading... the trading part I began in October 2015, and it is intended for me to continue to accumulate BTC and to bring down my average cost per BTC.  In essence, as these aspects of my holdings adjust, then my modified variation of the SSS plan adapts as well in my own formulaic ways that works for me to create a plan ahead of time but to tweak it in logical ways that works for me and is not emotionally driven.. and includes a long term expectation that BTC prices are going to continue to appreciate in ways that provide larger overall returns than other assets.

Regarding my points about regulation and liquidation, I am describing dynamics that influenced my decision in the beginning about whether and how to get in, and even though there seemed to be various challenges in these liquidation and regulation regards, those challenges have largely disappeared and have become less prominent in the bitcoin space.

[Cconvert2G36]

-snip-
It is like the Captain planning to "defeat" a sailors mutiny by rowing out with the First Mate in a small lifeboat, and declaring it to be the real ship.
-snip-

I might steal this one. 

Here's mine from another thread:

This is analogous to a negotiation... where you [greg&luke] place a loaded pistol on the table facing the other participants [miners] before you ask them for an answer. Reeks of desperation.

[Andre#]

Regarding existing holders, if you have your own keys you are relatively ok (minus the obvious destruction of USD value), but the situation with coins in online exchanges and wallets will be "problematic" if say an exchange with 500k BTCs, say 'ok my clients, now you have 500k BTCCs because we adopted this fork' (and we are keeping 500k BTCs of the other fork for ourselves). It would be like stealing BTCs and exchanging them for Gavincoins.

People need to do a bank run in every exchange (maybe even online wallets too) well before we reach the point of the hard fork, to ensure that they have control of their BTCs.

That's fine. Online wallets and exchanges are not supposed to do fractional reserve banking. So there need not be a run, since all the deposited coins are available (you don't need to run faster than your fellow account holder, because the coins may run out). And if there is one who cheats -- al the better if that one is singled out as a cheater.

You're not going to stop spreading FUD, right?

[Andre#]

People need to do a bank run in every exchange (maybe even online wallets too) well before we reach the point of the hard fork, to ensure that they have control of their BTCs.

AlexGR raises an excellent point. If there is an upcoming contentious hardfork scheduled then the first things people are going to do is withdraw ALL their coins off the exchanges and out of any custodial services.

All those bitcoin alliance folks and corporates that have made their businesses out of holding on to other people's coins in custody should keep that mind whilst they are pushing for contentious hardforks.

Ah, AlexGR's FUD sidekick...

[smooth]

I could do that myself now: make a copy of core, change the PoW formula, and presto: a hard fork happened, and the coin has split.  If the 1000 PH/s is not important, what is the difference between my bitcoin and their bitcoin?

For a start, the PoW.

After that, it depends.

[marcus_of_augustus]

People need to do a bank run in every exchange (maybe even online wallets too) well before we reach the point of the hard fork, to ensure that they have control of their BTCs.

AlexGR raises an excellent point. If there is an upcoming contentious hardfork scheduled then the first things people are going to do is withdraw ALL their coins off the exchanges and out of any custodial services.

All those bitcoin alliance folks and corporates that have made their businesses out of holding on to other people's coins in custody should keep that mind whilst they are pushing for contentious hardforks.

Ah, AlexGR's FUD sidekick...

Which idiots are going to leave their coins on an exchange or with Coinbase or BitGo or Bitpay before a hardfork? Almost all custody coins are going to be going back to their rightful owners before a contentious hardfork, the free market will do its job no?

Why leave the vote with the third party holders which fork your coins will end up on when you can keep your options open and hedge bets by holding them in cold storage for yourself?

*edited.

[smooth]

People need to do a bank run in every exchange (maybe even online wallets too) well before we reach the point of the hard fork, to ensure that they have control of their BTCs.

AlexGR raises an excellent point. If there is an upcoming contentious hardfork scheduled then the first things people are going to do is withdraw ALL their coins off the exchanges and out of any custodial services.

All those bitcoin alliance folks and corporates that have made their businesses out of holding on to other people's coins in custody should keep that mind whilst they are pushing for contentious hardforks.

Ah, AlexGR's FUD sidekick...

Which idoits are going to leave their coins on an exchange or with Coinbase or BitGo or Bitpay before a hardfork?

Why leave the vote with them which fork your coins will end up on when you can keep your options open and hedge bets by holding them in cold storage?

Not really clear why people leave quiet coins there in the first place.

[JorgeStolfi]

This isn't really accurate. Satoshi knew exactly where it would go and he never dismissed Hal's outlandish predictions about the value of Bitcoin's either during the conversation in the cryptography mailing list.

The fact that new coins are produced means the money supply increases by a
planned amount, but this does not necessarily result in inflation. If the
supply of money increases at the same rate that the number of people using it
increases, prices remain stable. If it does not increase as fast as demand,
there will be deflation and early holders of money will see its value increase.

It isn't accurate because JorgeStolfi was either trolling or stubbornly ignoring facts. I already explained to him a few days ago, complete with numerous quotes (though I missed that one -- thanks for finding it), that satoshi was well aware that Bitcoin not only would be a speculative asset but that it was absolutely expected and even required that it would function that way.

It is amazing how people can get such different readings from the same words.  (Just yesterday I was arguing with someone who, like many libertarian bitcoiners believed that the genesis block quote was proof that Satoshi was libertarian and designed bitcoin to get rid of banks and "fiat" money.

Yes, Satoshi obviously designed bitcoin on purpose to have a finite total issuance.  That was a natural mistake, because he  -- like almost everybody, including myself until 2 years ago -- believed that inflation was a bad thing, and that good money therefore should be inflation-free.

But there is a Grand Canyon between that and "was well aware that Bitcoin not only would be a speculative asset but that it was absolutely expected and even required that it would function that way".  I have read somewhere that it was Hal Finney, in fact, who first thought of bitcoin as investment; and Satoshi's reaction was like "oh, yes, you may want to keep some".  

Note that, in the quote above, he is referring to price increasing as the result of growth of demand, not of speculation itself.  In another quote he tries to estimate the growth of the user base, and says that 20% per year (double every 4 years) would be a "crazy  rate of growth.  By that "crazy"  rate, the price of 0.05 USD/BTC in mid-2010 would be ~0.50 USD/BTC now.  

While he does not say that explicitly, that "crazy" price increase rate would be also consistent with his choice for the parameters of the block reward fomula (halving every 4 years).  If the price increase was less than "crazy", say 10% per year, the value of the block reward too would decrease 10% per year, on average; forcing a gradual transition of the mining revenue from block reward to transaction fees.

Instead, speculative trading cause the price to increase 10x per year over the next 4 years, so that the value of the block reward increase instead of decreasing.  That made mining into an industrial activity, which was inevitably  concentrated (a development that he, and any rational person, would have seen as disastrous for the project).  That level of speculative trading also caused huge volatility, that made bitcoin unsuitable as a currency.  

It is absurdly delusional to claim that Satoshi had foreseen these developments, and that they were part of his goal.  The world did not need another speculative instrument; he would not have spent 3 years designing a crazy one.  There is no sense in having naive investors give 1 million dollars each day to secure a payment system used by less than a million people.  

EDIT: typo "5 years  --> "4 years"

[Karartma1]

People need to do a bank run in every exchange (maybe even online wallets too) well before we reach the point of the hard fork, to ensure that they have control of their BTCs.

AlexGR raises an excellent point. If there is an upcoming contentious hardfork scheduled then the first things people are going to do is withdraw ALL their coins off the exchanges and out of any custodial services.

All those bitcoin alliance folks and corporates that have made their businesses out of holding on to other people's coins in custody should keep that mind whilst they are pushing for contentious hardforks.

Ah, AlexGR's FUD sidekick...

Which idoits are going to leave their coins on an exchange or with Coinbase or BitGo or Bitpay before a hardfork?

Why leave the vote with them which fork your coins will end up on when you can keep your options open and hedge bets by holding them in cold storage?

Not really clear why people leave quiet coins there in the first place.

Because many people think that those are the best places to keep their own bitcoin, not everyone knows all the implications of leaving coins there.
The Bitcoin world is not only made by people from this forum: I think most of the people who use BTC don't even come here to understand what it is.
We have to be realistic: for the majority of the people BTC = speculation (and we are writing in a speculation thread)

[JorgeStolfi]

I could do that myself now: make a copy of core, change the PoW formula, and presto: a hard fork happened, and the coin has split.  If the 1000 PH/s is not important, what is the difference between my bitcoin and their bitcoin?

For a start, the PoW.

After that, it depends.

Depends on what?  If the hashpower is not important, and preserving the PoW is not important, then what is the magic factor that would cause all the value to go to the CoreCoin branch instead of the CartelCoin branch? 

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[smooth]

I could do that myself now: make a copy of core, change the PoW formula, and presto: a hard fork happened, and the coin has split.  If the 1000 PH/s is not important, what is the difference between my bitcoin and their bitcoin?

For a start, the PoW.

After that, it depends.

Depends on what?  If the hashpower is not important, and preserving the PoW is not important, then what is the magic factor that would cause all the value to go to the CoreCoin branch instead of the CartelCoin branch? 

Whatever it is that the economic majority thinks is more important. If it is sticking with the existing miner fleet, that's where the value ends up. If it is firing the existing miner fleet, that's where the value ends up. There is no answer you or I can state without that information that is more correct than another.

[JorgeStolfi]

And now for something completely different: something tenously related to trading



Note how the volume pattern changed on OKCoin after the last drop. Before the drop you could see the day/night rythm proper of China's time zone. After the drop there is nearly continuous activity, around the clock. Robot traders frantically proping up the price is not a far-fetched possibility...

The volume pattern before the drop itself was different than what I remembered from 2014.  Then it was smother, more sinusoidal.  The one you see on the image above has strong daily peaks that decay abruptly. Maybe some bitcoin ponzi in China updates his webpage once a day?

[marcus_of_augustus]

toomim and co have cartelised the bitcoin miners under guise of a political movement and don't expect bad outcomes? are they really that naive?

[JorgeStolfi]

Whatever it is that the economic majority thinks is more important. If it is sticking with the existing miner fleet, that's where the value ends up. If it is firing the existing miner fleet, that's where the value ends up. There is no answer you or I can state without that information that is more correct than another.

OK.  But note that the Core devs cannot "fire the miners", just as I cannot fire the Core devs or the miners.  They have no power to stop or hamper the CartelCoin, nor the OldCoin. All they can do is what I can do create the CoreCoin (or StolfiCoin) and hope that people will use it.  They cannot even ask people to choose between the two: each client will start with the same coins on each branch, and can move them independently.

[Andre#]

has anyone noticed that you cant make new btc addresses on exchanges now!, bittrex and polo dont allow it anymore, its one address per account ( with id on polo )
hmm i wonder why??

I just made a new one at Kraken. No problems.

[smooth]

Whatever it is that the economic majority thinks is more important. If it is sticking with the existing miner fleet, that's where the value ends up. If it is firing the existing miner fleet, that's where the value ends up. There is no answer you or I can state without that information that is more correct than another.

OK.  But note that the Core devs cannot "fire the miners", just as I cannot fire the Core devs or the miners.  They have no power to stop or hamper the CartelCoin, nor the OldCoin. All they can do is what I can do create the CoreCoin (or StolfiCoin) and hope that people will use it.  They cannot even ask people to choose between the two: each client will start with the same coins on each branch, and can move them independently.

I never mentioned the Core devs.

[marcus_of_augustus]

World faces wave of epic debt defaults, fears central bank veteran
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/davos/12108569/World-faces-wave-of-epic-debt-defaults-fears-central-bank-veteran.html

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation