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

[bitcoinPsycho]

looking at the 2 hour optimism chart it very clear to me that we're going up again an should hit $7300 in the next few hours(also go litecoin go)

what will be price after SegWit2x , i believe price will fall between 4000~4500 USD

I think we are all in agreement there will be a drop. I think it'll be short lived.

I for one will sell my segwit 2x and bump up my bitcoin stash.(once safe to do so)

If more people think like me then everyone bumping up there stash by 5%-20% depending on b2x price then surely the price will go up right?

Just look at the charts beginning of August of this year and I'm expecting something g similar. But then again what the fuck do I know.

I'm not going to dump aa quick as I did bch. most exchanges are taking 2x more seriously.to hard to call for me

What is good about segwit 2x? I really can't see it.

The good things about bitcoin is there is no one person responsible for it. It can't be stopped.

It's used now to hold as an investment. I personally don't give a shit about buying things with it or transactions speeds, big blocks etc and I bet all the big money thinks the same.

I'm not as into the whole technology like some of you guys here. For me it's an investment. 99% of the people buying btc are the same. Do you think Richard Branson buys his coffee with btc?

Again, what the fuck do I know. I'll give you a clue. Not much.

I'm with you. I work for Branson lol . he's done a lot for bitcoin's validity
go bitcoin go etc....

[1714159565]

1714159565

[Ludwig Von]

I've just transferred 10k € to Kraken to buy some more BTC, and now we're Choo-Choo'ing...

WTF?

Ha, you made the wheels come off again ?  

[Heater]

Carolina?

Not yet - I think the Rosewater Foundation just placed another one of their smaller buy orders. The big one is still to come.

[JayJuanGee]

looking at the 2 hour optimism chart it very clear to me that we're going up again an should hit $7300 in the next few hours(also go litecoin go)

what will be price after SegWit2x , i believe price will fall between 4000~4500 USD

Why you focusing on the down?  Does that make any sense?

Currently we are going up, and you are referring to down.  Seems kind of irrelevant, no?

Another way of making my point is that the amount of down is going to depend, in part, on the amount of up.  If we are currently at the top, that is different from whether we get a top above $8k  or a top above $12k or a top above $20k, then after we reach the top, then the topic of the correction would thereafter become more relevant and easier to answer.  I am thinking that your $4k to $4500 correction is possible, but it also a bit of wishful thinking.  Hopefully, you have enough coins to enjoy the upwards before the downwards, instead of focusing on something that seems to be a low probability speculation and might not happen at all.   

[Last of the V8s]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-41904102
Paradise Papers: Why offshore business is turned down
sloppy BBC is sloppy. history!=news

If anything, Panama Papers and Paradise Papers show that linking BTC with terrorism funding and drug trade are pure FUD.  The elites moved $10 trillions+ and hide them around the world with FIAT and all are done "legally" within the legal framework.

That being said, I still have nothing but the highest respect for the Sassoon family.  Being able to survive the Spanish Inquisition and Ottoman rule, made a fortune in Opium Wars, and still retain their peerage and fortune in the British upper crust, this is nothing short of a miracle.   I am sure that Baron Sassoon, being the previous head of G7 task force on Money Laundering, would not have done anything untoward.

lol. lovely restraint.

[fabiorem]

They want to tame a honey badger.

https://www.coindesk.com/cme-groups-leo-melamed-well-tame-bitcoin/

[Torque]

They want to tame a honey badger.

https://www.coindesk.com/cme-groups-leo-melamed-well-tame-bitcoin/

All I ask is they pump it to 10X or 20X first, lol. 

[JayJuanGee]

 I personally don't give a shit about buying things with it or transactions speeds, big blocks etc and I bet all the big money thinks the same.
 

I appreciate this part of your latest mindset RJC.  

Something like this:

I think x

BIG money thinks x

I am BIG _____ x .


I am sorry to announce that probabilities are now greater that you will be hanging up your daily work head gear to ponder piña coladas approximately 18.4786% sooner than previously estimated (I threw in a percentage to trick you into reading my post...     ).

[ivomm]

https://cointelegraph.com/news/segwit2x-hard-fork-could-have-devastating-consequences-for-bitcoin

I am still wondering whether the risk of hodling through the fork is worth the nerves

[Ludwig Von]

They want to tame a honey badger.

https://www.coindesk.com/cme-groups-leo-melamed-well-tame-bitcoin/

All I ask is they pump it to 10X or 20X first, lol. 

First they (their customers) gonna get screwed badly by honey badger and then they gonna complain to have the FED-SEC and the rest of the so called regulators to impose
regulations = destroy price discovery on the exchanges. And we might very well end in the same deplorable position as GLD.

[rjclarke2000]

Surely hodling through all this is the best thing.

I mean, you'll have both coins.

I personally can't see 2x taking over at all. BUT in the freak occurrence it does you'll have both anyway.

If anyone is that worried just don't dump anything at all.

See how all this plays out.



Can someone tell me why 2x will succeed??

[julian071]

Surely hodling through all this is the best thing.

I mean, you'll have both coins.

I personally can't see 2x taking over at all. BUT in the freak occurrence it does you'll have both anyway.

If anyone is that worried just don't dump anything at all.

See how all this plays out.



Can someone tell me why 2x will succeed??

It's in that piece that ivomm posted.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/segwit2x-hard-fork-could-have-devastating-consequences-for-bitcoin

[Torque]

They want to tame a honey badger.

https://www.coindesk.com/cme-groups-leo-melamed-well-tame-bitcoin/

All I ask is they pump it to 10X or 20X first, lol.  

First they (their customers) gonna get screwed badly by honey badger and then they gonna complain to have the FED-SEC and the rest of the so called regulators to impose
regulations = destroy price discovery on the exchanges. And we might very well end in the same deplorable position as GLD.

Could happen, but I'm not sure what can be done about it. I don't think they should be allowed to settle in cash, bitcoin should be required for settlement. Perhaps this will expose the need for full transparency in trades/settlement. This gives me some hope:

"Core members of the independent oversight committee responsible for overseeing the scope of the Bitcoin Reference Rate by developing a code of conduct for participants and reviewing the practice, standards and definition of the reference rate, includes the CME’s Gavin Lee and Payal Lakhani, independent expert Andreas M. Antonopoulos, Max Boonen, B2C2, Professor William J. Knottenbelt of Imperial College London, Michael Moro, Genesis Global Trading, and Dr. Timo Schlaefer."

Also, the physical PM market seems to be not giving a crap about where the paper price is going. I've seen physical dealers not budging on $1300+/oz for gold and $17+/oz for silver.

[vroom]

They want to tame a honey badger.

https://www.coindesk.com/cme-groups-leo-melamed-well-tame-bitcoin/

All I ask is they pump it to 10X or 20X first, lol.  

First they (their customers) gonna get screwed badly by honey badger and then they gonna complain to have the FED-SEC and the rest of the so called regulators to impose
regulations = destroy price discovery on the exchanges. And we might very well end in the same deplorable position as GLD.

Could happen, but I'm not sure what can be done. I don't think they should be allowed to settle in cash, bitcoin should be required for settlement. Perhaps this will expose the need for full transparency in trades/settlement. This gives me some hope:

"Core members of the independent oversight committee responsible for overseeing the scope of the Bitcoin Reference Rate by developing a code of conduct for participants and reviewing the practice, standards and definition of the reference rate, includes the CME’s Gavin Lee and Payal Lakhani, independent expert Andreas M. Antonopoulos, Max Boonen, B2C2, Professor William J. Knottenbelt of Imperial College London, Michael Moro, Genesis Global Trading, and Dr. Timo Schlaefer."

Also, the physical PM market seems to be not giving a crap about where the paper price is going. I've seen physical dealers not budging on $1300+/oz for gold and $17+/oz for silver.

I don't understand this cash settled bitcoin futures. Is not this just a bet on the price? For me it seems that CME is not even required to buy a single bitcoin. They just need to pay some cash if someone bets on the correct price. can someone please clarify that for me?

[gentlemand]

It's in that piece that ivomm posted.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/segwit2x-hard-fork-could-have-devastating-consequences-for-bitcoin

Shit article with moronic assumptions.

As with all of these things they assume miners are one mass who have nefarious plans. In reality they all have a mountain of bills to pay and zero interest in rocking the boat apart from a few maniacs who'll be drowned out anyway.

They can flirt and play with BCH safe in the knowledge they have BTC to run back to. That's not the case if they start fucking with the daddy chain.

[julian071]

It's in that piece that ivomm posted.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/segwit2x-hard-fork-could-have-devastating-consequences-for-bitcoin

Shit article with moronic assumptions.

That's great to hear. I don't have enough knowledge to find all the flaws. The one assumption I could point out that seems fishy is the enormous amount of hashing power that the author is supposing that would move. Of course if that does not happen, his whole point is moot. However I find it hard to assess how much truth there is in that assumption. Your wise words would be much appreciated. If you could point other moronic assumptions that would be great too.

Regardless, I still have some Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt about the consequences of all the FUD that will surely be coming. Especially as BTC seems to be specialising in being a store of value and an investment opportunity rather then all the other things it could be.

[afbitcoins]

You can fuck off with your "bitcoin segwit" bullshit, and your attempt to suggest that there is some other bitcoin, currently.

I'm a bit suprised by the venom in your response Jay. No offense was intended. Only to make a point that the segwit branch is just as much a fork as so called 'altcash' or 'bcash' (see what I did there). If there was such a consensus as you describe then bitcoin cash would not exist. Yet it does.  In your face.

As I already stated, I simply disagree with your attempt to describe some kind of rhetorical equality.  

There are attacks on the true and real bitcoin and anyhow, I already said what I had meant to say, so I doubt that there is anything further that is necessary from my end, because whatever you said does not help your case, including your supposed "in your face" retort that has NOT actually retorted anything of any substantial or material significance.  

You simply disagree but in a rude and aggressive manner. But thats OK I'm not particularly bothered about your vulgar language, I sometimes use expletives myself.

If you are not bothered by it, then why you wasting time bringing up such nonsense?   

 My in your face retort punctuated the fact that you have no rebuttal to my assertion that the mere existence of bitcoin cash proves you wrong when you state there was full consensus to implement segwit.

Your in my face retort is some kind of assertion that you believe that you have a show stopping argument or a slam dunk and you do not.

The mere existence of bitcoin cash does not prove any kind of meaningful or substantive point, except that a small group of renegade nutjobs decided that they were going to spend resources on a hardfork attack on bitcoin.

Second, I never stated that there was "full" consensus, and you are just making up new terms in order to create some kind of strawman argument.  There is no fucking thing as "full consensus" nor is such a thing required.

What happened is consensus happened around segwit, and that is all that matters.  Therefore, segwit reached consensus and was locked in in early August 2017, and was activated in late August.  If you want to remove segwit, then you need consensus in the other direction, which if you thought about it is not very fucking likely to happen.. because it already happened in the lock-in, activation and implementation direction, why the fuck would the community suddenly decide that they no longer want it?  Makes no sense, instead, stupid ass fuck job big blockers, like yourself, are trying to argue stupid points about segwit not having "full" consensus, and there is no such requirement.. and really do you ever think that there is going to be "full" consensus about anything?  There are always going to be a few stragglers who are objecting and complaining, but they are out of line with the vast majority (which in the segwit situation took 95% mining power to achieve such and at this point is water under the bridge).

I suppose I could have said fuck you or something like that though, might have been easier. But still you have no rebuttal.

Yeah, you could have said fuck you, but there would be no substance in such an emotional response.  So it does not help if you merely become emotional without adding any substantive meaning to your arguments (which would be adding factual claims or logical claims), and you need to have something to back up your fuck you, so stop taking matters so personally and learn how to recognize that these various ongoing BIG blocker forks and anti-segwit campaigning are attacks upon bitcoin and they are not equals to bitcoin (and they are generally inferior and supported by very small segments of the community attempting to rally broader space support or to get newbies into supporting them), and they are not in line with the overall bitcoin community (except to the extent that they may want to attack and infiltrate bitcoin and to the extent that they try to make astroturf attempt to look as if they are part of the bitcoin community), and that is why it seems to be a lot more fitting to be saying fuck you to those kinds  of ongoing attacks, rather than if someone were truly wanting to improve bitcoin without engaging in such ongoing sabotaging attempts.

I surmise that your rambling diatribe could be condensed to the following argument. Bitcoin cash doesn't count because 'nutjobs' made it.  There was no contention with segwit because bitcoin cash doesn' count. Of course you are entitled to your opinion. I don't really agree with it.

If you want to know what a hard fork without contention is look at Dash which has had several hard forks during its development but not yet resulted in a rival blockchain being spawned during it. 

By the way categorizing me as a stupid ass big blocker isn't strictly accurate. I am concerned with high fees and such like resulting from small blocks however I  am still well invested in bitcoin (the 1M block variety) and haven't ruled out its success going down the settlement layer path.

[Torque]

Honestly, some of you guys talking about forks having immediate value or being immediate "competition" are just not getting it.

Let's say that the entirety of Facebook's code base was completely open source, and anyone could fork it at any time and create an FB 2.0 with a click of the mouse. So someone does it, claiming that they can make it faster, better, whatever. Let's even say that any holders of the original Facebook stock would get an equal stock 'dividend' of like 10:1 for the new site.

That does not auto-magically give this new FB 2.0 any value at all. Period. There is a whole entire financial ecosystem that goes along with the original Facebook, including the founders, devs, employees, investors, stock holders, stock exchanges, supporting sites, corporate sites, merchants, marketers, ad agencies, etc. etc. The list goes on and on. This ecosystem was built up over a decade or more. Not to mention all the 2 billion users of "the ONE TRUE Facebook" that are not at all inclined to switch to FB 2.0. The are happy and content with continuing to use the original.

[AlcoHoDL]

Honestly, some of you guys talking about forks having immediate value are just not getting it.

Let's say that the entirety of Facebook's code base was completely open source, and anyone could fork it at any time and create an FB 2.0 with a click of the mouse. So someone does it, claiming that can make it faster, better, whatever. Let's even say that any holders of the original Facebook stock would get an equal stock 'dividend' of like 10:1 for the new site.

That does not auto-magically give this new FB 2.0 any value at all. Period. There is a whole entire ecosystem that goes along with the original Facebook, including the founders, devs, employees, investors, stock holders, stock exchanges, supporting sites, corporate sites, merchants, marketers, ad agencies, etc. etc. The list goes on and on. This ecosystem was built up over a decade or more. Not too mention all the 2 billion users of "the ONE TRUE Facebook" that are not at all inclined to switch to FB 2.0. The are happy and content with continuing to use the original.

Yes, but what if all those billions of users could just login to FB 2.0 using their legacy FB credentials? Wouldn't that be tempting? Wouldn't you do it, just to try the new system?

My problem with all this is that we are not talking about a new, incompatible altcoin that is based on the original code, but about a fork which gives the legacy chain's coin holders the right (or even the unintentional possibility) to use the new chain branch.

[rjclarke2000]

Honestly, some of you guys talking about forks having immediate value are just not getting it.

Let's say that the entirety of Facebook's code base was completely open source, and anyone could fork it at any time and create an FB 2.0 with a click of the mouse. So someone does it, claiming that can make it faster, better, whatever. Let's even say that any holders of the original Facebook stock would get an equal stock 'dividend' of like 10:1 for the new site.

That does not auto-magically give this new FB 2.0 any value at all. Period. There is a whole entire financial ecosystem that goes along with the original Facebook, including the founders, devs, employees, investors, stock holders, stock exchanges, supporting sites, corporate sites, merchants, marketers, ad agencies, etc. etc. The list goes on and on. This ecosystem was built up over a decade or more. Not to mention all the 2 billion users of "the ONE TRUE Facebook" that are not at all inclined to switch to FB 2.0. The are happy and content with continuing to use the original.

Loving that analogy Torque. I'd like to see what people have to shoot this theory down.