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

[B1tUnl0ck3r]

Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion is not the true vision of infofront.

infofront's true vision wouldn't let trolls to hijack this thread so easily. If this shit keeps happening, I'll have no choice but to fork this thread and start it again as it meant to be.

The new W/O thread will be ripped off from any troll protocols (like anonymint, roach, jbeher and other retards) and only infofront's true protocol to be left.

Raise hands now.

P.S: I won't be reverting your past crap. Your past messages (troll or not) will be safe.  I'll copy everything from this topic one by one but (tr00) moderation will be taking place by the page 20781.

you got your sherif star in an happy meal? please... go fork your self.

If you are bored with charts, moonrockets and others total losers who can't understand a market, you can always come and post on this great thread about coding a legal framework for C17H21NO4 in the usa :

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4577827.msg41287597#msg41287597

[Rosewater Foundation]

I'm a modern young lady!

You go girl.

[TERA2]

You should plot 2011 on there too

[realr0ach]

Precious metals are no longer a Schelling point because of the technology that governments have now, metals can no longer be moved without being confiscated. Gold and silver are under the control of nation-states, but Bitcoin has jurisdictional arbitrage and can’t be controlled by any partial grouping of nation-states.

Once again you have gotten your facts 100% opposite of what they are in reality.  It's ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE more cost effective to create and run a police state in cyberspace than in the physical world.  So, no, metals are not at risk because nobody can afford to create a police state monitoring what everyone does in the physical plane, but they can easily do so for the digital one.  You're using the govt's own infrastructure in the first place.  Please do not try to pass off such statements that are laughable at face value as facts.  

Shitcoins are the ones at risk due to having no valid Schelling point and ease of govt clamp down, not metals.  If the govt attempts to outlaw silver and gold, they do not cease to exist.  They still exist and have value.  Since shitcoins have no intrinsic use or value, a govt clampdown destroys them.  They're completely worthless.  And yes, Kaczynski was right no matter how much you attempt to pretend he was not.  The most oppresive forms of tyranny will manifest from the digital plane, not the physical one, due to the cheaper cost and ease of creating and running those systems as I mentioned above.

Only a complete fool would embrace these digital slave systems over sound money - physical silver and gold.

Gov are provenly good clampingdown physical ownerships. No chances for any PM here. Shop owners are at risk.

Its harder or impossible to clampdown IP or virtual bearer instruments. Use Bitcoin and brainwallets, how is that stoppable better than PM?

No...they are not.  First of all, nobody on the right or left gives a damn what govt says anymore.  Even back when people respected govt, barely anyone turned in their gold when they tried to confiscate it.  So whether the govt attempted to move against shitcoins or metals, they are unable to do either with voluntary compliance.  They're required to use force in both cases.  The only force they're required to use against shitcoins is knocking on the door of the exchanges, giant mining facilities, or ISPs and filtering out the non-obfuscated traffic.  It takes them barely any effort or force to obliterate shitcoins.  It takes them a WHOLE LOT of effort to physically attack everyone roaming the planet to confiscate their physical metals.

I've talked to numerous people from TBTF bankers to low level celebrities that make up the system.  All of these people with any passing interest in shitcoins know who both Anonymint and I are, and pretty much all of them agree with me, except maybe random people like Ashton Kutcher, that whoever holds physical metals in the future makes the rules, not shitcoins.  So in any argument of r0ach vs Anonymint, it's basically r0ach + the entire rest of the planet vs Anonymint and Ashton Kutcher.  Choose what side you want to be on for the conclusion of this fight.

[Rosewater Foundation]

I've talked to numerous people

Choose what side you want to be on for the conclusion of this fight.

[B1tUnl0ck3r]

No...they are not.  First of all, nobody on the right or left gives a damn what govt says anymore.  Even back when people respected govt, barely anyone turned in their gold when they tried to confiscate it.  So whether the govt attempted to move against shitcoins or metals, they are unable to do either with voluntary compliance.  They're required to use force in both cases.  The only force they're required to use against shitcoins is knocking on the door of the exchanges, giant mining facilities, or ISPs and filtering out the non-obfuscated traffic.  It takes them barely any effort or force to obliterate shitcoins.  It takes them a WHOLE LOT of effort to physically attack everyone roaming the planet to confiscate their physical metals.

I've talked to numerous people from TBTF bankers to low level celebrities that make up the system.  All of these people with any passing interest in shitcoins know who both Anonymint and I are, and pretty much all of them agree with me, except maybe random people like Ashton Kutcher, that whoever holds physical metals in the future makes the rules, not shitcoins.  So in any argument of r0ach vs Anonymint, it's basically r0ach + the entire rest of the planet vs Anonymint and Ashton Kutcher.  Choose what side you want to be on for the conclusion of this fight.

if you mean this kind of metal:



I agree with you... otherwise can you ingest "your metals"? at least you will have to be open up before "giving" it .

I'm a modern young lady!

You go girl.

you should have put this one :



way more appropriate for those who get it .

[bitserve]

You have convinced me.  I need to run the version from November 2010 when Satoshi was still involved. What version was that?  Because that’s obviously the one true Bitcoin.

Sorry guys any transactions after 2010 are invalid. Anyone that says otherwise is just a Core shill.

No, you don't really need to do that.

What you need to do is:

Step 1. Take all your "pure" Bitcoin in legacy addresses and move them to an exchange (make sure to use a Segwit deposit address, this is important)
Step 2. Sell them all (yeah)
Step 3. Save the private key/s of the originating legacy addresses.
Step 4. Try to convince everyone of a future fork in which Segwit will be basically wiped out of existence and only the "TRUE satoshi" practitioners will reign.
Step 5. When the fork happens use your old private keys for instant profit.

Sounds like a plan, uh?

What could go wrong?

P.S.: People shilling (see step 4) for this scenario in which Segwit gets wiped out of existence either are already nocoiners... or don't fully believe in their own words.

[realr0ach]

Now anonymint is cross-posting in another thread with complete fairy tales claiming shitcoins can't be stopped because if anyone tried to stop them, people can just transmit the blockchain by HAM radio!

And your absolutely delusional about the ability of governments to intercept encrypted Internet traffic, or if necessary encrypted HAM radio transmissions.

Seriously...what the hell are you even talking about now?  That wasn't even your idea in the first place.  It was some random guy's post long ago who didn't even make the comment in a serious manner.  It was just a random thought he threw out knowing full well it won't work and is completely unfeasible.  You know someone is extremely desperate and has long lost this argument when they start claiming people are going to transmit blockchains by HAM radio.  What's next?  Shitcoins can't be stopped because those guys at the airport runway holding up those flags can transmit blockchains to each other by sign language?

[B1tUnl0ck3r]

Now anonymint is cross-posting in another thread with complete fairy tales claiming shitcoins can't be stopped because if anyone tried to stop them, people can just transmit the blockchain by HAM radio!

And your absolutely delusional about the ability of governments to intercept encrypted Internet traffic, or if necessary encrypted HAM radio transmissions.

Seriously...what the hell are you even talking about now?  That wasn't even your idea in the first place.  It was some random guy's post long ago who didn't even make the comment in a serious manner.  It was just a random thought he threw out knowing full well it won't work and is completely unfeasible.  You know someone is extremely desperate and has long lost this argument when they start claiming people are going to transmit blockchains by HAM radio.  What's next?  Shitcoins can't be stopped because those guys at the airport runway holding up those flags can transmit blockchains to each other by sign language?

you are so dumb with your metals... you know this :



cost less than 35$...

and was used sucessfully here :

    Hungarian Revolution of 1956[1]
Colombian conflict
Moro Conflict
South African Border War
Indo-Pakistani War of 1965
War of Attrition
Six-Day War
Nigerian Civil War[2]
Yom Kippur War
Ogaden War
Vietnam War
Laotian Civil War
Cambodian Civil War
Cambodian–Vietnamese War
Sino-Vietnamese War
Sri Lankan Civil War
Chadian–Libyan conflict
Afghan Civil War
Afghan-Soviet War
1982 Ethiopian-Somali Border War
First Liberian Civil War
Second Liberian Civil War
First Sudanese Civil War
Second Sudanese Civil War
South Sudanese Civil War
Somali Civil War
Algerian Civil War
Abkhaz–Georgian conflict
Georgian–Ossetian conflict
Georgian Civil War
Tajikistani Civil War
Transnistria War
East Prigorodny Conflict
1991–1992 South Ossetia War
War in Abkhazia (1992–1993)
War in Abkhazia (1998)
First Chechen War
Second Chechen War
War in Afghanistan
Iran–Iraq War
Gulf War
Lebanese Civil War
South Lebanon conflict (1985–2000)
Yugoslav Wars
Croatian War
Bosnian War
Iraq War
First Congo War
Second Congo War
Mexican Drug War
2006 Lebanese War
Russo-Georgian War
Insurgency in the North Caucasus
Northern Mali Conflict
Libyan Civil War
Second Libyan Civil War
Boko Haram insurgency
Syrian Civil War
Iraqi Civil War (2014–present)
Yemeni Civil War (2015–present)
Saudi-led intervention in Yemen (2015–present)
Conflict in Najran, Jizan and Asir

and way more places that can be recorded...

and you believe in your metals? shinny even more? just LoL.

[Torque]

Now I'm convinced that anunymint and realr0ach are just sock puppet accounts of the same person.

Hey look, they're arguing!  

[Ibian]

Blah blah blah more garbage ramblings

A poor and witless man[lad] will protect his ego before he will protect his Bitcoins.

Yes... everyone do what troll anunymint suggests, and that way your coins will be safe.. panic, everyone.

Why do you care where other people keep their coins? In twenty words or less.

Segwit has been activated and implemented into bitcoin by normal consensus... therefore, if you support bitcoin, then you should be attempting to utilize and support its current and newest features... eg.. segwit... Keep a decent percentage of your coins on segwit addresses and using segwit features,...Ibian.    Get with the bitcoin program... modern bitcoin... not old bitcoin.

So "because you say so". That's not much of an argument. Besides being pretty pathetic.

[fabiorem]

Why would anybodies coins be lost by HODLING in Core addresses? Anybody else please deny or confirm this?

I run bitcoin-qt and my biggest security concern is me losing my password.

[Rosewater Foundation]

Now I'm convinced that anunymint and realr0ach are just sock puppet accounts of the same person.

Hey look, they're arguing!  

Even NLC showed up in Anon form to gloat over his previous victory. A lot of socks are burning bridges for this raid. It's a social engineering smorgasbord

[jbreher]

infofront's true vision wouldn't let trolls to hijack this thread so easily. If this shit keeps happening, I'll have no choice but to fork this thread and start it again as it meant to be.
Raise hands now.

Just Do It.

[bones261]

Segwit has been activated and implemented into bitcoin by normal consensus... therefore, if you support bitcoin, then you should be attempting to utilize and support its current and newest features... eg.. segwit... Keep a decent percentage of your coins on segwit addresses and using segwit features,...Ibian.    Get with the bitcoin program... modern bitcoin... not old bitcoin.

So "because you say so". That's not much of an argument. Besides being pretty pathetic.

Your segwit coins will be safe and sound on any fork that enforces the segwit rules. The only reason to be paranoid is if you believe a fork will be implemented that will not follow the segwit rules and instead treat the segwit transactions as anyonecanspend transaction, and you wish to have the option to participate in this hypothetical chain. You can also be extra paranoid, and make sure that you do not have any segwit tainted coins. But that new fork would have to basically force a reorg, to replay the old segwit transactions. The more & more blocks it would reorg would be more and more expensive to implement. This is the same principal that protects us from 51% attacks in the 1st place. If you want to HODL your coins in P2PKH (legacy) addresses and make sure you have no segwit tainted coins, you are free to do that. You just will not be able to participate in the lightning network and you will not enjoy the benefit of slightly cheaper fees that you enjoy with segwit.

[Anon136]

holy shit so many words.

What is wrong with you man. No one is going to read that shit. Go out side or something. You probably look like a vampire.

I miss the real anonymint. That guy was fun.

You have convinced me.  I need to run the version from November 2010 when Satoshi was still involved. What version was that?  Because that’s obviously the one true Bitcoin.

Sorry guys any transactions after 2010 are invalid. Anyone that says otherwise is just a Core shill.

The only version that is the one true Bitcoin is the pseudo code that Satoshi wrote in the white paper. Back when he was already mining.... in his mind.

Get a version of that running and you'll have the purest form of his vision. /s

P.S. - The only version of Linux that I run on my laptop is version 0.1 released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. It's the purest form of his original vision, the one true Linux. Everything else that came after is corrupt and a piece of shit.<sup>1

1 /s</sup>

It's all been down hill since tally sticks.

[B1tUnl0ck3r]

say what you want but the enemies of bitcoin are succeeding... in pivx world everyone knows which chain is the original and the clones are dying...

and when the sons and daughters of bitches who work for the so called free press will have their orders they will cheer the police when they come for our bitcoin...

it's a fucking and war, the one killing the others side the fastest win. that's it. 101.

[Ibian]

Segwit has been activated and implemented into bitcoin by normal consensus... therefore, if you support bitcoin, then you should be attempting to utilize and support its current and newest features... eg.. segwit... Keep a decent percentage of your coins on segwit addresses and using segwit features,...Ibian.    Get with the bitcoin program... modern bitcoin... not old bitcoin.

So "because you say so". That's not much of an argument. Besides being pretty pathetic.

Your segwit coins will be safe and sound on any fork that enforces the segwit rules. The only reason to be paranoid is if you believe a fork will be implemented that will not follow the segwit rules and instead treat the segwit transactions as anyonecanspend transaction, and you wish to have the option to participate in this hypothetical chain. You can also be extra paranoid, and make sure that you do not have any segwit tainted coins. But that new fork would have to basically force a reorg, to replay the old segwit transactions. The more & more blocks it would reorg would be more and more expensive to implement. This is the same principal that protects us from 51% attacks in the 1st place. If you want to HODL your coins in P2PKH (legacy) addresses and make sure you have no segwit tainted coins, you are free to do that. You just will not be able to participate in the lightning network and you will not enjoy the benefit of slightly cheaper fees that you enjoy with segwit.

The luddites destroyed looms because they thought they would get them killed.

Looms.

Bitcoin is a new step in money, orders of magnitude more disruptive than weaving machines. It's not paranoia, it's just basic historical knowledge. The amount of resources needed to carry out large scale attacks on the network of the type we have been talking about recently seems like a lot of money to us, but that doesn't mean that there isn't someone out there with enough money and inventive to do so. And a serious attempt will not be telegraphed in advance, it will just strike out of the blue. Given that the cost of insuring against such an event is... fifteen cents on the transfer... there simply is no good argument against doing so.

[B1tUnl0ck3r]

Segwit has been activated and implemented into bitcoin by normal consensus... therefore, if you support bitcoin, then you should be attempting to utilize and support its current and newest features... eg.. segwit... Keep a decent percentage of your coins on segwit addresses and using segwit features,...Ibian.    Get with the bitcoin program... modern bitcoin... not old bitcoin.

So "because you say so". That's not much of an argument. Besides being pretty pathetic.

Your segwit coins will be safe and sound on any fork that enforces the segwit rules. The only reason to be paranoid is if you believe a fork will be implemented that will not follow the segwit rules and instead treat the segwit transactions as anyonecanspend transaction, and you wish to have the option to participate in this hypothetical chain. You can also be extra paranoid, and make sure that you do not have any segwit tainted coins. But that new fork would have to basically force a reorg, to replay the old segwit transactions. The more & more blocks it would reorg would be more and more expensive to implement. This is the same principal that protects us from 51% attacks in the 1st place. If you want to HODL your coins in P2PKH (legacy) addresses and make sure you have no segwit tainted coins, you are free to do that. You just will not be able to participate in the lightning network and you will not enjoy the benefit of slightly cheaper fees that you enjoy with segwit.

The luddites destroyed looms because they thought they would get them killed.

Looms.

Bitcoin is a new step in money, orders of magnitude more disruptive than weaving machines. It's not paranoia, it's just basic historical knowledge. The amount of resources needed to carry out large scale attacks on the network of the type we have been talking about recently seems like a lot of money to us, but that doesn't mean that there isn't someone out there with enough money and inventive to do so. And a serious attempt will not be telegraphed in advance, it will just strike out of the blue. Given that the cost of insuring against such an event is... fifteen cents on the transfer... there simply is no good argument against doing so.

exactly... the pedophiles using division to make us fight against one another can't print them anymore to save their lives each time one of their members make a mistake revealing them.

they are in full on war against us. they will criminalize like they did for the gays, or the canabis growers or the cocaine user... then all the stupid carouzel cock riding bimbos will support those that will oppress us, as they will have the power.

we need an army paid in bitcoin capable of killing all the others armies in 1 shot.

[Maicol792]

Prediction Of The Week
Bitcoin Needs To Breakthrough $6,300 In Order To Rally, Says Fundstrat Analyst

Fundstrat’s Robert Slyumer believes that Bitcoin needs a short-term breakthrough at $6,300 in order to reverse its current downtrend. According to his analysis of Bitcoin’s 15-day moving average charts as of May 2018, Slyumer noted that the resistance level is $6,300 to $6,400, with a critical stop level at $5,800 to $5,800.

from: https://cointelegraph.com/news/hodler-s-digest-june-24-july-1-facebook-brings-back-crypto-ads-the-woz-calls-bitcoin-just-amazing