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

[Rosewater Foundation]

@CobraBitcoin https://twitter.com/CobraBitcoin/status/970736614275153926

Increased my holdings of Bitcoin Cash today. There was a long need for a blockchain good for payments, that makes certain tradeoffs to achieve that, and I think from a UX point of view, Bitcoin Cash has much better chances of winning the upcoming payments war than LN.

At least he's inconsistent.

[JayJuanGee]

amendments are changes to the constitution

Psst..have to cryptospeak around these parts..

The original Constitution is made up of 7 articles and it is like the genesis block. Amendments are "consensus" based blocks added over time that form the framework that is the United States. This chain can be forked under certain conditions described by Hairy somewhere previously in this thread I believe.

US constitution has been hardforked how many times?
I want US Classic. Not these amended altcoin constitutions.

Don't be retarded.


Nobody gives a shit what you want. 

Instead, it is much more healthy to attempt and navigate and accept what is there rather than whining about the so many ways in your narrow opinion that what is there is not perfect.   

bullshit

what you term "whining" is actually engaging in debate in a democratic process

I am not talking bullshit.... You seem to be reacting with emotion.  amirite?   

Oh of course, you have a right to propose changes to any given system, and you can also assert that we should go back to the original version and describe your vision in that regard, and generally, I have the right to assert that you are whining too. 

Each of these positions of the changed system and appeals to the original system can be described as negotiating positions, too, and each side can assert that his/her position is more reasonable than the other side's position.   But they are not equally valid, once the amendments have already passed and been accepted into the system.

I am not referring to any specifics here, except maybe we have been talking generally about proclamations regarding constitutional originalism  and we have also been referring to proclamations of bitcoin originalism.  Each of these systems have been amended with the passage of time, and my characterization of a position that wants to go back to the original as whining does not necessarily shut off the discussion, even though it might be reasonably understood as a sending of a message from me that I perceive that the originalist has not substantiated his/her position sufficiently with merely a proclamation that the original version is supposedly better than the amended one.

Furthermore, if any originalist wants to get rid of an amendment, usually the process of getting rid of the amendment (and returning to the original document) is just as burdensome as originally getting the amendment passed, so any originalist does not have any kind of easy road to whine and say that s/he wants to go back to the original because usually a process has already been followed that had caused the whole system to move from the original version to the amendment version and in order to get rid of the amendment the originalist usually would have the burden of production and persuasion to convince of such repeal that is frequently equal to the burdens that had been present to get the amendment(s) passed in the first place.

So, contrary to your assertions, I don't see how anything that I was saying was bullshit or suppressing discussion, but merely asserting that the whiners don't have some kind of easy path to get any matters reversed, so they better get their asses to work to produce and persuade beyond mere whining.   

[JayJuanGee]

Accumulation is happening again. But note that at these price levels, this accumulation could go on for a very long time.

You guys may die of complete boredom in the interim.

But I want my Lambo noooooooooowww!

https://i.imgflip.com/25s5tj.jpg

If you spent around $10k on bitcoins any time between late 2014 and early 2016 at below $500 (let's say average price per BTC was about $500), then you would have 20 BTC - seems like enough for a Lambo.

On the other hand, I think that it would NOT be very wise to buy a Lambo unless you have at least 100BTC (so if you have at least 100BTC, then you would be spending less than 20% of your bitcoin holdings on a Lambo).  On the other hand (I think that is enough hands for now), if you think that you are going to die soon (within the next year or two), then who cares, you need to have funzies while you are still living... and spend your bitcoins and buy the depreciating Lambo - even if you only have 20 BTC-ish or even less.

on the gripping hand you just estimate how long you figure you have left.

say you figure 30 years. a lambo plus enough money for a lavish lifestyle for 15 years is 1/2 your stack. will the value of the btc you still have left at that point (due to btc price increase in 15 years) be enough for another 15 or 20 years beyond that? 

if you dont spend it faster than your remaining stacks value increases.. TOYS!!!

of course if the price tanks.. well theres always organ donations or something. always have a Plan B.

Most traditional investment advisors will suggest that you can withdraw up to 4% per year of a sufficiently diversified investment portfolio and still maintain the principle.  At a certain point, if you believe that you have a "not going to be with us anymore" timeline, then your withdrawal strategy could safely become more aggressive because in those circumstances there might not be a need to preserve much if any principle.

Sure, you might decide to consider safeness or appreciation in bitcoin to be different from traditional investment strategies, yet personally, I don't see any significant reason to deviate greatly from a 4% per year withdrawal plan for BTC, and surely you are not locked into any withdrawal plan that you chose to follow, because if you begin to follow a 4% withdrawal plan for several years and BTC appreciates way above expectations of that plan, then you could become more aggressive on the withdrawal plan.  Any plan should provide guidelines and reason, but of course, situations and perspectives can cause a considerable amount of tweaking and playing around that hopefully such playing around does not devolve so far into gambling territory rather than exercising a decent amount prudence and reasoning.

[HI-TEC99]

Bitcoinity's going down for maintenance soon. Anyone checking the price on it will have to switch to something else.

At about 1:30 AM UTC site will temporarily go down for maintanance.

[JayJuanGee]

Bitcoinity's going down for maintenance soon. Anyone checking the price on it will have to switch to something else.

At about 1:30 AM UTC site will temporarily go down for maintanance.

"Temporary?"

5 minutes?

30 minutes?

2 hours?

1/2 day?

one month?

[Torque]

What is BCASH doing?

 
Nothing, apparently

@CobraBitcoin https://twitter.com/CobraBitcoin/status/970736614275153926

Increased my holdings of Bitcoin Cash today. There was a long need for a blockchain good for payments, that makes certain tradeoffs to achieve that, and I think from a UX point of view, Bitcoin Cash has much better chances of winning the upcoming payments war than LN.

It's important that it wins the payments war for all of the participants involved. All 2 of them.

[HI-TEC99]

Bitcoinity's going down for maintenance soon. Anyone checking the price on it will have to switch to something else.

At about 1:30 AM UTC site will temporarily go down for maintanance.

"Temporary?"

5 minutes?

30 minutes?

2 hours?

1/2 day?

one month?

They estimate between an hour and a few days.

Bitcoinity.org

Down for maintenance.

ETA about 1 hour, so it shouldn't take longer than a few days

Something to keep you busy: airma.sh

edit

They had it back online in less than the hour they predicted.

[toknormal]

I keep saying it and it keeps happening.

The one no-one's watching - Unobtanium. Now 4 years old.

Try getting your hands on it - you can't.

Now $170. Immense !!

[oblox]

I keep saying it and it keeps happening.

The one no-one's watching - Unobtanium. Now 4 years old.

Try getting your hands on it - you can't.

Now $170. Immense !!

...because... wait for it... no one cares.

[cofefeGandalf]

[edited out]

If you spent around $10k on bitcoins any time between late 2014 and early 2016 at below $500 (let's say average price per BTC was about $500), then you would have 20 BTC - seems like enough for a Lambo.

On the other hand, I think that it would NOT be very wise to buy a Lambo unless you have at least 100BTC (so if you have at least 100BTC, then you would be spending less than 20% of your bitcoin holdings on a Lambo).  On the other hand (I think that is enough hands for now), if you think that you are going to die soon (within the next year or two), then who cares, you need to have funzies while you are still living... and spend your bitcoins and buy the depreciating Lambo - even if you only have 20 BTC-ish or even less.

That's my NOT SO GOOD advices for the day.          

20% of the nest egg for a lambo, that's crazy talk. I'd barely be willing to spend that percentage to retire, then maybe lambo if 20% of retirement-money is enough for the lambo. Yes I'm a greedy greedy fuck. 

I think that you and I are on a similar page in our thinking about buying luxury and depreciating assets with proceeds of our bitcoin investment, so I suppose that I am appealing to the more extravagant folks in this thread.  They do exist.

One thing that might need to be sussed out is whether we are presuming bitcoins to be the totality of your investments or what kind of size is th rest of your estate.   Let's just assume for the sake of argument that the bitcoin holdings constitute a vast majority of your whole wealth (at least 80% or more), and then your figure of 20% of 20% puts you at about 4% of your holdings, and even having some reservations about whether a Lambo would be prudent under those circumstances. 

I cannot really battle with you on those kind of personal thresholds, because I am likely similar to you in my thinking and probably less than 2% would be my personal threshold, as long as I was feeling sufficiently geared up otherwise to have a decent storage place for the thing and the other lifestyle drama that a lambo would likely bring into my life.. because there is no doubt that spending on a lambo should really symbolize that you have acquired a decent stash of "fuck you" money, rather than you have to stretch your finances in order to be able to fit such a purchase into your lifestyle.

Full ACK to that.
Although I like Lambos, I would not like the attention it'd get me and it's very low on my imaginary stuff-to-get list. Being a depreciating extreme luxery good also lowers the percentage of coins I'd be willing to spend on it.
That said, I currently plan to get a tesla s instead. Cheaper, less-extreme luxery (different threashold) and selling some bcash (ty bcash ceo, lol) as well as other alts brought the strain on my btc holdings down to a comfortable level, so, well, fuck it. Usually I prefer stuff that makes me money but where would be the fun without wasting a bit for fun stuff, right?  

[toknormal]

I keep saying it and it keeps happening.

The one no-one's watching - Unobtanium. Now 4 years old.

Try getting your hands on it - you can't.

Now $170. Immense !!

...because... wait for it... no one cares.

...because... wait for it... no one cares.

Yes they do actually.

Because the entire nature of these markets is characterised by two harmonics interacting with each other:

 • speculataion
 • fair value

If you've been around for a few years you'll have noticed that anything that comes onto the market always has a bow wave. Litecoin, Peercoin, NxT, Bitshares....you name it.

That "bow wave" is fuelled by speculation over some apparently unique characteristic. Then as new stuff comes along people forget about it and with profit takes - the asset "fades away".

But the unique characteristic didn't "fade away" and for a very select few of them starts to be revalued at fair value. That's what's happening with Unobtanium - one of the few early Alts created in the "supernova" of 2013/14 never to be repeated. It was expensive, then cheap and now getting expensive again, except this time for real rather than speculative reasons.

So the prices we're seeing now (even measured in BTC) are likely never to be revisited.

[Rosewater Foundation]

Stick your fingers in a shitcoin at random.

Just don't.

[oblox]

I keep saying it and it keeps happening.

The one no-one's watching - Unobtanium. Now 4 years old.

Try getting your hands on it - you can't.

Now $170. Immense !!

...because... wait for it... no one cares.

...because... wait for it... no one cares.

Yes they do actually.

Because the entire nature of these markets is characterised by two harmonics interacting with each other:

 • speculataion
 • fair value

If you've been around for a few years you'll have noticed that anything that comes onto the market always has a bow wave. Litecoin, Peercoin, NxT, Bitshares....you name it.

That "bow wave" is fuelled by speculation over some apparently unique characteristic. Then as new stuff comes along people forget about it and with profit takes - the asset "fades away".

But the unique characteristic didn't "fade away" and for a very select few of them starts to be revalued at fair value. That's what's happening with Unobtanium - one of the few early Alts created in the "supernova" of 2013/14 never to be repeated. It was expensive, then cheap and now getting expensive again, except this time for real rather than speculative reasons.

So the prices we're seeing now (even measured in BTC) are likely never to be revisited.

People care so much, it's on a handful of exchanges and trades less than $50k/day. GTFO.

[toknormal]

People care so much, it's on a handful of exchanges and trades less than $50k/day. GTFO.

There are assets where volume matters and ones where it doesn't. Mona Lisa's for example aren't measured by their market "volume". Diamonds don't trade in supermarkets, so I don't accept your analysis in this particular case.

Why does bitcoin have value ? Because markets that are looking for a reserve monetary asset (as opposed to a technology or equity stock) fear one thing over all others - ambiguity.

Bitcoin mitigates ambiguity more than any other crypto can simply because it is the earliest and most branded of all blockchain assets. Imagine in 100 year's time with a gazillion cryptos or future virtual assets floating around what will be more difficult to reproduce ? Some arbitrary thing that was created in the year 2067 or an original who's origin goes right back to the dawn of non-tangible assets.

The distinction that something like Unobtanium has is that it's far less liquid and occupies its own sector - basically functioning as a type of "art market" in the crypto realm.

That's why it didn't die and is now on a permanent road to a major revaluation IMO.

Try picking up even 1 UNO in the year 2030 and see how you fare. There are less than 200,000 in total supply and a crypto that rare is never going to be - never can be - created again with the same age.

[explorer]

Well, if the rules are clear beforehand, and A knows that he won't get money for medicines even if that means dieing, then he has to die for not mowning the lawn (it is HIS decision). There can be some exceptions as if he is disabled and therefore can't do it or is incapable of understanding the rules due to some mental issues. Acting otherwise would be completely unfair.

P.S.: I think I have some "leftist" inclinations for making some exceptions in relation to protect the weak (not the lazy though).

What if the parents are very lazy and don’t mow the lawn, but the consequence is their children die?

The examples does not give a shit.

Just so we are perfectly clear, you are advocating killing children through neglect because their parents do not provide for them?  

So you're saying...  Lobsters will eat our children?

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

If you spent around $10k on bitcoins any time between late 2014 and early 2016 at below $500 (let's say average price per BTC was about $500), then you would have 20 BTC - seems like enough for a Lambo.

On the other hand, I think that it would NOT be very wise to buy a Lambo unless you have at least 100BTC (so if you have at least 100BTC, then you would be spending less than 20% of your bitcoin holdings on a Lambo).  On the other hand (I think that is enough hands for now), if you think that you are going to die soon (within the next year or two), then who cares, you need to have funzies while you are still living... and spend your bitcoins and buy the depreciating Lambo - even if you only have 20 BTC-ish or even less.

That's my NOT SO GOOD advices for the day.          

20% of the nest egg for a lambo, that's crazy talk. I'd barely be willing to spend that percentage to retire, then maybe lambo if 20% of retirement-money is enough for the lambo. Yes I'm a greedy greedy fuck. 

I think that you and I are on a similar page in our thinking about buying luxury and depreciating assets with proceeds of our bitcoin investment, so I suppose that I am appealing to the more extravagant folks in this thread.  They do exist.

One thing that might need to be sussed out is whether we are presuming bitcoins to be the totality of your investments or what kind of size is th rest of your estate.   Let's just assume for the sake of argument that the bitcoin holdings constitute a vast majority of your whole wealth (at least 80% or more), and then your figure of 20% of 20% puts you at about 4% of your holdings, and even having some reservations about whether a Lambo would be prudent under those circumstances. 

I cannot really battle with you on those kind of personal thresholds, because I am likely similar to you in my thinking and probably less than 2% would be my personal threshold, as long as I was feeling sufficiently geared up otherwise to have a decent storage place for the thing and the other lifestyle drama that a lambo would likely bring into my life.. because there is no doubt that spending on a lambo should really symbolize that you have acquired a decent stash of "fuck you" money, rather than you have to stretch your finances in order to be able to fit such a purchase into your lifestyle.

Full ACK to that.
Although I like Lambos, I would not like the attention it'd get me and it's very low on my imaginary stuff-to-get list. Being a depreciating extreme luxery good also lowers the percentage of coins I'd be willing to spend on it.
That said, I currently plan to get a tesla s instead. Cheaper, less-extreme luxery (different threashold) and selling some bcash (ty bcash ceo, lol) as well as other alts brought the strain on my btc holdings down to a comfortable level, so, well, fuck it. Usually I prefer stuff that makes me money but where would be the fun without wasting a bit for fun stuff, right?  

I agree that it is a good idea to splurge a bit, here and there, and surely, I am a bit like you, I would rather buy a Tesla, a boat, some hookers and blow, rather than using the same amount of BTC profits that it would take to buy merely a Lambo... .but yeah, you would be less on the side of flamboyant wealth, while achieving more actual material (rather) than symbolic pleasures from the same amount of money.

So, for example, if you could afford a medium price-ranged Lambo (or the equivalent splurging) from merely 4% of your portfolio holdings, then if we place the cost of a medium range Lambo at about $250k, then you have assembled a portfolio in the $6million territory, which is surely nothing to sneeze at in terms of "fuck you" money. 

In about 2015, during much of the BTC price flat period, I had done a decent amount of calculations regarding attempting to figure out what levels of BTC portfolio holdings might be considered reasonable to maintain a decent entry level to passive income but still a decent reserve (emergency fund).  I had determined that $1million was no longer enough, based on inflation and all of that, so $3million seems more reasonable to have a bit of a cushion, too.  So, yeah, anything beyond those $3million levels is icing on the cake, even though the volatility of bitcoin might not let one rest with $3million if the BTC price goes down 70% (which we experienced from $19,666 to $5920), so having a decent cushion above $3million can cause the passive income sustainability assurances.

[Rosewater Foundation]

Try picking up even 1

[HairyMaclairy]

Have just changed my autocorrect to default “bcash” to “bcash lol”.  Very satisfying.

[Torque]

But the unique characteristic didn't "fade away" and for a very select few of them starts to be revalued at fair value. That's what's happening with Unobtanium - one of the few early Alts created in the "supernova" of 2013/14 never to be repeated. It was expensive, then cheap and now getting expensive again, except this time for real rather than speculative reasons.

So the prices we're seeing now (even measured in BTC) are likely never to be revisited.

Thousands of penny stocks eventually trade at a price never to be revisited again. And yet still no one cares... because no one values them.

[Gab0]

https://www.usmarshals.gov/assets/2018/bitcoinauction/