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

[dumbfbrankings]

lol @ uguise planning world finanshul domination while your 3.7 tps is pegged to the floor, legions of newbs complaining/confused about their "future of money" stuck/gone?, and a VC owned dev team led by a neckbeard with a death wish against fixing it...

puff puff pass da hopium boyz

[adamstgBit]

Is that linear or log?  

imagine its log and the scale on the Y-axis ranges 20%, which illustrates how BTC slowly and predictably gains 1% value year after year while the RAW-Supply Vs Demand(without speculative demand) for the BTC is unstable.

[ssmc2]

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/14/bitcoin-news-bank-of-tokyo-mitsubishi-says-testing-its-own-digital-currency-based-on-blockchain-technology.html

Noticeably absent is the info on how their bankcoin is secured.


Bullish as fawk

[julian071]

I just can't see it NOT being a FIAT vacuum cleaner.

Don't worry, I don't think Bitcoin will ever be a "fiat vacum cleaner". Think of it this way....

There are 2 general types of "money" needed by advanced economies. 1 type that keeps prices stable (for trading) and one type that keeps the supply fixed (for store of value). The one that keeps prices stable is simply a way to denominate trades - it isn't actually "money" in the sense of being a bearer token like commodities, precious metals or cryptocurrencies. On many websites now you can even choose how to denominate your trade - Canadian Dollars, $USD, EUR, whatever.

Those trading currencies need to have a variable supply - like the USD. A fractional reserve system which inflates and contracts according to liquidity requirements. If you don't have that and use a fixed supply currency like Bitcoin for trading then half the businesses in the world will go bust and the other half will make supernormal profits which are not sustainable.

So I don't see bitcoin ever being used as a trading currency en masse. (You don't see prices ever being denominated in gold and neither did we when there was a gold standard). Bitcoin is a base asset which can be used to "back" trading currencies for example or facilitate the capitalisation of whatever markets, but I think prices will still continue to be denominated in prevailing regional currencies.

I should be clear as many have made the "vacuum cleaner" statement. What I am saying is that instead of having a savings account we will (at least) have "Bitcoin accounts". Sure, the money supply by governments will want to be contracted and expanded for reasons that both make sense and are sick. No argument that that will continue for a while, perhaps with different FIAT money though.

But me as a "working"   individual, I do NOT want to have my money sitting in government money as I don't trust it and don't like how it is being used and using us. I would much rather have it sitting in Bitcoin or something stable. Maybe we keep a few thousand in dollars for spending in a checking account (but maybe we don't as if BTC is accepted everywhere, why have anything in government money?)

I just think the numbers won't lie and that people, even if they are only losing a very small amount, say .1% of actual buying power per month, would not want to have their money in the regular bank and would much rather have it in a Bitcoin bank (under their immediate control or not) as it might sound better to them to gain .1% per month, rather than lose .1% per month.

Its about sharing

You make great and valid points, however most people don't have money sitting in the form of fiat. In fact, most people don't have a (relevantly) postive balance on their credits and debts at all! And those who do usually have them tied up in other things.

For example, being a (slightly above) average joe, I own a house. I am actually happy that the mortgage on that is denominated in fiat, because that devalues relative to the value of my house.

Fiat money usually gets spent very quickly. With interest rates being what they are, it's just no use keeping it.

[DARKHOLDER]

Is that linear or log?  

imagine its log and the scale on the Y-axis ranges 20%, which illustrates how BTC slowly and predictably gains 1% value year after year while the RAW-Supply Vs Demand(without speculative demand) for the BTC is unstable.

Hope BTC will reach new ATH before halving

[adamstgBit]

Is that linear or log?  

imagine its log and the scale on the Y-axis ranges 20%, which illustrates how BTC slowly and predictably gains 1% value year after year while the RAW-Supply Vs Demand(without speculative demand) for the BTC is unstable.

Hope BTC will reach new ATH before halving

the graph above assume full market saturation with BTC firmly entrenched as THE global reserve currency, with a market cap in the 10's of trillions, and shows how speculation at that point smooths out volatility.

until then i would expect unbelievable volatility prices with growth spurts and speculative bubbles and random deep corrections.

will speculation drive prices sky high before the halfing? that is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things  

[matt4054]

The blockchain is seriously overloaded right now, transactions are experiencing huge delays:



(this is from my live charts at http://www.bitcoinqueue.com)

I believe this has also a bad impact on trading (i.e. too slow from and to exchanges).

So, what do you think, faster adoption of new protocol and/or higher block size?

[inca]

First noticed bitcoin on a zero hedge article in 2012. Set up my blockchain.info account in November 2012 after reading about bitcoin for an entire weekend. I couldn't figure out a way to buy any in the UK and i didn't trust the idea of escrow. By the time I pulled my finger out and started accumulating that way the price was 60 dollars  instead of 10 or something and i missed out on a significant life changing payday :-)

C'est la vie! All the chaps who hung in there and used the bear market to accumulate should be pretty happy right now.

[Fakhoury]

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/14/bitcoin-news-bank-of-tokyo-mitsubishi-says-testing-its-own-digital-currency-based-on-blockchain-technology.html

Noticeably absent is the info on how their bankcoin is secured.


Bullish as fawk

Private SQL database , wrong ?

[Fakhoury]

First noticed bitcoin on a zero hedge article in 2012. Set up my blockchain.info account in November 2012 after reading about bitcoin for an entire weekend. I couldn't figure out a way to buy any in the UK and i didn't trust the idea of escrow. By the time I pulled my finger out and started accumulating that way the price was 60 dollars  instead of 10 or something and i missed out on a significant life changing payday :-)

C'est la vie! All the chaps who hung in there and used the bear market to accumulate should be pretty happy right now.

We ain't seen nothing yet, inca

[JayJuanGee]

The blockchain is seriously overloaded right now, transactions are experiencing huge delays:



(this is from my live charts at http://www.bitcoinqueue.com)

I believe this has also a bad impact on trading (i.e. too slow from and to exchanges).

So, what do you think, faster adoption of new protocol and/or higher block size?

I like that link that you provided, matt4054. 

Hopefully, the information in the charts is relatively accurate, and we can look at current levels of the mempool, as well as the fees that appear to be attached to such pending transactions, as compared with historical levels.

[bitebits]

^^ Sometimes a picture says more than a thousand words.

Nice website Matt!

[toknormal]

all i'm saying is i dont buy the idea that we CANNOT have stable prices with a fixed monetary supply

Well I think it's time you bought it 

You run a fairground. At the entrance people buy tokens - 1 token counts for 2 rides. Inside the fairground, there is only 1 currency: token currency. (Call it Bitcoin if you like).

Each day, you have an average of 100 people inside the gates at any one time, each person buys on average 5 tokens. So you maintain a "money supply" of 500 tokens which are constantly being recycled, even though the ride capacity is not fully utilised.

Then one Saturday, due to excellent weather, you get a 50% surge in visitors. Now you have 3 choices:

1. inflate the prices so that 1 ride costs 1 token instead of half a token
2. turn people away
3. get more tokens (inflate the money supply) and keep prices the stable

Sure, you can have stable prices with a fixed monetary base, but only if demand for liquidity remains stable (which is cannot in a dynamic economy).

[Its About Sharing]

I just can't see it NOT being a FIAT vacuum cleaner.

Don't worry, I don't think Bitcoin will ever be a "fiat vacum cleaner". Think of it this way....

There are 2 general types of "money" needed by advanced economies. 1 type that keeps prices stable (for trading) and one type that keeps the supply fixed (for store of value). The one that keeps prices stable is simply a way to denominate trades - it isn't actually "money" in the sense of being a bearer token like commodities, precious metals or cryptocurrencies. On many websites now you can even choose how to denominate your trade - Canadian Dollars, $USD, EUR, whatever.

Those trading currencies need to have a variable supply - like the USD. A fractional reserve system which inflates and contracts according to liquidity requirements. If you don't have that and use a fixed supply currency like Bitcoin for trading then half the businesses in the world will go bust and the other half will make supernormal profits which are not sustainable.

So I don't see bitcoin ever being used as a trading currency en masse. (You don't see prices ever being denominated in gold and neither did we when there was a gold standard). Bitcoin is a base asset which can be used to "back" trading currencies for example or facilitate the capitalisation of whatever markets, but I think prices will still continue to be denominated in prevailing regional currencies.

I should be clear as many have made the "vacuum cleaner" statement. What I am saying is that instead of having a savings account we will (at least) have "Bitcoin accounts". Sure, the money supply by governments will want to be contracted and expanded for reasons that both make sense and are sick. No argument that that will continue for a while, perhaps with different FIAT money though.

But me as a "working"   individual, I do NOT want to have my money sitting in government money as I don't trust it and don't like how it is being used and using us. I would much rather have it sitting in Bitcoin or something stable. Maybe we keep a few thousand in dollars for spending in a checking account (but maybe we don't as if BTC is accepted everywhere, why have anything in government money?)

I just think the numbers won't lie and that people, even if they are only losing a very small amount, say .1% of actual buying power per month, would not want to have their money in the regular bank and would much rather have it in a Bitcoin bank (under their immediate control or not) as it might sound better to them to gain .1% per month, rather than lose .1% per month.

Its about sharing

You make great and valid points, however most people don't have money sitting in the form of fiat. In fact, most people don't have a (relevantly) postive balance on their credits and debts at all! And those who do usually have them tied up in other things.

For example, being a (slightly above) average joe, I own a house. I am actually happy that the mortgage on that is denominated in fiat, because that devalues relative to the value of my house.

Fiat money usually gets spent very quickly. With interest rates being what they are, it's just no use keeping it.

Most Americans might be in debt and not have large amounts of cash, but many do. And outside of a relatively speaking, debtor nation, many many people have cash or accounts, etc. even if we are talking a small%, we are still talking trillions.

I would also add, most people are not so well off that their money is tied up imo.

What happens when their is an easily accessable choice to govt fiat, one that does that and increases in value? And wait, there's more! Lol

[AlexGR]

The blockchain is seriously overloaded right now, transactions are experiencing huge delays:
...
I believe this has also a bad impact on trading (i.e. too slow from and to exchanges).

You mean traders who

a) lose something like 0.2-0.3% for every trade (exchange commission)
b) accept big bank or SWIFT fees for every fiat transfer in and out
c) accept trading taxes / capital gain taxes etc by their government

...don't have a few cents to get first block priority tx?

Btw, the #1 problem in bitcoin trading is not the speed of btc but the extremely slow fiat / legacy banking.

[Mrpumperitis]

https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin/
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/4o83su/bitcoins_unconfirmed_transactions_at_34k/

[Spaceman_Spiff]

Why would someone buy USD when BTC is ubiquitously used in the future, because they want their currency to depreciate to gain stability?  That makes no sense

It does make sense. They would buy USD because they need it to faciliate trade of goods and services which are denominated in that currency. It doesn't depreciate fast enough to inhibit its use for trade. Any longer term holdings are invested so they don't lose value. Thats just how the world works - look back in history of 100 years. The $USD has depreciated massively - about 98% or something, yet it didn't inhibit the most monumental period of growth the world has seen in its existence.

It's right that fiat currencies should depreciate in value over time because their primary purpose is to facilitate trade and keep prices stable, not to store value (in the long term that is, obviously they need to be stable enough to store value in the short term).

Bitcoin will be stable (non-volatile) enough for commerce.

It won't be. It's academic. No fixed supply currency can be unless you have an economy that doesn't expand or contract in size. Also, if it was stable it wouldnt be doing its job. Many commentators criticise bitcoin for its volatility but it's that very volatility which indicates that it's successfully reflecting the balance of supply and demand for liquidity.

I'll admit that you seem to know more about modern economics than I do, but I disagree with you.
The reason gold isn't used as a transaction medium is because it is too damn inconvenient compared to fiat, so people are willing to hold a slowly depreciating currency because it was more convenient than gold.  In a bitcoin world, bitcoin would be just as convenient to transact with as fiat, so there is no incentive for the individual not to hold all his money in bitcoin.  Neither do businesses have a reason to ask to be paid in a depreciating currency.  In a world where bitcoin would be the only currency, it would not be volatile but slowly gain in value equal to productivity increase + percentage of coins lost per year, lets call it 3 percent per year.  Any business model that has a profit below that percentage (compared to btc value of the previous year) would not be executed due to opportunity cost (better to stay in btc then).  Might not be ideal for economic growth, but I fail to see why people would act differently. You seem to reason from the economic systems perspective, but it is people and their decisions that make up the economy.

[matt4054]

^^ Sometimes a picture says more than a thousand words.

Nice website Matt!

Thanks -- I'll make sure to keep my thread posted about updates in the next few days

[adamstgBit]

all i'm saying is i dont buy the idea that we CANNOT have stable prices with a fixed monetary supply

Well I think it's time you bought it 

You run a fairground. At the entrance people buy tokens - 1 token counts for 2 rides. Inside the fairground, there is only 1 currency: token currency. (Call it Bitcoin if you like).

Each day, you have an average of 100 people inside the gates at any one time, each person buys on average 5 tokens. So you maintain a "money supply" of 500 tokens which are constantly being recycled, even though the ride capacity is not fully utilised.

Then one Saturday, due to excellent weather, you get a 50% surge in visitors. Now you have 3 choices:

1. inflate the prices so that 1 ride costs 1 token instead of half a token
2. turn people away
3. get more tokens (inflate the money supply) and keep prices the stable

Sure, you can have stable prices with a fixed monetary base, but only if demand for liquidity remains stable (which is cannot in a dynamic economy).

Demand WILL remain stable tho...

The idea is that speculators price bitcoin at say 1mill / bitcoin  even tho raw-damad only accounts for a price of 0.4-0.5 million / bitcoin.
the raw demand can go up down and sideways yet the speculators still price bitcoin at 1 million / BTC.

they expect raw demand to go up and down, they dont care about that, they care about the longer term trend and price bitcoin accordingly.

so you end up with a stable 1mill/ BTC while raw demand can fluctuate significantly

[dumbfbrankings]

The blockchain is seriously overloaded right now, transactions are experiencing huge delays:
...
I believe this has also a bad impact on trading (i.e. too slow from and to exchanges).

-
...don't have a few cents to get first block priority tx?
-

You're not being accurate with a "few" cents anymore.

We started this argument months ago and you said it was no problem because 2 cents, a little later... 4 cents... then 10 cents... now we're talking 19 cents.



In your subjective opinion... when does it get high? 25 cents, 50, $1 for one of the smallest transactions you can make?

ETH investors love blockstream sycophants like you.