Bitcoin Forum
May 04, 2024, 12:27:10 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: What happens first:
New ATH - 43 (69.4%)
<$60,000 - 19 (30.6%)
Total Voters: 62

Pages: « 1 ... 19672 19673 19674 19675 19676 19677 19678 19679 19680 19681 19682 19683 19684 19685 19686 19687 19688 19689 19690 19691 19692 19693 19694 19695 19696 19697 19698 19699 19700 19701 19702 19703 19704 19705 19706 19707 19708 19709 19710 19711 19712 19713 19714 19715 19716 19717 19718 19719 19720 19721 [19722] 19723 19724 19725 19726 19727 19728 19729 19730 19731 19732 19733 19734 19735 19736 19737 19738 19739 19740 19741 19742 19743 19744 19745 19746 19747 19748 19749 19750 19751 19752 19753 19754 19755 19756 19757 19758 19759 19760 19761 19762 19763 19764 19765 19766 19767 19768 19769 19770 19771 19772 ... 33320 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion  (Read 26371682 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. (174 posts by 3 users with 9 merit deleted.)
Rosewater Foundation
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 254



View Profile
March 05, 2018, 06:55:23 AM

Frothing like a snake!
1714782430
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714782430

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714782430
Reply with quote  #2

1714782430
Report to moderator
According to NIST and ECRYPT II, the cryptographic algorithms used in Bitcoin are expected to be strong until at least 2030. (After that, it will not be too difficult to transition to different algorithms.)
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1714782430
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714782430

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714782430
Reply with quote  #2

1714782430
Report to moderator
1714782430
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714782430

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714782430
Reply with quote  #2

1714782430
Report to moderator
HairyMaclairy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 2174


Degenerate bull hatter & Bitcoin monotheist


View Profile
March 05, 2018, 06:56:23 AM

Thought experiment. Two tribes, the northern herders and the southern herders. The northern herders, the collectivists, agree to live according to the common good, such that no man would starve in time of plenty. The southern herders, the individualists, agree to live according to individual rights. A man may go hungry in the south, but all community action is voluntary on principle. Is there any sensible way in which one tribe can be called more moral than the other? Is there some metamorality by which we can make sense of this?

"In the beginning of human life, when there was yet no law and government, the custom was "everybody according to his moral (yi)." Accordingly each man had his own moral, two men had two different morals and ten men had ten different morals -- the more people the more different notions. And everybody approved of his own moral and disapproved the views of others, and so arose mutual disapproval among men. As a result, father and son and elder and younger brothers became enemies and were estranged from each other, since they were unable to reach any agreement. Everybody worked for the disadvantage of the others with water, fire, and poison. Surplus energy was not spent for mutual aid; surplus goods were allowed to rot without sharing; excellent teachings (Dao) were kept secret and not revealed."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature
Rosewater Foundation
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 254



View Profile
March 05, 2018, 06:59:11 AM

Thought experiment. Two tribes, the northern herders and the southern herders. The northern herders, the collectivists, agree to live according to the common good, such that no man would starve in time of plenty. The southern herders, the individualists, agree to live according to individual rights. A man may go hungry in the south, but all community action is voluntary on principle. Is there any sensible way in which one tribe can be called more moral than the other? Is there some metamorality by which we can make sense of this?

"In the beginning of human life, when there was yet no law and government, the custom was "everybody according to his moral (yi)." Accordingly each man had his own moral, two men had two different morals and ten men had ten different morals -- the more people the more different notions. And everybody approved of his own moral and disapproved the views of others, and so arose mutual disapproval among men. As a result, father and son and elder and younger brothers became enemies and were estranged from each other, since they were unable to reach any agreement. Everybody worked for the disadvantage of the others with water, fire, and poison. Surplus energy was not spent for mutual aid; surplus goods were allowed to rot without sharing; excellent teachings (Dao) were kept secret and not revealed."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature

That's a hypothetical that doesn't account for the evolution of cooperation.
HairyMaclairy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 2174


Degenerate bull hatter & Bitcoin monotheist


View Profile
March 05, 2018, 07:02:58 AM

Like a hypothetical frothing snake.  

That’s an extremely tight band on the daily.
Rosewater Foundation
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 254



View Profile
March 05, 2018, 07:05:11 AM

Like a hypothetical frothing snake.  

That’s an extremely tight band on the daily.

+100 WO sMerits
Rosewater Foundation
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 254



View Profile
March 05, 2018, 07:12:05 AM
Merited by HairyMaclairy (1)

The frothing wormtrain snakes it's way into the Monday tall grass.
pacman7331
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 638
Merit: 118



View Profile
March 05, 2018, 07:14:14 AM



We got eight days to break 12k until we break the upward trend.
Should be easy.
Bears got a rough job.
Rosewater Foundation
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 254



View Profile
March 05, 2018, 07:18:55 AM



We got eight days to break 12k until we break the upward trend.

"Carolina!" He screamed. "There's a wormtrain making snake in your tall grass!"
600watt
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2338
Merit: 2106



View Profile
March 05, 2018, 07:56:55 AM

meh

I would have expected violent upward action when we broke the downtrend.  This break is unconvincing.

I think we are in for the chaotic establishment of a sideways channel, it's bounds as yet undetermined, but this may well be the upper.

ripple scam stole this "violent upward action" this round. +20% and they are not even using their own scam coin when they roll out services.




(it shouldn't read "you" but "they")
anhzaibro
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 10


View Profile
March 05, 2018, 08:01:59 AM

BTC immediately conquered the level of 11.7k rises over the turn to support the threshold to conquer the threshold of 12.7k, then again turn this threshold into support to break the threshold of 14.3k
ErisDiscordia
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1133
Merit: 1163


Imposition of ORder = Escalation of Chaos


View Profile
March 05, 2018, 08:02:43 AM
Merited by 600watt (1)

Thought experiment. Two tribes, the northern herders and the southern herders. The northern herders, the collectivists, agree to live according to the common good, such that no man would starve in time of plenty. The southern herders, the individualists, agree to live according to individual rights. A man may go hungry in the south, but all community action is voluntary on principle. Is there any sensible way in which one tribe can be called more moral than the other? Is there some metamorality by which we can make sense of this?

"In the beginning of human life, when there was yet no law and government, the custom was "everybody according to his moral (yi)." Accordingly each man had his own moral, two men had two different morals and ten men had ten different morals -- the more people the more different notions. And everybody approved of his own moral and disapproved the views of others, and so arose mutual disapproval among men. As a result, father and son and elder and younger brothers became enemies and were estranged from each other, since they were unable to reach any agreement. Everybody worked for the disadvantage of the others with water, fire, and poison. Surplus energy was not spent for mutual aid; surplus goods were allowed to rot without sharing; excellent teachings (Dao) were kept secret and not revealed."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature

That's Thomas Hobbes. He was paranoid AF in his social philosophy due to living during the times of Cromwell, the republic and civil war. As a result he had a low opinion of "human nature" which tended to make life "nasty, brutish and short" in the absence of some higher restraining power (Leviathan/the state).

I have to wonder about the mental health of people quoting Hobbes - what sort of hellhole did you grow up in to completely overlook the human drive for cooperation?
Rosewater Foundation
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 254



View Profile
March 05, 2018, 08:15:55 AM

the human drive for cooperation

Science-y fact: An ape sees another ape try for something out of reach, it's more likely to help if that ape has unselfishly groomed him in the past.
Rosewater Foundation
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 254



View Profile
March 05, 2018, 08:29:19 AM

The problem is adjudicating between different tribal moralities. Cooperation evolved like morality evolved, to solve in-group problems. There doesn't seem to be anything analogous in dealing with out-group problems. America is torn between northern herders and southern herders. What do?
jojo69
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3164
Merit: 4344


diamond-handed zealot


View Profile
March 05, 2018, 08:41:38 AM

ffs

wasn't I debunking Hobbes just last week?
Rosewater Foundation
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 392
Merit: 254



View Profile
March 05, 2018, 08:44:03 AM

ffs

wasn't I debunking Hobbes just last week?

Yeah. You do good work.
Dakustaking76
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 579
Merit: 267


View Profile
March 05, 2018, 09:01:41 AM

And again the fucking big players wont that we rise above €9500

mike4001
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 443
Merit: 260


View Profile
March 05, 2018, 09:19:07 AM

And again the fucking big players wont that we rise above €9500


I don't get it either how it can benefit them to keep the price down.

Big player should have quiet a lot of Bitcoins so an price increase should benefit them much more but if they could buy some more and the price for all of their Bitcoins stays down.
afbitcoins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1061



View Profile WWW
March 05, 2018, 09:28:32 AM

Thought experiment. Two tribes, the northern herders and the southern herders. The northern herders, the collectivists, agree to live according to the common good, such that no man would starve in time of plenty. The southern herders, the individualists, agree to live according to individual rights. A man may go hungry in the south, but all community action is voluntary on principle. Is there any sensible way in which one tribe can be called more moral than the other? Is there some metamorality by which we can make sense of this?

All would be good for a while for the northern collectivists. But eventually a section of the northern collectivists would start to notice that handouts were more profitable than breaking a sweat to do any labour themselves. They would start to demand more handouts as they are entitled to them. The ones who do work hard would be taxed more and more heavily and eventually conclude why bother. The society would collapse only seeing seeds of recovery once the heavy taxation burden had finally gone and people start to work hard and see the fruit of their labour. They would change to become more individualistic.

Those on the south would thrive enjoying the fruits of their labour. Their society would become rich. Trade and commence would flourish. The leaders would share the wealth and create things like national health service they would all congratulate themselves on being so forward thinking and generally great. But slowly people would demand more and more for the common good. They become more collectivist. Taxes rise to pay for it all.

And so on

 Grin
snowdropfore
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 843
Merit: 1001



View Profile
March 05, 2018, 09:42:12 AM

20000pages  is coming ,hope when the 20000 pages coming with the price of $20000, that will be awesome.
HairyMaclairy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 2174


Degenerate bull hatter & Bitcoin monotheist


View Profile
March 05, 2018, 09:47:49 AM

Thought experiment. Two tribes, the northern herders and the southern herders. The northern herders, the collectivists, agree to live according to the common good, such that no man would starve in time of plenty. The southern herders, the individualists, agree to live according to individual rights. A man may go hungry in the south, but all community action is voluntary on principle. Is there any sensible way in which one tribe can be called more moral than the other? Is there some metamorality by which we can make sense of this?

"In the beginning of human life, when there was yet no law and government, the custom was "everybody according to his moral (yi)." Accordingly each man had his own moral, two men had two different morals and ten men had ten different morals -- the more people the more different notions. And everybody approved of his own moral and disapproved the views of others, and so arose mutual disapproval among men. As a result, father and son and elder and younger brothers became enemies and were estranged from each other, since they were unable to reach any agreement. Everybody worked for the disadvantage of the others with water, fire, and poison. Surplus energy was not spent for mutual aid; surplus goods were allowed to rot without sharing; excellent teachings (Dao) were kept secret and not revealed."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature

That's Thomas Hobbes. He was paranoid AF in his social philosophy due to living during the times of Cromwell, the republic and civil war. As a result he had a low opinion of "human nature" which tended to make life "nasty, brutish and short" in the absence of some higher restraining power (Leviathan/the state).

I have to wonder about the mental health of people quoting Hobbes - what sort of hellhole did you grow up in to completely overlook the human drive for cooperation?

Well the Moji did grow up during the Warring States period (c. 400 BC) which was a pretty hellish time so perhaps not surprising he was quoting Hobbes.  
Pages: « 1 ... 19672 19673 19674 19675 19676 19677 19678 19679 19680 19681 19682 19683 19684 19685 19686 19687 19688 19689 19690 19691 19692 19693 19694 19695 19696 19697 19698 19699 19700 19701 19702 19703 19704 19705 19706 19707 19708 19709 19710 19711 19712 19713 19714 19715 19716 19717 19718 19719 19720 19721 [19722] 19723 19724 19725 19726 19727 19728 19729 19730 19731 19732 19733 19734 19735 19736 19737 19738 19739 19740 19741 19742 19743 19744 19745 19746 19747 19748 19749 19750 19751 19752 19753 19754 19755 19756 19757 19758 19759 19760 19761 19762 19763 19764 19765 19766 19767 19768 19769 19770 19771 19772 ... 33320 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!