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

[bitserve]

Is that the shit coin release?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg20336230#msg20336230 

Sorry YOU are confused, NOT me. Tomorrow is the new ATH.

Not that I would complain, because that would mean by 4 AUG we would be MOONING. But nahh, it's too soon yet, sorry

[Last of the V8s]

...

And yes, let's also increase blocksize to a fixed 2MB this year... in BITCOIN.

No, no. No hard forks.

[r0ach]

Well, we already knew the R3 heebs were behind the Eth pump and dump scam.  Now we know who's been trying to pump and dump bitcoin lately:  Goldman Sachs trying to dump their bag of trash on you.  Maybe we should rename them to "Marcus of Sachs" and "JayJuanGoldman"?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-24/goldman-nervous-bitcoin-traders-be-patient-next-surge-will-take-it-above-3600

[Mr Frog]

No, no. No hard forks.

Yes, yes. Yes hard fork.   

[FractalUniverse]

No, no. No hard forks.

Yes, yes. Yes hard fork.   

fork To Da Moon!!! 

[hodl_2015]

fork To Da Moon!!! 
[tasteless img]

First time I kicked a "Sr. Member" into the ignore bin. Goodbuy FU.

[FractalUniverse]

fork To Da Moon!!! 
[tasteless img]

First time I kicked a "Sr. Member" into the ignore bin. Goodbuy FU.

congrats, you got early symptoms of alzheimer's 
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/04/110415104536.htm

[European Central Bank]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-24/bitcoin-options-to-become-available-in-fall-after-cftc-approval

so what does this mean for bitcoin? is it good? bad? a disaster? are we gonna be drowned in volatility and paper bitcoin?

[Raja_MBZ]

No, no. No hard forks.

Yes, yes. Yes hard fork.   

fork To Da Moon!!! 

Fork would never moon.

Look at history, look at ETC, it tells enough of this stupid tale.

[r0ach]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-24/bitcoin-options-to-become-available-in-fall-after-cftc-approval

so what does this mean for bitcoin? is it good? bad? a disaster? are we gonna be drowned in volatility and paper bitcoin?

It means a few different options:

1)  The bankers talk about how they introduce volatility into the metals market to try and scare the general public out of them, so it might just be wild pump and dump city for craptocurrency

2)  The R3 bankers own most of the Ethereum scamtokens and likely a lesser amount of bitcoin, so they might try to weaken bitcoin while pumping the Eth scam

3)  They might just naked short everything into the ground like they do in metals to try and keep people in the dollar

4)  If there's a danger of a run on the Comex from too much fractional reserve, they might try to pump craptocurrency in order to try and trick people from buying gold and silver and redirect them back into digital scam markets instead

In other words, it's generally bad from every angle for everyone on the planet to give govt the power to control markets.

[conspirosphere.tk]

$BTCUSD 50/200 MA Cross - First since April 7th. Fasten your seatbelts.

[r0ach]

$BTCUSD 50/200 MA Cross - First since April 7th. Fasten your seatbelts.

lol? moving averages are reverse looking, not forward looking.  At least RSI gives you an idea of if the market is overbought or oversold, but a MA like that tells you absolutely nothing besides what has already happened. Yea, it's possible it can go up.  It's also possible it can go down.  The only reason RSI works is because markets don't actually exist, just manipulation.  RSI tells you if people have any ammo left to manipulate more or not, while generic moving averages tell you nothing unless the market is entirely controlled by a bot built on using them.

[r0ach]

the RSI looks good.

i expect 500$ pop really soon...

Look at the chart...it's two vertical lines going straight up resembling any typical pump and dump.  Either they will be satisfied with their profits here and dump them on you, or they will do a calculated risk of being greedy and try to extract more pump and dump profits going higher.  This is no aggregate market.  Which way the mostly single entity controlling the market goes will also be determined by if there's shorts to squeeze or not.  Usually the bitcoin market only goes up if there's lots of shorts to squeeze.

[conspirosphere.tk]

$BTCUSD 50/200 MA Cross - First since April 7th. Fasten your seatbelts.

lol? moving averages are reverse looking, not forward looking.  
(snip)

Roach, every post of you reminds me of when I sold a whole bunch of bitcoins at 400$ each to buy gold & silver. It hurts.

[d_eddie]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-24/bitcoin-options-to-become-available-in-fall-after-cftc-approval

so what does this mean for bitcoin? is it good? bad? a disaster? are we gonna be drowned in volatility and paper bitcoin?

It means a few different options:

1)  The bankers talk about how they introduce volatility into the metals market to try and scare the general public out of them, so it might just be wild pump and dump city for craptocurrency

2)  The R3 bankers own most of the Ethereum scamtokens and likely a lesser amount of bitcoin, so they might try to weaken bitcoin while pumping the Eth scam

3)  They might just naked short everything into the ground like they do in metals to try and keep people in the dollar

4)  If there's a danger of a run on the Comex from too much fractional reserve, they might try to pump craptocurrency in order to try and trick people from buying gold and silver and redirect them back into digital scam markets instead

In other words, it's generally bad from every angle for everyone on the planet to give govt the power to control markets.

Delete #3 to begin with. No naked shorts.

The CFTC said in a statement Monday LedgerX will be authorized to provide clearing services for fully-collateralized digital currency swaps.

(My emphasis.)

[r0ach]

Delete #3 to begin with. No naked shorts.

The CFTC said in a statement Monday LedgerX will be authorized to provide clearing services for fully-collateralized digital currency swaps.

(My emphasis.)

Yea right, the monetary system has been run as a scam for hundreds of years and they are just now going to stop scamming people for no reason?  Doesn't matter anyway, you can destroy bitcoin without naked shorts just by continuously shorting it below cost of production, which forces miners to turn off and lowers the synthetic price floor further.

[JayJuanGee]

Because Bitcoin Cash has the transaction capacity required to support all the use cases that core threw overboard to sustain their Raspberry Pi fetish. More transaction capacity > more use cases > more utility > more use >  more value > more demand > higher price > more mining support > more security. Virtuous circle.

edit: or to look at it another way:

BTC has up to this point worked pretty well as a store of value*. But let's face it, for the last year, BTC has sucked as a medium of exchange. Some other crypto is going to fill that role. So you've got a choice:
1) Allow Bitcoin Cash to flourish, and take the role of default medium of exchange crypto. For this, you will be admirably rewarded. For you are starting off with one free BCC for every BTC you own.
2) Kill BCC, and some other crypto (LTC perhaps? Dash, god** forbid?) takes the medium of exchange role. Leaving you -- the BTC holder -- with nothing to show for it.

*oh yeah - that asterisk. Frankly, I believe that BTC earned its status as store of value only because its previous exceptional performance (now abandoned) as a medium of exchange. There's a good chance that BTC's store of value properties will be eroded by another coin that works great as medium of exchange, while still working well as a store of value. If so, wouldn't it be a good idea to own that other crypto?

** it's just an expression.

Have you recently watched the mempool? Is almost empty. Yeah, block usage is still over a safe threshold but Segwit is going to be implemented very soon (now it is a certainty unlike years ago) and will help alleviate some. Also a blocksize increase to 2MB is on the works.

Bitcoin scaling has never had a better prospect than it has right now.

So what is the fucking need for "Bitcoin Cash" precisely right now? It's nonsense.

Maybe you don't believe the blocksize increase will happen? I hope it does, because:

- Even if not right now, we will need that blocksize increase sometime in the future.

- If that is what has been agreed to reach consensus, then it is time to deliver, or next time we need consensus noone will trust any "agreement".

- Miners have not only accepted to pass Segwit which was a majority community request but they have with 100% hashrate consensus. If they can do the 2MB increase HF with the same consensus there is not risk, so it is ok.

- Many of the people that were completely against BU (me included) was for the reason that BU is an aberration that, besides the buggy code, gives miners the right to increase/decrease blocksize at will. That's too much power for the already powerful miners. A fixed blocksize increase when (or better yet BEFORE) it is needed? FINE!.

Above all, and most importantly... If someday Bitcoin can be replaced for any other altcoin at will, our digital money fantasy castle will crumble.

Can't we all just work on making Bitcoin (the one and only) better instead of trying to fight against it?

P.S.: The way all this "scaling process" has developed makes me think we can, and in fact it is happening.

I agree with you that bitcoin is in a place that is much better than it has ever been (or at least close to that), and I agree with you that there is likely little to no reason for Bitcoin Cash, except as a possible experiential attempt find out whether forking off could cause important mass of others to follow (NOT too likely, like a snowball's chance in hell, but maybe enough to play around with, make some money for some disrupter folks and cause some confusion and FUD).

Your other discussion about some kind of supposed momentum for a 2mb hardfork or any kind of need for such seems to be based on pure wishes rather than any kind of technical justification - so in that regard, a 2mb hardfork seems pretty unlikely to take place in the coming couple of years, even though it will continue to be a reason to spread FUD and disgruntlement and whine and to even be a discussion point.   But in the end there is far from any kind of close consensus on that particular topic, and likely even difficult to achieve greater than 50% consensus when push comes to shove... which is way to fucking low of a consensus point (even 80% is too low) to realistically play the non-consensus based hardfork card.

[lightfoot]

Roach, every post of you reminds me of when I sold a whole bunch of bitcoins at 400$ each to buy gold & silver. It hurts.

Trust me I know your pain: Last summer I was buying gold at 1oz=2btc. This year I'm buying sports cars at 1 car=2btc.

I'll probably feel as stupid next year about this year's buy as I do about last year's buys. :-)

C

[notme]

No, no. No hard forks.

Yes, yes. Yes hard fork.   

fork To Da Moon!!! 

Fork would never moon.

Look at history, look at ETC, it tells enough of this stupid tale.

ETC is the original ruleset.  ETH is the fork.

[savetherainforest]

No, no. No hard forks.

Yes, yes. Yes hard fork.  

fork To Da Moon!!!  

Fork would never moon.

Look at history, look at ETC, it tells enough of this stupid tale.

ETC is the original ruleset.  ETH is the fork.

ETC / ETH would seem to prove that being "correct" isn't worth much if the majority agrees to not give a shit about being "correct".

now... lets find out if people care more about the speed,  ease of use, and cost of TX  Vs technical mobojmobo  

Well to be honest, in these kind of circumstances people go along with the flow for a short period of time after. They take the profits and then the cracks appear long after they drawn their profits and invested them in something else.

Nothing lasts forever. Not even Bitcoin. Because and especially the main reason: 'protocol' / 'procedures' / 'emergency situation protocols'.  That is mostly what gives any system in the Universe, real value!