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

[ft73]

On the 15 minute chart it looks like things are breaking down (or a double, tripple bottom) - 85 is key it seems.
Even the 1 and 4 hour chart are dipping a bit. Interesting at this level:

I would tell $84, as posted before.
$84 break => $80 imho.

EDIT:  Sorry, i was following BitStamp. $85 sounds fine 

[Richy_T]

This is true, Bitcoin as a speculation medium and as a currency don't go together.

People speculate on traditional currencies all the time. It's how Soros made his money.

[NewLiberty]

This is true, Bitcoin as a speculation medium and as a currency don't go together.

People speculate on traditional currencies all the time. It's how Soros made his money.

I think you made the Mickey's point for him.
Or were you not aware of the effect on those currencies?

So yes it can be done.   Is it good for "Bitcoin"?

[Richy_T]

Everyone wanted $50 coins.
The sooner they wake up, the better. 

I would have settled for $60. But I'm not fussed about it. Though the currency I would have bought them in has fallen 7% against the dollar since then so it would have been a double good buy to have got in.

[Richy_T]

So yes it can be done.   Is it good for "Bitcoin"?

It may be. There's an awful lot of bitcoins owned by relatively few early adopters. If Bitcoin is to succeed, a large chunk of those bitcoins need to be extracted from those early adopters and spread amongst the general population.

[NewLiberty]

So yes it can be done.   Is it good for "Bitcoin"?

It may be. There's an awful lot of bitcoins owned by relatively few early adopters. If Bitcoin is to succeed, a large chunk of those bitcoins need to be extracted from those early adopters and spread amongst the general population.

Not sure I agree with that as a necessary precursor to the success of bitcoin, but assuming that it is for the moment, how and why does speculation accomplish that?

[Adrian-x]

So yes it can be done.   Is it good for "Bitcoin"?

It may be. There's an awful lot of bitcoins owned by relatively few early adopters. If Bitcoin is to succeed, a large chunk of those bitcoins need to be extracted from those early adopters and spread amongst the general population.

Not sure I agree with that as a necessary precursor to the success of bitcoin, but assuming that it is for the moment, how and why does speculation accomplish that?

The fear of losing there value (early adopters don't want to be holding a hot potato) distribution = diversified demand = greater chance of sustained value.

[Nightowlace]

So yes it can be done.   Is it good for "Bitcoin"?

It may be. There's an awful lot of bitcoins owned by relatively few early adopters. If Bitcoin is to succeed, a large chunk of those bitcoins need to be extracted from those early adopters and spread amongst the general population.

I don't agree with this. The price will rise as the demand/use/store of value (whichever route BTC takes) increases thus making the "limited" amount of BTC more valuable. People will not have to own a Bitcoin but rather could own a few Satoshis which will be worth what a whole BTC is worth today. I believe this is what many "early adopters" who are holding their BTC are hoping for. Regardless if you are buying BTC now you are an "early adopter". Get in where you can, and help grow BTC however you can.

[deeplink]

So yes it can be done.   Is it good for "Bitcoin"?

It may be. There's an awful lot of bitcoins owned by relatively few early adopters. If Bitcoin is to succeed, a large chunk of those bitcoins need to be extracted from those early adopters and spread amongst the general population.

It seems these early adopters have had a pretty good understanding of where the future is going. I for one would be happy to see these kinds of people get incredibly, filthy rich, so they can invest in awesome new businesses and technologies. Now that would make a change away from the current status quo, where the financial system only benefits parasites and sociopaths.

[ElectricMucus]

So yes it can be done.   Is it good for "Bitcoin"?

It may be. There's an awful lot of bitcoins owned by relatively few early adopters. If Bitcoin is to succeed, a large chunk of those bitcoins need to be extracted from those early adopters and spread amongst the general population.

It seems these early adopters have had a pretty good understanding of where the future is going. I for one would be happy to see these kinds of people get incredibly, filthy rich, so they can invest in awesome new businesses and technologies. Now that would make a change away from the current status quo, where the financial system only benefits parasites and sociopaths.

IMO most Bitcoiners are the most sociopathic people there are.
It takes a *special* attitude to strive after a system where economic status is derived only by a unchangeable, unchallengeable, non-physical ledger.   

[Miz4r]

So yes it can be done.   Is it good for "Bitcoin"?

It may be. There's an awful lot of bitcoins owned by relatively few early adopters. If Bitcoin is to succeed, a large chunk of those bitcoins need to be extracted from those early adopters and spread amongst the general population.

It seems these early adopters have had a pretty good understanding of where the future is going. I for one would be happy to see these kinds of people get incredibly, filthy rich, so they can invest in awesome new businesses and technologies. Now that would make a change away from the current status quo, where the financial system only benefits parasites and sociopaths.

IMO most Bitcoiners are the most sociopathic people there are.
It takes a *special* attitude to strive after a system where economic status is derived only by a unchangeable, unchallengeable, non-physical ledger.   

Can't be more sociopathic than banksters and Wall Street junkies.

[deeplink]

So yes it can be done.   Is it good for "Bitcoin"?

It may be. There's an awful lot of bitcoins owned by relatively few early adopters. If Bitcoin is to succeed, a large chunk of those bitcoins need to be extracted from those early adopters and spread amongst the general population.

It seems these early adopters have had a pretty good understanding of where the future is going. I for one would be happy to see these kinds of people get incredibly, filthy rich, so they can invest in awesome new businesses and technologies. Now that would make a change away from the current status quo, where the financial system only benefits parasites and sociopaths.

IMO most Bitcoiners are the most sociopathic people there are.
It takes a *special* attitude to strive after a system where economic status is derived only by a unchangeable, unchallengeable, non-physical ledger.   

Maybe it would change your mind if you didn't spend so much time in the speculation forum?  

I refer to the Bitcoin early adopters, not the current get rick quick types. People like the the guy responding to this Reddit topic and there are many other examples.

[Richy_T]

It seems these early adopters have had a pretty good understanding of where the future is going. I for one would be happy to see these kinds of people get incredibly, filthy rich, so they can invest in awesome new businesses and technologies. Now that would make a change away from the current status quo, where the financial system only benefits parasites and sociopaths.

I have no problem with them getting rich. And that's where the speculation comes in to a degree. Speculation raises the price (at certain points), allowing the holders to "cash in" on their foresightedness.

I do have to say that I'm not a big fan of the manipulation but that is something that will hopefully (I believe it will) resolve itself in time.

It's all just the free market at work. If Bitcoin can't handle it, it doesn't deserve to succeed.

[NewLiberty]

IMO most Bitcoiners are the most sociopathic people there are.
It takes a *special* attitude to strive after a system where economic status is derived only by a unchangeable, unchallengeable, non-physical ledger.   

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/going-rogue-share-traders-more-reckless-than-psychopaths-study-shows-a-788462.html

Mr Pot, meet Mr Kettle

[Richy_T]

I don't agree with this. The price will rise as the demand/use/store of value (whichever route BTC takes) increases thus making the "limited" amount of BTC more valuable. People will not have to own a Bitcoin but rather could own a few Satoshis which will be worth what a whole BTC is worth today. I believe this is what many "early adopters" who are holding their BTC are hoping for. Regardless if you are buying BTC now you are an "early adopter". Get in where you can, and help grow BTC however you can.

This is the point though. How much can a few Satoshi be worth when there are several people out there holding tens (hundreds?) of thousands of bitcoins? How much is the Mona Lisa worth if I have a warehouse full of them out back? Speculation encourages large holders to release some of their funds for profit before doing so would devastate a mature market.

Volatility now or catastrophic volatility later. Fortunately not your (or anybody's) choice.

[wachtwoord]

I don't agree with this. The price will rise as the demand/use/store of value (whichever route BTC takes) increases thus making the "limited" amount of BTC more valuable. People will not have to own a Bitcoin but rather could own a few Satoshis which will be worth what a whole BTC is worth today. I believe this is what many "early adopters" who are holding their BTC are hoping for. Regardless if you are buying BTC now you are an "early adopter". Get in where you can, and help grow BTC however you can.

This is the point though. How much can a few Satoshi be worth when there are several people out there holding tens (hundreds?) of thousands of bitcoins? How much is the Mona Lisa worth if I have a warehouse full of them out back? Speculation encourages large holders to release some of their funds for profit before doing so would devastate a mature market.

Volatility now or catastrophic volatility later. Fortunately not your (or anybody's) choice.

The total outstanding Bitcoins doesn't change so a single person holding a significant amount doesn't matter for the value.

[molecular]

So yes it can be done.   Is it good for "Bitcoin"?

It may be. There's an awful lot of bitcoins owned by relatively few early adopters. If Bitcoin is to succeed, a large chunk of those bitcoins need to be extracted from those early adopters and spread amongst the general population.

It seems these early adopters have had a pretty good understanding of where the future is going. I for one would be happy to see these kinds of people get incredibly, filthy rich, so they can invest in awesome new businesses and technologies. Now that would make a change away from the current status quo, where the financial system only benefits parasites and sociopaths.

IMO most Bitcoiners are the most sociopathic people there are.
It takes a *special* attitude to strive after a system where economic status is derived only by a unchangeable, unchallengeable, non-physical ledger.   

Maybe it would change your mind if you didn't spend so much time in the speculation forum?  

I refer to the Bitcoin early adopters, not the current get rick quick types. People like the the guy responding to this Reddit topic and there are many other examples.

right on dude. That guy in the reddit post talks my heart. I have several magnitudes of coins less than him, but my thinking is very similar nevertheless.

I agree with your earlier post that a world "financed" by these early cryptogeeks is probably better than what we have now.

There is however a distinction to the status-quo that is much more important in the long run: Bitcoin has a limited supply. The money will disperse over the long run (rich people spend and invest, borrowers default). It's seemingly easy to argue that interest rates effect a concentration of money over the long run (I used to think this). But this is not true in a free market using an inelastic money supply. Wealth will actually flow to the people offering good products and services in such an environment. We did a good first step to enable this with cryptocurrency and the free market should follow. So I also agree with the reddit poster that Bitcoin will grant access to the global market for the currently poor (think System D, see this TED talk) and make for a fairer level playing field.

[Richy_T]

The total outstanding Bitcoins doesn't change so a single person holding a significant amount doesn't matter for the value.

The number of bitcoins must cover the whatever market they are being used for. The fine divisibility of Bitcoin means that this is not a logistical issue but if some dude is holding 5 times the value of the world economy in his wallet, things get tricky.

[crumbs]

[...]Bitcoin has a limited supply. The money will disperse over the long run (rich people spend and invest, borrowers default). [...]

I can't see the logic here offhand, but, presuming that's true, does it then follow that those looking to accumulate more bitcoins than Average Joe are backing the wrong horse?  Are you saying that non-inflationary currencies encourage spending?

[w00dy]

The money will disperse over the long run

Bitcoin HAVE TO or it's doomed. simple as that.