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

[jojo69]

hey jberher,  if you need a job after all this, drop me a line.

[Dabs]

If someone offered me a pizza ... I'd take the coins instead. But then no one is going to offer that much anyways ...

[jbreher]

Fuck off you imbeciles and let the adults get to work already.

Exactly what am I doing that is preventing your so-called 'adults' from getting your/their work done?

Tend to your own fucking garden.

[jbreher]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrLr7MdyyLg

Confirmed @11:50 what I've always suspected to be true: fractional reserve shares (aka "phantom shares") in the U.S. stock market are real. I fkn knew it! That along with collateralized and even naked re-hypo liens on personal/corp shares exactly confirms why when the U.S. stock market crashes, it crashes so hard.... because of all the unwinding.

Before Patrick Byrne was into Bitcoin, he brought to light this very issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_FZO9-ZIWU

There's some good tutorial material on the topic he developed back then floating around the web as well.

[jbreher]

Again only tangentially related: the arcane mechanism by which 'US GDP growth rate' is calculated.
But first! Be prepared to be stunned and amazed!
http://netrightdaily.com/2017/11/average-annual-gdp-growth-not-think/

Does "tangentially related" also mean irrelevant to the current discussion?  Don't you need to make some kind of connection, and even if you might be presenting some non-controversial data, but what is the connection to the current topic?

Yes. Irrelevant to the discussion above the horizontal rule. The horizontal rule itself denoting a change in topic. I thought this was the custom, no?

[jbreher]

hey jberher,  if you need a job after all this, drop me a line.

Can't see why I might, but thanks.

After all, even if I wasn't sitting on big bags o' Bitcoin, I have a lucrative career. Of course, I have informed by boss I'll be out the door once I finish two projects. But I get regular inquiries from headhunters, so I think I'm OK even in the unlikely event that crypto does shit the bed.

[jojo69]

hey jberher,  if you need a job after all this, drop me a line.

Can't see why I might, but thanks.

After all, even if I wasn't sitting on big bags o' Bitcoin, I have a lucrative career. Of course, I have informed by boss I'll be out the door once I finish two projects. But I get regular inquiries from headhunters, so I think I'm OK even in the unlikely event that crypto does shit the bed.

I imagine so.

Whatever happens, you are a superlative propagandist, and I mean that in the best way.  I truly hope that you believe your line...if not, you should sell that dearly my friend.  Do not give that shit away.

[Elwar]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrLr7MdyyLg

Confirmed @11:50 what I've always suspected to be true: fractional reserve shares (aka "phantom shares") in the U.S. stock market are real. I fkn knew it! That along with collateralized and even naked re-hypo liens on personal/corp shares exactly confirms why when the U.S. stock market crashes, it crashes so hard.... because of all the unwinding.

I read that interview the other day, very interesting. I am also deep in the weeds in the securities world now and see that more companies are looking to put their securities on a blockchain. It should be an interesting dynamic. One company that has been doing securities for years is now opening things up to crypto securities on the blockchain. Though just about all of them are using Ethereum. I keep raising my hand when it comes to which blockchain to use mentioning Bitcoin but all of the smart contract developers are in the ETH world. Hopefully this all changes after Rootstock opens up later this month.

Overstock's T0 should be interesting as well, it's been a long time coming.


As for account sales...someone offered me what would have been the equivalent of $2 per post for their signature campaign. Would be attractive to someone in a 2nd or 3rd world.

Interestingly enough...I nobody see anyone's signatures...is this happening? Is bitcointalk going to make a comeback?

nvm...looks like just this thread

[bitserve]

@Elwar, yep, it is only this thread.

Theymos removed the signatures from displaying here as part of the "deal" to allow the thread to be excempt of on-topicness and other rules of bitcointalk. Wise move that seems to have mostly got rid of the plague of signature spammers and affiliate campaigners that are pretty much elsewhere all over this board.

[AlcoHoDL]

@Elwar, yep, it is only this thread.

Theymos removed the signatures from displaying here as part of the "deal" to allow the thread to be excempt of on-topicness and other rules of bitcointalk. Wise move that seems to have mostly got rid of the plague of signature spammers and affiliate campaigners that are pretty much elsewhere all over this board.

Oh yeah, I just noticed it! GOOD!

I absolutely hate ads (and signature campaigns)!

[AlexGR]

But really, if S2X emerges the victor, is that really a 'worst case' for you Core acolytes? Seems to me that there ain't more than a RCH difference between S1X and S2X. Sure, a handful of overly-entitled neckbeards either whiny-ragequit or have their bluffs exposed. Other than that, what?

You are missing the point. If a bunch of people can meet and redefine what Bitcoin is, then that's the major problem right there - because at that point it has been proven that Bitcoin can be controlled or co-opted.

Disagree. In my understanding of Bitcoin, the economic majority decides which is the One True Bitcoin.

You don't even need 'a bunch of people'. Anyone -- collectively or individually -- can code up alternate protocol rules and offer it to the community. But the One True Bitcoin is only the one that that the economic majority adopts. We all redefine it together. By definition.

Network protocols are not a democracy. They need near universal agreement in order to work.

The reason is simple:

If for every contentious choice, there was a 52% group that said "yes I like that" and a 48% group that said "I don't like that", then you have two protocols. In the second contentious choice for each fork, of similar dynamics (52-48), you have four protocols. In the third, you have eight protocols - which all do not recognize each other. If there were, say, 8 DNS protocols, your router wouldn't even know where to begin with in order to convert a name to an IP address...

Bitcoin is trying to compete with assets like Gold. You can't "fork" Gold or redefine what Gold is and that has value. Bitcoin's resistance to re-definition, likewise has value. Some people are trying hard to damage this resistance in order to say "see? Bitcoin is crap, it can be forked, it can be inflated through forks, uncertainty can be introduced on what fork will be the "right" one, etc etc... gold doesn't have all this bullshit, I'll stick with gold / stocks / fiat".

This is why all the forkers are cancer. They are undermining bitcoin, or are actively trying to control it, under any narrative like "bigger blocks". Even when they had their "big blocks" with BCH and the 8mb fork, now they are trying to take BTC to 8mb as well with S2X. Why don't they simply stick to BCH? It's simple: Because it was never about big blocks, it was about CONTROL.

[AlcoHoDL]

Network protocols are not a democracy. They need near universal agreement in order to work.

The reason is simple:

If for every contentious choice, there was a 52% group that said "yes I like that" and a 48% group that said "I don't like that", then you have two protocols. In the second contentious choice for each fork, of similar dynamics (52-48), you have four protocols. In the third, you have eight protocols - which all do not recognize each other. If there were, say, 8 DNS protocols, your router wouldn't even know where to begin with in order to convert a name to an IP address...

Bitcoin is trying to compete with assets like Gold. You can't "fork" Gold or redefine what Gold is and that has value. Bitcoin's resistance to re-definition, likewise has value. Some people are trying hard to damage this resistance in order to say "see? Bitcoin is crap, it can be forked, it can be inflated through forks, uncertainty can be introduced on what fork will be the "right" one, etc etc... gold doesn't have all this bullshit, I'll stick with gold / stocks / fiat".

This is why all the forkers are cancer. They are undermining bitcoin, or are actively trying to control it, under any narrative like "bigger blocks". Even when they had their "big blocks" with BCH and the 8mb fork, now they are trying to take BTC to 8mb as well with S2X. Why don't they simply stick to BCH? It's simple: Because it was never about big blocks, it was about CONTROL.

Very well said!

[jbreher]

I truly hope that you believe your line...

Indeed I do. I'm a freeking ancient curmudgeon. The only line I toe is my own.

But really, if S2X emerges the victor, is that really a 'worst case' for you Core acolytes? Seems to me that there ain't more than a RCH difference between S1X and S2X. Sure, a handful of overly-entitled neckbeards either whiny-ragequit or have their bluffs exposed. Other than that, what?

You are missing the point. If a bunch of people can meet and redefine what Bitcoin is, then that's the major problem right there - because at that point it has been proven that Bitcoin can be controlled or co-opted.

Disagree. In my understanding of Bitcoin, the economic majority decides which is the One True Bitcoin.

You don't even need 'a bunch of people'. Anyone -- collectively or individually -- can code up alternate protocol rules and offer it to the community. But the One True Bitcoin is only the one that that the economic majority adopts. We all redefine it together. By definition.

Network protocols are not a democracy. They need near universal agreement in order to work.

While that is a salient point, it has fuck-all to do with your position. You seem to preach utopia. We ain't there. We already have multiple competing implementations duking it out in the marketplace. You can either recognize this fact, or get run over by the tide that Don't Give A Shit About Your Feelings.

[Granxis]

There is a resistance at the level of 7300 dollars, Bitcoin 2 can not reach this level by day, after segwit the level of 7500 dollars will see the level of 6500 dollars per side. It depends on the situation.

[Last of the V8s]

look i'm a hypocrite like everyone else, but this ...

playground insults?

a handful of overly-entitled neckbeards either whiny-ragequit

... alone proves you are no Goebbels.

And you get heated and sweary when others swear at you. Poor quality shilling 2/10.

No, you're just as you say a curmudgeon, like Ibian, like roach, like me when I don't control myself.

You don't have any arguments other than 'don't like all this modern stuff'.


Or can you account for this assertion

While I believe in BCH's long term prospects, it may be a bumpy ride. Then again, its the only one of the three that can make it through a sudden hashrate drop.

And Bitcoin Gold/GPU can fuck right off.

btc hashrate dropped 40% at first when bch came on. it made it through with slower blocks and higher fees and price went up.

core devs are running round reassuring users that we can survive a 90% drop in hashrate. @slush is on their side, and something's happening with Francis Pouliot in Canada.
150 min blocks for a few weeks are meh.
hashrate will not decide this


and why the hate for gold/gpu?
surely you're not threatened?
it's harmless ... surely?

[preshpresh]

Network protocols are not a democracy. They need near universal agreement in order to work.

The reason is simple:

If for every contentious choice, there was a 52% group that said "yes I like that" and a 48% group that said "I don't like that", then you have two protocols. In the second contentious choice for each fork, of similar dynamics (52-48), you have four protocols. In the third, you have eight protocols - which all do not recognize each other. If there were, say, 8 DNS protocols, your router wouldn't even know where to begin with in order to convert a name to an IP address...

Bitcoin is trying to compete with assets like Gold. You can't "fork" Gold or redefine what Gold is and that has value. Bitcoin's resistance to re-definition, likewise has value. Some people are trying hard to damage this resistance in order to say "see? Bitcoin is crap, it can be forked, it can be inflated through forks, uncertainty can be introduced on what fork will be the "right" one, etc etc... gold doesn't have all this bullshit, I'll stick with gold / stocks / fiat".

This is why all the forkers are cancer. They are undermining bitcoin, or are actively trying to control it, under any narrative like "bigger blocks". Even when they had their "big blocks" with BCH and the 8mb fork, now they are trying to take BTC to 8mb as well with S2X. Why don't they simply stick to BCH? It's simple: Because it was never about big blocks, it was about CONTROL.

Very well said!

... it's totally pathetic and beyond any reasonable or technical discussion. The infants didn't get their way, got their bottoms smacked and now want to pretend to play nice again.

(((who))) could be so pathetic & anti-humanity???

[conspirosphere.tk]

You mean that after all of this discussion of "wave 5", we have not even arrived at it yet?

 

I am really ANGRY, if you cannot tell...

Idk. They say that you can see waves with some certainty only retrospectively, and I'm not an expert for sure.

IMO I don't expect much resistance until the 9K, even because S2X seems to be a dud even worse than the other fork attacks.
And once S2X will be revealed as the fail that it is I see just a free highway going forward.

But a wildcard that I'm expecting is the implosion of Finex.

[Arriemoller]

"A suggested definition for “Bitcoin to the Moon”"


"I suggest that we make “Bitcoin to the Moon” mean just that in the most literal sense possible. “Bitcoin to the Moon” is the point in time, when one bitcoin will buy you a return ticket to and from the moon as a tourist. Give this another ten years of SpaceX and bitcoin development in parallel, and this is not inconceivable at all."


https://falkvinge.net/2017/11/03/suggested-definition-bitcoin-moon/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Falkvinge-on-Infopolicy+%28Falkvinge+on+Liberty%29

[pfrtlpfmpf]

You mean that after all of this discussion of "wave 5", we have not even arrived at it yet?

 

I am really ANGRY, if you cannot tell...

Idk. They say that you can see waves with some certainty only retrospectively, and I'm not an expert for sure.

IMO I don't expect much resistance until the 9K, even because S2X seems to be a dud even worse than the other fork attacks.
And once S2X will be revealed as the fail that it is I see just a free highway going forward.

But a wildcard that I'm expecting is the implosion of Finex.

Really ? I´m making a killing with funding at finex. I moved hundreds of bitcoin through them. Never a problem. Give me a reason, other than the hacking from before. They all got hacked before. Nothing to see here. Walk on !

[kurious]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrLr7MdyyLg

Confirmed @11:50 what I've always suspected to be true: fractional reserve shares (aka "phantom shares") in the U.S. stock market are real. I fkn knew it! That along with collateralized and even naked re-hypo liens on personal/corp shares exactly confirms why when the U.S. stock market crashes, it crashes so hard.... because of all the unwinding.

That is a fantastic interview, thanks for the link.

I am sending it to a hedge fund manager friend who I have succeeded in coaxing into BTC.

They don't think like us, don't read stuff here (funnily enough) but they are not stupid and they do get it.  They have just been waiting for the ETFs and the futures markets as they don't seem to want to hold the actual BTC.