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

[jbreher]

You and many others in this thread are basically saying
"Fractional Reserve is shit"

Let's not forget it's backed by Proof of War.

It should be obvious, but this fact seems to have escaped your attention: the fact that fiat is backed by proof of war does not lead to a conclusion that it is not shit.

[bitserve]

(quotes freely snipped for relevance)

Still having more money than you could probably spend (as such whales do) is not that terrible even if your net worth gets a cut of several hundred millions. Maybe I am wrong, but I don't think they are as much depressed as I am right now.

I played this past peak much worse than I did the previous (2013) in which I doubled my Bitcoin count. The blame is on me (or my greed).

P.S.: No, not going to break/sell. I can perfectly (and depressedly) ride this thing until ZERO. I am more worried about the amount of profits already (even if temporarily?) lost than what I still have to lose (which is LESS).

We're soul brothers in a way - but swings and opportunities aren't over yet. New profits can and will come, and the one thing I learned about trading is: The only way to really learn a lesson is pay for it. You paid handsomely, but you're still in the green. Your glass is half full, see? And it's Don Simon Premium, not the usual stuff!

It's basically that.... I didn't play well this time... But hindsight is 20/20... and I really don't like to have a substantial exposure to exchanges anymore.

So yeah, hodl and suck it up. In the end I will be fine... or not. We will see.

I also paid my lessons through the nose. Still in the green, though, using my new knowledge from old mistakes to make some corn on the side, and still learning useful tidbits at a much more reasonable price. See you at the 100k party sooner than we both think?

Yeah, I know we don't have reasons to complain for the most part... yet at the same time it hurts... and I don't think there's nothing wrong in acknowledging both.

And... who knows, the $100K party is currently still less than x20 away.... We have seen the badger do way crazier things in very little time, so... who knows!

Thinking about it... The $100K party would be the *most justified* "excuse" for a celebration party EVER!

[Toxic2040]

There is a thread out "there" already...but what ever. This is worth posting here imo.

Tom Lee of FundStrat is saying there is a reason for the cyclic sell-offs we have been seeing..seems legit. For all you daytarders it might behoove you to sync up somewhat to what is going on over there at the CBOE..  ymmv.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/fundstrat-s-thomas-lee-weakness-in-bitcoin-is-caused-by-futures-expiration

According to Lee, Bitcoin usually sees a drop of around 18 percent in 10 days before futures expiration, with prices generally recovering by six days afterward. Lee explained that if a trader is long on Bitcoin and short the futures, holders may sell large shares of BTC at the volume weighted average price as contracts move closer to expiring.

Near expiration however, they may sell the remaining Bitcoin, which causes the price to drop, and leaving the short position in the futures they close “with a handsome profit.”

----------
Forgot a 1h chart.
Hold through this and we might see some green cloud action soon.

[Tyr808]

You and many others in this thread are basically saying
"Fractional Reserve is shit"

Let's not forget it's backed by Proof of War.

It should be obvious, but this fact seems to have escaped your attention: the fact that fiat is backed by proof of war does not lead to a conclusion that it is not shit.

Relatively speaking.
It's shit for the have-nots of course.

For the have-a-little-and-want-more it could be good or bad according to whether one is able to use it at their advantage (id est: successfully throwing earl liquidity in the rat race).
The biggest critique to full reserve systems resides in the fact that where the lender is not intrinsecally motivated to assume the risk, there is less space for businesses to fluorish without that initial money-debt boost.

The price for that is very high of course.

[JayJuanGee]

Hodling is depressing in times like this.... it's my cold wallet that is being brutally hit what concerns me.

Just think about the WinkleVii's or Tim Draper's cold wallet and you'll feel a whole lot better.  

I tried. But it doesn't help. Still having more money than you could probably spend (as such whales do) is not that terrible even if your net worth gets a cut of several hundred millions. Maybe I am wrong, but I don't think they are as much depressed as I am right now.

I keep repeating it but... If we could act as if that $20K peak never happened (so ridiculously soon) I would be pretty happy right now. That's the only thing that helps for me.

I played this past peak much worse than I did the previous (2013) in which I doubled my Bitcoin count. The blame is on me (or my greed).

P.S.: No, not going to break/sell. I can perfectly (and depressedly) ride this thing until ZERO. I am more worried about the amount of profits already (even if temporarily?) lost than what I still have to lose (which is LESS).

Possibilities seem like this:

1) you did not sell enough on the way up  (anyone can kind of feel like that)

2) you sold on the way up, but you bought back too soon, so now you are running out of money to buy  (there seems to be a remedy for this, and that is to just budget a plan for on the way down - but of course, if you don't have any money for buying and you don't want to sell any then you just have to HODL, suck it up , and hope to fix the mistake in the future).

3) could be some other possibilities, but I cannot think of them, at this moment.    

It's mostly 1, also 2... and for 3 here comes the explanation: In 2013/2014 I had most of my BTC on exchanges for active trading, that let me double my stash in BTC count even if the total value was lower than before the drop. This time I kept reducing my exposure to exchanges.

I am in a similar boat to you, at least in terms of attempting to reduce my exchange exposure, but I believe that I was never trading in such extreme amounts because I could never bear to sell very much of my BTC stash at any one given time.  I believe that I went from about a bit over 60% of the value of my BTC investment on various exchanges to about 20-25% of the value of my BTC investment on exchanges. I figured that I could take  some of the BTC value off of exchanges while at the same time having enough BTC on the exchanges that allow me to continue to sell up to a certain amount of BTC if the BTC price goes shooting up.  Subsequently, I decided that it was not worth my risk to put larger amounts of BTC on exchanges, "in the event that there was some kind of LARGE justification for me to sell a large portion of my BTC quickly).  I will admit that around the time of the BCash hardfork, and some of the other uncertainties then in play about how the segwit adoption was going to get implemented, I did allocate a bit of a higher portion of BTC on exchanges because I concluded that some of the pulling of money off exchanges and the possible blockage of deposits and withdrawals for a certain period of time would possibly cause some additional lack of liquidity profitability by having some additional BTC on exchanges.

In the end I was only trading with around 10% of my total stash, and I didn't even sell all of that 10% as I keep doing scalping in a way similar to yours as we have discussed before.

It seems that I am trading less than 10% of my stash, too, but I keep some extra BTC on exchanges that allow me to sell (currently up to $35k) without having to make additional deposits. I am not keeping extra BTC value on exchanges for other currently unknown events, and funny thing that if the total value of BTC goes shooting up, then you end up needing less BTC on exchanges, so it seems to have been largely playing out that way for me... and I discovered that I can still get some of the protections from the BTC volatility downside while selling smaller portions of my total holdings...  (maybe the whole situation just rises to the level of NOT wanting to generate too many dollars that I would not know what to do with besides putting back into BTC and my being willing to ride out more of the downside volatility without feeling any kind of need to make great increases to my BTC holdings by selling large amounts of BTC on the way up.  In other words, I have found selling relatively smaller amount of BTC to be adequately satisfying.. without any need to get too greedy).

So even if I ended with a 30 or 40% gain in my trading during the drop, that is for only a 10% of my total stash... sooooo a measly 3-4% total gain in coins vs a drop of 65% in price from the ATH... ouch!

I have concluded, for myself, that it is not necessary to become maniacally focused on the amount of profits that I make with each downward volatility as long as I continue to moderately follow a reasonable system that focuses on attempting to stack BTC and insuring myself (somewhat) from extreme possible downward price movements, yet for me the projections of future BTC holdings seem to be working out in a way that I am continuing to add to the stack (and the future projected stack at various price projection points.. It may be unrealistic to consider that the overall holdings will continue to increase or even increase in some kind of 30% to 40% range.. especially if the BTC price doubles or triples or does a 10x or more.  

So, yeah, if the goal is to stack BTC then a direct outcome of that kind of goal would be that the overall value of the holdings of both BTC and dollars is going to go down way more in the short term - and especially, like you said when there is something like a 65% BTC price drop (or perhaps more could come)

It's basically that.... I didn't play well this time... But hindsight is 20/20... and I really don't like to have a substantial exposure to exchanges anymore.

So yeah, hodl and suck it up. In the end I will be fine... or not. We will see.

A large majority of us BTC bulls have decent chances of doing quite well with an overall BTC stacking practice, even if there are various points in the short term that we could calculate various ways that we could have made more money or better preserved our overall BTC portfolio value.

Also, if we are not leveraging and only investing what we can afford to lose, then we should not be becoming too emotional about the situation because all of our living expenses are covered, and then the main issue would only be that we are wishing to be more rich, rather than already being rich because we are mostly already living within our means and our bitcoin investment is not distracting us from living within our means.

[JayJuanGee]

Well, at least somebody is trying to hold "The bottom" up... . (Mic post some good pic) 

Confirmed. Bottom is being held up.




Sometimes I feel like my biggest contribution to this thread is butt pictures, but I guess that's good enough.

That is a BIG ass bottom, too!!!      I am shocked!!!!   

[savetherainforest]

Hey it'll probably spike down to sub $600!! /s

When bearish calls get really stupid, the bottom is close.  

As scary as this sounds, I wouldn't be surprised if that happened. I am at the stage where all I do is pray and hope while fearing the worst. Anything under $5k, and its full panic station.

How the hell do I not see these posts?? ... I think I have an internal 'ignore' mechanism that skips over shills with very few posts & merits. But anyway... that is some good stuff just right there!!!

[JayJuanGee]

Interdasting.

Based on that chart, looks like more DOWN is on the way?   

[realr0ach]

Trump once again acts as Jewish puppet trying to false flag attack in Syria:

https://www.silverdoctors.com/headlines/world-news/false-flag-alert-u-s-with-trumps-authorization-just-started-funding-the-white-helmets-in-syria-again/

"MAGA" = ending the fed, breaking up the banks and media, and returning to constitutional money (silver and gold), not acting as a Jewish puppet.  Until there's any mention of doing these things like Ron Paul would have done, this is all a scam.  The only reason they're being tough on Mexican immigration and China is because both of those countries are exporting deflation to the US, and the debt based banking system collapses without permanent inflation.  The fight against Mexico and China itself is even a scam and is just a proxy war to save the banks.

[Torque]

~snip

~snip

~snip

Nice words tweeted by Vinny Lingham:

 Very poorly worded.  It actually doesnt make sense as written.
Which luxury is he lacking?  Has he been living a hand-to-mouth existence?  He's a fucking millionaire.

Edit:  im a fucking idiot.  I'll blame it on the night shifts...
It's perfectly written in plain english.

No, actually his ramblings are not "enlightening" at all, but are still poorly worded garbage when you consider that what he wrote can literally be applied to every single investment vehicle on the planet. Bitcoin (or crypto) is no exception.

Vinny is an idiot.

The wealthy elite will always have the luxury of being the strongest hands with any investment vehicle, because they are already rich and don't need the money they invest (so no need to liquidate during down turns).

[Paashaas]

Even Bitcoinwisdom.io calls it Bcash 

[realr0ach]

No, actually his ramblings on not "enlightening" at all...Vinny is an idiot.

The wealthy elite will always have the luxury of being the strongest hands with any investment vehicle, because they are already rich and don't need the money they invest (so no need to liquidate during down turns).

Well, for his desire to come true, there would need to be an economic cataclysm that the wealthy usurer's income did not transfer through to the other side.  This means that gold, silver, and every other non-perishable commodity would all need to become worthless, plus things like the fake commodity bitcoin.  In other words, you would need to enter a real dark ages where only a man's labor that he uses for barter and that of perishable goods like food had value and nothing else.

The only other possibility is a Pinochet-type ruler who just seizes all of the Jewish money changer and people like Bezos' money then hangs them.  This option is likely inevitable on a long enough timeline of income inequality.  Well, both options are inevitable when the system becomes lopsided and unable to function any longer when less than 1% owns everything.  It's only a question of if the system breaks down first or if a Pinochet attempts to manually fix it.

[realr0ach]

I'd just like to repost Masterluc's latest long-term forecast, from two months ago.  It looks relevant.

https://www.tradingview.com/i/pmV1uLC7/

How is a single line going upwards at a 45 degree angle FOREVER indicating the price goes to INFINITY a "forecast"!?!?!?!?!???!?!?!

That's not a forecast, it's down-syndrome.  Anyone who claims it's not possible for the market to go either sideways or down at all and must forever go up at 45 degrees is a scammer from hell, an idiot, or both.  The "trend is your friend" and all, but an obviously unsustainable 45 degree line can be nothing more than a Ponzi scheme if you take his chart at face value.  So if you believe what this guy claims, then you yourself are claiming bitcoin is a Ponzi by default. 

Let's also not forget if the price went to some crazy number right now, like $100k+ that without numerous more halvings, bitcoin would probably use more energy than the ENTIRE United States LOL.

[Paashaas]

My guess is 'no'. I'm probably the most persistent Bitcoin* believer / SegWit skeptic still participating in this thread, and I ain't getting paid. (Most others of my opinions seem to have left for more hospitable climes). And while I may have a limited perspective on the matter.

I'm glad you starting to admit it. I'll give you a merrit because of it.

You should educate youreself more about Bitcoin/Segwit/Lightning and all the other cool projects comming oure way.

[jbreher]

Incidentally, the Bitcoin network topology is nothing like the diagram on the right.

It's like the one on the right but with crap dangling off of it. There is a large community of full node operators, that community looks like that picture on the right, if others decide to tack their own structures onto it that doesn't change the fact that the underlying one is still there.

So each vertex shares an edge with three or so of its closest neighbors, and there are no long hops? Got it.

I call bullshit.

Nearly every miner is directly connected to nearly every other miner. Those are the first order members of the network.

Most non-mining, fully-validating entities (frequently mis-characterized as 'nodes') are attached to a small number of other such NMFV entities that have many many many connections, and a handful of random connections to other insignificant NMFV entities.

[jojo69]

Vinny is an idiot.

The wealthy elite will always have the luxury of being the strongest hands with any investment vehicle, because they are already rich and don't need the money they invest (so no need to liquidate during down turns).

There are tons of advantages to being financially secure; being able to buy in bulk, being able to stock up when things are on sale, being able to pay cash and avoid interest, being able to afford what ever graft and corruption it takes to operate profitable enterprise in your particular jurisdiction, etc., etc.

Sound money gives the common man the ability to better his position simply by producing more than he consumes.  Inflating fiat forces mom and pop into the rigged casino just to try and stay even.

[Searing]

~snip

~snip

~snip

Nice words tweeted by Vinny Lingham:

 Very poorly worded.  It actually doesnt make sense as written.
Which luxury is he lacking?  Has he been living a hand-to-mouth existence?  He's a fucking millionaire.

Edit:  im a fucking idiot.  I'll blame it on the night shifts...
It's perfectly written in plain english.

He may have a point all of my BTC and altcoin hoards have come from doubling down on equipment from Fall of 2013. KNC Jupiter BTC miner to start at $5,131.80...so his point

has some merit.....If I'd been a recent newbie and bought BTC at the $15k high.....(depending on how much) I likely would have bailed crying like

a 12-year old child. (wait...I do that now...) ....So yeah, rationalization wise I can wait this out and call it PROFIT at whatever insane percentage it is.

Again, I worked with dev disabled...so again ALL my hoard and doubling down on ASIC's (and dumb luck) played into this....from that first miner...the ASIC

mining carried the buckets and toiled itself to get there. So he is correct....sorta IMHO...so my only real 'concern' was the original purchase of the KNC Miner,

it all goes back to that initial bet of $5,131.80 and the luck and doubling down since (till now today when I shut all my Bitmain L3+'s off ..no profit at 8,000mh)

[jbreher]

You and many others in this thread are basically saying
"Fractional Reserve is shit"

Let's not forget it's backed by Proof of War.

It should be obvious, but this fact seems to have escaped your attention: the fact that fiat is backed by proof of war does not lead to a conclusion that it is not shit.

Relatively speaking.
It's shit for the have-nots of course.

For the have-a-little-and-want-more it could be good or bad according to whether one is able to use it at their advantage (id est: successfully throwing earl liquidity in the rat race).
The biggest critique to full reserve systems resides in the fact that where the lender is not intrinsecally motivated to assume the risk, there is less space for businesses to fluorish without that initial money-debt boost.

The price for that is very high of course.

Just means that only the most solid business ventures would get funded. With all the underwater drek clogging the system today, I don't see a problem with tighter investment policies.

Of course, the shittiest aspect of the fiat money system is that each new dollar that is zapped into existence gains its value by quite literally stealing purchasing power from each dollar that was in existence the moment before. And that such new dollars are -- without exception -- awarded to already-rich parasites. On the backs of the downtrodden.

[realr0ach]

My guess is 'no'. I'm probably the most persistent Bitcoin* believer / SegWit skeptic still participating in this thread, and I ain't getting paid. (Most others of my opinions seem to have left for more hospitable climes). And while I may have a limited perspective on the matter.

I'm glad you starting to admit it. I'll give you a merrit because of it.

You should educate youreself more about Bitcoin/Segwit/Lightning and all the other cool projects comming oure way.

None of you people understand the macro view of Lightning.  If you did, you would know it's not possible to just remove the focal point of bitcoin (longest chain rule) without the entire thing falling apart.  The fallacy of all these people's thinking is that Lightning will be some type of added layer which is entirely subservient to the rules of bitcoin.  This is COMPLETELY FALSE.  Lightning is it's own entity that would not be subservient to the rules of bitcoin at all since each system uses an entirely different focal point:

Lightning network has always been garbage.  If these things didn't require putting all transactions in a common que, bitcoin would have already utilized parallel scaling in the first place.  Lightning network can only function as a completely centralized hub and spoke model for numerous reasons like liquidity and needing a common que to prevent attack.  Or to put it simply, if you're not using something like a longest chain as a focal point in an open join/leave system, it's always going to turn into a system of 'trusted' nodes.  

You don't get to just 'remove' the focal point.  A focal point is required.  If you remove the longest chain focal point, the new focal point becomes trust by default.  We are Walmart, trust our node because we're Walmart. We at Walmart also only trust nodes run by Goldman Sachs.  Trust us both.  We also refuse to route any transactions to any other nodes.  None have proper liquidity to route anyway.

At the end of the day, these are all stupid and dysfunctional Rube Goldberg machines that are hyped by scammers.  It's 100% impossible to create a decentralized digital currency.  There is no reason whatsoever for any of this stuff to exist in comparison to silver and gold.

[realr0ach]

He may have a point all of my BTC and altcoin hoards have come from doubling down on equipment from Fall of 2013. KNC Jupiter BTC miner to start at $5,131.80...so his point has some merit.....

What you described is the Jesse Livermore investment strategy of doubling down.  The problem occurs in this context where you can easily tell an ENORMOUS number of market participants were all using this same strategy from miners to "investors", creating a grotesque bubble that implodes.  Which is why Livermore said to keep doubling down on the way up but immediately take profit and close out everything the second the bull market appears to be slowing.  Otherwise you're going to lose it all...which is why he died broke...and many shitcoiners will retrace his steps.

In reality, the Livermore strategy is nothing more than:  try to use leverage to create a bubble on purpose in order to fleece everyone else and bail out before they figure out what's going on.  This is bitcoin in a nutshell ever since it's inception.  This is why people keep trying to prop up Bitfinex and even offer buyouts for it when it's an obvious fraud.  An exchange with leverage is required for these scams to exist.  If the exchange with leverage disappears, it's far more difficult to fleece the goyim by inflating and deflating bubbles.