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

[xhomerx10]

Do people like these sentiment updates or are they dumb?

I like these sentiment updates, we need these rare on-topic posts

 We already have a sentiment indicator:  Rosewater Foundation  
He's more colourful, more accurate and much easier to read.

[1714028395]

1714028395

[1714028395]

1714028395

[1714028395]

1714028395

[d_eddie]

For what it is worth, here is the current chart I use for trading.  Current strategy is to attempt to open shorts at the orange down trend line.  The price at the moment has remained too low beneath the orange trendline so currently have no trades open (short from 28 September has been closed).  Support and resistance is too tightly packed for me to gain an acceptable risk/return on longs.  However a long position from $5,900 would be appealing.  

https://www.tradingview.com/chart/BTCUSD/xAc2kWDL-Bitcoin-USD-Downtrend-state-support-and-resistance-analysis/

What I'm doing now is I closed my shorts too and I'm left with a long btc position, suffering a bit. However, liquidation would be under 2k, so my play money is safe for the moment. I may decide to take a hit if we go under 4k, but I'd buy physical bitcoin before that.

On the sidelines, I opened and closed a few gambling shorts on BCH. The last has just been closed. I'll reopen if its head peeks above 0.083 btc again. Which might not happen in the near future. Or it could, depending on IPO proceedings or Jihan's needs. At any rate, I have to thank the bcashies for the feeble pump. Do it again please! Can you take it above 0.1 for a while? Thank you.

[d_eddie]

Do people like these sentiment updates or are they dumb?

I like these sentiment updates, we need these rare on-topic posts

 We already have a sentiment indicator:  Rosewater Foundation  
He's more colourful, more accurate and much easier to read.

Rosewater is too peaky. I'd like a smoother RW statistic, like RWMA50 or something.

[Rosewater Foundation]

Do people like these sentiment updates or are they dumb?

I like these sentiment updates, we need these rare on-topic posts

 We already have a sentiment indicator:  Rosewater Foundation  
He's more colourful, more accurate and much easier to read.

Alle Menschen werden Brüder
Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

Go das Bitcoin go.

[xhomerx10]

Do people like these sentiment updates or are they dumb?

I like these sentiment updates, we need these rare on-topic posts

 We already have a sentiment indicator:  Rosewater Foundation  
He's more colourful, more accurate and much easier to read.

Alle Menschen werden Brüder
Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

Go das Bitcoin go.

 A beautiful song inspired by beautiful poetry will always lift your spirits

https://youtu.be/XFX8S9aAgvw

 dang, I'm getting chills

[jojo69]

indeed it is, in fact, this coffee could use a little bourbon

[goldkingcoiner]

1d Bollinger Bands tighter than a catholic schoolgirl. But going by the CCI and MACD, we are going to outbreak into a dump. Im guessing to 6k~ish. Can't wait for the buy in again... Ugh. When is Bitcain finally going to go to 7k? The wait is killing moi.

[El duderino_]

^^
change gear and keep the drinking for weekends, CAUSE with this possible longtime sideways movements "livers could be in DANGER"

[bitserve]

Still, (I think) Bitcoin was not meant as a way to evade tax or capital controls but to be your own bank by having direct control of your money.

BTC might initially have had those former uses, but is steadily moving away from its experimental past, and that is a very big positive.

Regulations treating BTC as a mainstream asset, including AML and institutional KYC, are already essential at the fiat interface, but the treatment of transfers in crypto alone are a different question.

On one level, regulations about crypto transfers are defacto recognising it offically as money. That may not be a route that monetary authorities want to go down at present.

In most juristictions, all valuable assets are required to be registered in some way,and that usually is a positve in terms of ownership law and security. If BTC is outside that system it will always have a deficiency in terms of adoption and mainstream recognition.

I would envisage BTC and some other cryptos eventually coming within all of that, with most others remaining in the grey zone ,with the concomitant freedoms and also drawbacks of that status.




Surely the primary facet of cryptos (and the one for which BTC was born) is to provide a parallel monetary store and exchange system, as a refuge from the eventual insolvency of the current fiat regime ?


Over the long term, the free market should decide whether that is a worthy, recognised or necessary function.

The ability to evade tax and capital controls is just a consequence of being the sole owner of your money. I do agree that further incorporation of crypto into society and law is a good thing as long as no laws are made that attempt to disrupt the operation of the network or that interferes with obvious technical best practices.
I like your reasoning of providing a parallel monetary store and exchange system as the present system will surely implode at some point. Hopefully BTC and Lightning will be ready by then to support a switch.
To future generations this battle of fiat against crypto will appear the same as things like the french revolution, the rise of socialism and more egalitarian rights, the seperation of church and state, rise of the internet. All important steps in human development. A global and neutral form of hard money is just like that, once adopted we won't turn back.

All true. Yet the thing is that most countries have been during the past decade increasing regulations to basically leave "out of the system" any "unregistered" assets. Gone are the days where you could go with a briefcase full of cash and buy a house no questions asked. Now, whatever you use to buy it be it fiat, gold, others assets, crypto it has to pass AML/KYC controls and, in most cases, it even has to undergo a previous conversion to "BANKING" fiat (ie. no CASH fiat).

And the banking regulations are being hardened every day. Again, gone are the days where you could just deposit a briefcase full of cash into your bank account. Now every deposit over 3000€ needs to be fully explained. And if you think you can split it into multiple smaller deposits that's even worse as it could be considered structuring once/if detected.

So, yes, we can have our Bitcoin stash "undeclared" but when it comes to use/spend it to buy real state or almost anything of high value it basically have to pay whatever taxes are due. Same goes for capital controls... it is the high value purchase (ie: a house) in the other country what would be noticed not the transfer of the Bitcoins.

They don't really need new specific regulations to enforce taxes or capital control. The same applies to gold or whatever form of money. Bitcoin is no different here.

Bitcoin may lack the physical form of cash and gold which makes it virtually accesible to his owner anywhere in the world but when you spend it (other than trivial amounts, etc) it is when existing regulations come into place and become enforceable. There's no way to avoid that except, of course, for small daily spendings.

And it would be beneficial if the MSM stopped highlighting marginal scenarios in which crypto can be used for money laundering or evading tax/capital controls because it is just that: marginal. It's corporates and "smart" accounting what you really need to use for that, not any form of money... neither Bitcoin.

[infofront]

Still, (I think) Bitcoin was not meant as a way to evade tax or capital controls but to be your own bank by having direct control of your money.

BTC might initially have had those former uses, but is steadily moving away from its experimental past, and that is a very big positive.

Regulations treating BTC as a mainstream asset, including AML and institutional KYC, are already essential at the fiat interface, but the treatment of transfers in crypto alone are a different question.

On one level, regulations about crypto transfers are defacto recognising it offically as money. That may not be a route that monetary authorities want to go down at present.

In most juristictions, all valuable assets are required to be registered in some way,and that usually is a positve in terms of ownership law and security. If BTC is outside that system it will always have a deficiency in terms of adoption and mainstream recognition.

I would envisage BTC and some other cryptos eventually coming within all of that, with most others remaining in the grey zone ,with the concomitant freedoms and also drawbacks of that status.

Surely the primary facet of cryptos (and the one for which BTC was born) is to provide a parallel monetary store and exchange system, as a refuge from the eventual insolvency of the current fiat regime ?

Over the long term, the free market should decide whether that is a worthy, recognised or necessary function.

Bitcoin doesn't give a fuck what regulations we put on it. If it ever does, we'll just use Monero.

[d_eddie]

Bitcoin doesn't give a fuck what regulations we put on it. If it ever does, we'll just use Monero.

For crypto transfers, large or small, it's a good solution indeed. But if conversion to fiat is needed, it's back to KYC/AML one way or another.

[gembitz]

Still, (I think) Bitcoin was not meant as a way to evade tax or capital controls but to be your own bank by having direct control of your money.

BTC might initially have had those former uses, but is steadily moving away from its experimental past, and that is a very big positive.

Regulations treating BTC as a mainstream asset, including AML and institutional KYC, are already essential at the fiat interface, but the treatment of transfers in crypto alone are a different question.

On one level, regulations about crypto transfers are defacto recognising it offically as money. That may not be a route that monetary authorities want to go down at present.

In most juristictions, all valuable assets are required to be registered in some way,and that usually is a positve in terms of ownership law and security. If BTC is outside that system it will always have a deficiency in terms of adoption and mainstream recognition.

I would envisage BTC and some other cryptos eventually coming within all of that, with most others remaining in the grey zone ,with the concomitant freedoms and also drawbacks of that status.

Surely the primary facet of cryptos (and the one for which BTC was born) is to provide a parallel monetary store and exchange system, as a refuge from the eventual insolvency of the current fiat regime ?

Over the long term, the free market should decide whether that is a worthy, recognised or necessary function.

Bitcoin doesn't give a fuck what regulations we put on it. If it ever does, we'll just use Monero.

bitmonero is just a clone of bytecoin :-D bwaahaha

[bitserve]

Bitcoin doesn't give a fuck what regulations we put on it. If it ever does, we'll just use Monero.

For crypto transfers, large or small, it's a good solution indeed. But if conversion to fiat is needed, it's back to KYC/AML one way or another.

You can convert to fiat without passing KYC/AML. I mean, you could potentially find someone that gives you a briefcase full of cash fiat for your crypto no questions asked. But you have not laundered anything as you end up with an "out of the system" briefcase full of cash that you can use for your daily spending but not for making a high value purchase (real estate, lambo, stocks, etc) without laundering it first.

Crypto does not solve the laundering problem nor really helps in tax evading in a significant way.

[infofront]

Bitcoin doesn't give a fuck what regulations we put on it. If it ever does, we'll just use Monero.

For crypto transfers, large or small, it's a good solution indeed. But if conversion to fiat is needed, it's back to KYC/AML one way or another.

In several years, I'm hoping we won't need fiat conversion. But yeah, we're pretty much stuck in KYC/AML hell until then.

[d_eddie]

Bitcoin doesn't give a fuck what regulations we put on it. If it ever does, we'll just use Monero.

For crypto transfers, large or small, it's a good solution indeed. But if conversion to fiat is needed, it's back to KYC/AML one way or another.

In several years, I'm hoping we won't need fiat conversion. But yeah, we're pretty much stuck in KYC/AML hell until then.

I'm afraid once fiat conversion is unnecessary, they'll move the tracking to the actual goods, as they're already doing for assets with substantial value, e.g., cars, real estate etc - as pointed out several times in recent posts.

In other words:

Crypto does not solve the laundering problem nor really helps in tax evading in a significant way.

... but creative corporate accounting does. Boxes inside boxes, that kind of stuff.

[jojo69]

laws always work better for the ownership class

just make sure you land on the right side of the fence

[El duderino_]

via Imgflip Meme Generator

  LOL ,BCH what a Joke......

[ivomm]

This will be Rosewater and all weak hands look, when Bitcoin recovers and reaches new ATH's.

I know that 6 digit price looks impossible now, but in several years it WILL become reality. Bitcoin is here to stay, for sure. With more and more Bitcoin atm's, there will be no need to convert to fiat.

[Torque]

Mike Novogratz - making Bitcoin price predictions like a drunk Vinny Lingham 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/03/bitcoin-wont-top-9000-by-years-end-former-hedge-fund-legend-novogratz-says.html

These guys have absolutely no idea, just like the rest of us 

[pönde]

Bitcoin doesn't give a fuck what regulations we put on it. If it ever does, we'll just use Monero.

For crypto transfers, large or small, it's a good solution indeed. But if conversion to fiat is needed, it's back to KYC/AML one way or another.

You can convert to fiat without passing KYC/AML. I mean, you could potentially find someone that gives you a briefcase full of cash fiat for your crypto no questions asked. But you have not laundered anything as you end up with an "out of the system" briefcase full of cash that you can use for your daily spending but not for making a high value purchase (real estate, lambo, stocks, etc) without laundering it first.

Crypto does not solve the laundering problem nor really helps in tax evading in a significant way.

I think finally crypto will sneak in everyday trade and begin replace fiat. So need for krypto-fiat exchange will decline. First crypto will be used to buy un-tangible commodities like webhosting. Monero can already be used for it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/9kk8ar/you_can_now_buy_webhosting_with_monero/

Well, problems will arise if the secret police looks account book and finds out the crypto to be used. But when the systems like file sharing, computing, AI and such will begin to buy and sell resources with other such systems, using cryptos, while they are unable to handle the momentary heavy load, there is no need to give receipts or write anything to account book. So there is no way to get busted.

And these purchases between the systems can happen millions in every second and they will ultimately be so significant for the operation of technology that it is impossible to interfere with them. Mankind just depends too much of them. Too big to fail.

Also, people could buy resources from decentralized systems by crypto. Again. No receipts no account books. No way to get busted.

One of these kind on could be a decentralized twitter or reddit. People could pay for the system to store their message for some period of time. After that the message is destroyed. The max strorage time could be one month. That is long time enough to to brake down the corrupted power of centralized twitter and such. Also, this way the storage size will not increase for ever.

Are there any of this kind of a service available?