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

[bitcoinvest]

wow! it really happened!!! we passed 1.000€!!!
Very stable at this moment the order push for upwards trend right? what we can expect from here??

[1714768580]

1714768580

[1714768580]

1714768580

[1714768580]

1714768580

[1714768580]

1714768580

[AlexGR]

Difficulty History

Date   Difficulty   Change   Hash Rate
Feb 18 2017   440,779,902,287   4.41%   3,155,225,442 GH/s
Feb 04 2017   422,170,566,884   7.43%   3,022,014,630 GH/s
Jan 22 2017   392,963,262,344   16.64%   2,812,940,600 GH/s
Jan 10 2017   336,899,932,796   6.05%   2,411,623,656 GH/s
Dec 28 2016   317,688,400,354   2.43%   2,274,102,150 GH/s
Dec 15 2016   310,153,855,703   8.16%   2,220,167,778 GH/s
Dec 02 2016   286,765,766,821   1.76%   2,052,749,317 GH/s
Nov 18 2016   281,800,917,193   10.68%   2,017,209,539 GH/s
Nov 05 2016   254,620,187,304   0.40%   1,822,642,296 GH/s

[Karartma1]

3+ Exahashes/second!  I didn't even know what exa stood for before Bitcoin!

Funny how that wall on Kraken moved from 1000 to 1005 euro's. Is 1005 the new 1000?

If the 4 digits will hold until March 11th (ETF day) then I will believe you.

[strawbs]

These make an interesting read about the ETF:

http://www.etf.com/sections/features-and-news/bitcoin-etfs-dummies
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bitcoin-investors-bet-the-sec-will-approve-cryptocurrency-etf-a-view-at-odds-with-analysts-2017-02-13

They give reasonable reasons why they feel that the SEC are unlikely to approve the ETF.  Which would be unfortunate...

[prophetx]

Let's buy some extra coins for our British friend rjclarke. Push that bitcoin!

If you all do that you are more than welcome to come and have a big party at mine. The wife won't be happy but there you go.

The adress? :p

On a more serious note it seems that everyone is pushing this as hell!
So... Time for shorting no?

I'm hearing this same song every day since Mike Hearn sold out his bitcoins at $450.

yup...

[hv_]

WoW, look at all those fake Nodes popping up at the same time.

Just for clarification - what is a 'fake node'?

To many Nodes running by a hand-full of people, BU will go bust. Segwitt will prevail!

At least one of those recent BU nodes is mine. I opened up my node to inbound connections last week.

Segwitt will prevail!

Doesn't appear that The SegWit Omnibus Changeset will ever amass the 95% block requirement for activation. What's plan B?

Luckily we have still some legends in this good old legendary forum thinking of plan B!
That can make bitcoin only stronger.
Tx!

[European Central Bank]

These make an interesting read about the ETF:

http://www.etf.com/sections/features-and-news/bitcoin-etfs-dummies
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bitcoin-investors-bet-the-sec-will-approve-cryptocurrency-etf-a-view-at-odds-with-analysts-2017-02-13

They give reasonable reasons why they feel that the SEC are unlikely to approve the ETF.  Which would be unfortunate...

'I don't have any inside information, but my sense is that the majority of the things that the SEC is particularly concerned about revolve around bitcoin itself as opposed to anything specific about the Winklevoss filing.'

that's your reason right there. it doesn't matter how great the application is if they have reservations about the underlying asset, and they would be sensible to do so.

[prophetx]

These make an interesting read about the ETF:

http://www.etf.com/sections/features-and-news/bitcoin-etfs-dummies
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bitcoin-investors-bet-the-sec-will-approve-cryptocurrency-etf-a-view-at-odds-with-analysts-2017-02-13

They give reasonable reasons why they feel that the SEC are unlikely to approve the ETF.  Which would be unfortunate...

'I don't have any inside information, but my sense is that the majority of the things that the SEC is particularly concerned about revolve around bitcoin itself as opposed to anything specific about the Winklevoss filing.'

that's your reason right there. it doesn't matter how great the application is if they have reservations about the underlying asset, and they would be sensible to do so.

the way this Trump administration is going there might not actually be anyone at the SEC to have any reservations; just kidding... problem is all these Obama people are still left in there and GOP Congress still dragging ass to replace them all; once new leadership comes we are likely to have a more friendly regulator.

[Ted E. Bare]

HODL!

[abercrombie]

$1070 this morning on BFX!

Less than $10 away from short sale liquidations pushing this thru the roof top.  

are we rich yet??  

[Lauda]

3+ Exahashes/second!  I didn't even know what exa stood for before Bitcoin!

Looks like someone hasn't been paying attention to the hashrate lately. It's quite an amazing feat that it has doubled since August 2016!

If the 4 digits will hold until March 11th (ETF day) then I will believe you.

It does seem likely that it will hold, even though I don't usually prefer to speculate much as we know that the market tends to be irrational.

$1070 this morning on BFX!

are we rich yet?? 

I'm waiting at $10 700.

[Torque]

These make an interesting read about the ETF:

http://www.etf.com/sections/features-and-news/bitcoin-etfs-dummies
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bitcoin-investors-bet-the-sec-will-approve-cryptocurrency-etf-a-view-at-odds-with-analysts-2017-02-13

They give reasonable reasons why they feel that the SEC are unlikely to approve the ETF.  Which would be unfortunate...

'I don't have any inside information, but my sense is that the majority of the things that the SEC is particularly concerned about revolve around bitcoin itself as opposed to anything specific about the Winklevoss filing.'

that's your reason right there. it doesn't matter how great the application is if they have reservations about the underlying asset, and they would be sensible to do so.

If they have reservations about an underlying asset that essentially hasn't changed in its function for 8 years now, then that means that they will never approve an ETF.  Because Bitcoin isn't going to "change" significantly moving forward.

That is, unless they change their reservations...

I think any denial of a Bitcoin ETF would be nearly 100% politically-motivated.  It would mean that they (Governments? World Powers?) simply don't want Bitcoin recognized as a legitimate long term financial instrument.  But that would be fine by me, as I think ETFs over time become corrupt, eventually holding back the underlying assets as opposed to supporting them.

If they want to keep corporate and individual mutual/hedge/wealth funds and 401k s intact, they better wise up and approve the ETFs. Otherwise people will drop those long term, and just directly invest in assets like Bitcoin directly.

[European Central Bank]

If they have reservations about an underlying asset that essentially hasn't changed in its function for 8 years now, then that means that they will never approve an ETF.  Because Bitcoin isn't going to "change" significantly moving forward.

That is, unless they change their reservations...

I think any denial of a Bitcoin ETF would be nearly 100% politically-motivated.  It would mean that they (Governments? World Powers?) simply don't want Bitcoin recognized as a legitimate long term financial instrument.  But that would be fine by me, as I think ETFs over time become corrupt, eventually holding back the underlying assets as opposed to supporting them.

or you could take the more generous view that they're not in the business of opening the gates to something that might fail catastrophically. everyone here is on board. someone from the outside looking in, and especially with the conservative mindset that a regulator has, is seeing threats of forks, chinese weirdness and regulatory uncertainty elsewhere. 8 years is not much of an age for a brand new asset class.

i think china would have been the biggest factor in them saying no. now that's being brought to heel the chances are higher.

[prophetx]

If they have reservations about an underlying asset that essentially hasn't changed in its function for 8 years now, then that means that they will never approve an ETF.  Because Bitcoin isn't going to "change" significantly moving forward.

That is, unless they change their reservations...

I think any denial of a Bitcoin ETF would be nearly 100% politically-motivated.  It would mean that they (Governments? World Powers?) simply don't want Bitcoin recognized as a legitimate long term financial instrument.  But that would be fine by me, as I think ETFs over time become corrupt, eventually holding back the underlying assets as opposed to supporting them.

or you could take the more generous view that they're not in the business of opening the gates to something that might fail catastrophically. everyone here is on board. someone from the outside looking in, and especially with the conservative mindset that a regulator has, is seeing threats of forks, chinese weirdness and regulatory uncertainty elsewhere. 8 years is not much of an age for a brand new asset class.

i think china would have been the biggest factor in them saying no. now that's being brought to heel the chances are higher.

or you can take the view that the last 8 years have had a party in power who has traditionally been attached to the east coast banking cartel and therefore not interested in anything new.

[JimboToronto]

Good morning Bitcoinland.

I see that the battle for euro/mBTC parity continues... current bitcoin price is $1060USD at Bitcoinaverage. That's 998.63EUR.

It's over on some exchanges, under on others.

Meanwhile, the gentle uptrend continues. Easy does it.

Nice to see that a market dump of over 400 coins at Stamp had almost no effect. The market seems to be getting less panicky every day.

Go Bitcoin go.

[Torque]

i think china would have been the biggest factor in them saying no. now that's being brought to heel the chances are higher.

100% agree with this.  In fact, it's interesting that China exchanges being reigned in magically happened 4 weeks prior to the ETF announcement, no?  Seems like someone at the SEC might have made a few phone calls...   

[becoin]

This train is unstoppable!

[K~Ehleyr]

...In fact, it's interesting that China exchanges being reigned in magically happened 4 weeks prior to the ETF announcement, no?  Seems like someone at the SEC might have made a few phone calls...   

I like the way you're thinking 

[European Central Bank]

or you can take the view that the last 8 years have had a party in power who has traditionally been attached to the east coast banking cartel and therefore not interested in anything new.

maybe, but regulators aren't in the business of running headfirst towards innovation. they should be conservative. in the great scheme of things there's really no hurry to get a bitcoin etf approved. it's only a tiny subset of people who are waiting for it.

the gld etf took long enough to approve and that was the definition of no brainer.

[Meuh6879]

This train is unstoppable!