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

[HairyMaclairy]

I’m a bit disappointed that BTC hasn’t made a V shaped bottom yet.   

I don’t like how we are hanging around here with volume dropping off sharply.   

[cAPSLOCK]

No one is getting BCH symbol on Binance

Looks to me like BCash has given itself cancer.

[jojo69]

I’m a bit disappointed that BTC hasn’t made a V shaped bottom yet.   

I don’t like how we are hanging around here with volume dropping off sharply.   

it is lacking a certain snapback quality

another leg down methinks

[cAPSLOCK]

I’m a bit disappointed that BTC hasn’t made a V shaped bottom yet.   

I don’t like how we are hanging around here with volume dropping off sharply.   

Honeybadger got the flu...

He don't care.

[JayJuanGee]

Seems that you are getting pretty good at both hedging, but also not getting to greedy with your bets in order to stuff away funds and to also increase the size of your "playing" funds.

Regarding the leet, if you want to maintain your status, you cannot post anymore... You just have to keep editing old posts...

Otherwise, if you do post, you have to delete one post for every new post.

I don't let my play money grow geometrically. The excess gets periodically stashed away. That's how I was able to double up ~2.7 times - meaning s a 270% return, rather than 650%.

Leet: can't be bothered to preserve. Everything is temporary anyway.

P.S. You too are capable of palatable dryness, see?

How I currently feel about the PS portion of your response:

[marcus_of_augustus]

um, guys, I haven't really been following the big blocker nutjobs with their holy war, except by osmosis from excrement that gets flung around here .... can any one give me a run down of anything significant or relevant to bitcoin long term?

so far i've got ...

ConSatoshiWright is going to roger roger ver by not forking onto roger's fork
JihanCovert Asiic is then going to roger the both of them by ramming even bigger blocks and bad hash power into the orgy of holy war violence

jbear and others are fake reporting with innuendo, deception by omission and delusions from the front lines adding to the fog of the holy satoshi wars?

what about the calvinists? any head choppings or bloody inquisitions?

[marcus_of_augustus]

Looks to me like BCash has given itself cancer.

most cancers metastasize, Bcash was always a cancer it's just moving to the next phase.

[Hexah]

And it's all gone, babye BCH!

[marcus_of_augustus]

Bcash clown car towing a dumpster fire forking holy war?

[Icygreen]

Haha

[r1s2g3]

As I was expecting, anyone who bought BCH for the fork is getting dumped on. $384 and likely to make an ATL soon.
Guess someone's gotta hold the bags, smh

The pump funds had to come from somewhere? Maybe it was artificial and the bitches over at the BCH teams recouped their funds via btc dumping?

I am wondering, if each party planning to dump each other coins to show their supremacy and will bring price to dust.

[PoolMinor]

Looks like a lot of bullshit, and also misleading to equate "power" to miners and mining.  We already learned from the UASF that power in bitcoin (likely also to be true in bcash) is more distributed than just miners being able to dictate outcome, and the most powerful players, overall are the users.. so they can play their little games and try to suggest that miners are all powerful, when they do not have as much power as the misleaders like to propagandize to be the case.

All the UASF did was give the miners motivation to do what the users wanted. If most of the miners decided to ignore it, the UASF would not have gone anywhere. A chain on the Bitcoin Blockchain cannot advance without at least a few miners cooperating. It also testifies to the fact that although some people complain that BTC mining is overly centralized, none of the miners were willing to risk that they would end up being a lone wolf and have their blocks orphaned. It is clear the miners are still in a healthy competition rather than colluding with one another.

Maybe that is part of my point?  You are not going to get 100% of the miners, and even if you get 51%, then what?  Rules are going to change based on 51%?  I don't think so.  In other words, the true resilience of users versus miners has NOT been tested out, yet, and miners did not want to go there.. like you said, which kind of supports my point that incentives are aligned in such a way that the costs of deviating from users may well be way too much for the miners to attempt to test out.

The blockchain can exist without users but cannot exist without miners!

[Hexah]

As I was expecting, anyone who bought BCH for the fork is getting dumped on. $384 and likely to make an ATL soon.
Guess someone's gotta hold the bags, smh

The pump funds had to come from somewhere? Maybe it was artificial and the bitches over at the BCH teams recouped their funds via btc dumping?

I am wondering, if each party planning to dump each other coins to show their supremacy and will bring price to dust.

I wonder if it's on faketoshis coin, but on ABC I am still in neutral.

Well, let's see, if they drop on their daily volumes in few days an imminent crush might gonna happen and they will be the eminent fork in the history of crypto.

Look at their differences and draw some conclusions.

[JayJuanGee]

Looks like a lot of bullshit, and also misleading to equate "power" to miners and mining.  We already learned from the UASF that power in bitcoin (likely also to be true in bcash) is more distributed than just miners being able to dictate outcome, and the most powerful players, overall are the users.. so they can play their little games and try to suggest that miners are all powerful, when they do not have as much power as the misleaders like to propagandize to be the case.

All the UASF did was give the miners motivation to do what the users wanted. If most of the miners decided to ignore it, the UASF would not have gone anywhere. A chain on the Bitcoin Blockchain cannot advance without at least a few miners cooperating. It also testifies to the fact that although some people complain that BTC mining is overly centralized, none of the miners were willing to risk that they would end up being a lone wolf and have their blocks orphaned. It is clear the miners are still in a healthy competition rather than colluding with one another.

Maybe that is part of my point?  You are not going to get 100% of the miners, and even if you get 51%, then what?  Rules are going to change based on 51%?  I don't think so.  In other words, the true resilience of users versus miners has NOT been tested out, yet, and miners did not want to go there.. like you said, which kind of supports my point that incentives are aligned in such a way that the costs of deviating from users may well be way too much for the miners to attempt to test out.

The blockchain can exist without users but cannot exist without miners!

I doubt that your attempt to extract out certain pieces, and then trying to argue your logic after those kinds of extractions is going to lead you to a correct answer....   You can believe what you want.  I already said that it seems that experience has already shown us, including the UASF that incentives are going to push in a direction NOT to kill the golden goose.

I will concede, on the other hand, that all possible scenarios have not yet been tested, but we have a dynamic system and players who respond to other players, so when you try to make an extreme example, like you did with the extraction of certain players, you are creating such an artificial situation that is not going to happen in real life, because in real life you are going to find incremental responses that might either dull or exacerbate a situation - yet in the end, it seems that bitcoin has already established a very strong set of incentives and counter incentives, and those incentives are going to continue to be tweaked with the passage of time... and in the meantime, as investors we can continue to monitor the situation and decide whether we are losing confidence in our investment or whether we need to modify our own behavior in regards to the the direction that we see the incentives going (to the extent that we can see material changes that are significant to us, individually). 

[JimboToronto]

Holy moley Bitcoinland.  

I've been without the internet since going out to the jungle a few days ago. Dude was working on fixing the service as I was leaving to go to the city for my delayed dental implant surgery today. Just woke up from the aftereffects from the anesthesia and logged on at the hotel.

Yowzer. Seems we had the big dip some people were waiting for... currently $5638USD/$7422CAD (Bitcoinaverage).

I'm glad I was able to pay for my surgery (around 3 coins) while I could still get over $8kCAD/btc including fees. Got an extra kiss when the dentist offered to wait until May for the $8.7kUSD that I was going to pay him with one of my credit cards  that was refused, despite having a $10k+CAD credit balance.

As is it, I now have 16 fresh new implants in my face and instead of having to sell some Bitcoin to pay off the credit card when I head back up north, I'll have enough spare cash to buy some coins while the price is still low, and I won't have to sell any more coins until May when I finally get zirconia "Hollywood" teeth. Life is good.

Unfortuneately it seems I'm eliminated from Micgoosens' bottom-price-by-the-new-year game. Oh well. Win some lose some.

[bitserve]

It is interesting how close to a BTC difficulty change the BCH fork and hash battle is occurring however. Provocative.

Yes.  What a coincidence.  Go figure.

Even more provocative - ABC seems to be kept alive due to a black_hat/white_knight act of Roger. He has redirected 4 EHash of power on the Bitcoin.com pool from BTC to BCH.

Spicy!

Wait, are you trying to tell me that CSW's whole plan relied on Roger sitting by idly looking at his pool mining BTC while all of his work and savings in Bcash are destroyed because there wasn't enough hash to support Bcash?

Of course not, silly. I'm merely forwarding actual information not yet entered into discourse here. What is _your_ contribution?

Though an autocratic redirection of BTC pool power without assent of all participants is kind of interesting in its own right.

More info in the Bitcoin Cash thread.

The "small" hashrate redirected by ANTMINER is probably their own. Bitcoin.com can redirect the hashrate at will as stated on its TOS AND also clearly publicly announced its intention to do so. We could try to argue about the details, the ethics or whatever... but in the end he (Ver?) did it because he CAN.

Everything went as (probably) expected and there were no surprises... obvious suspected bluffs from Wright side became factual bluffs.

[DaRude]

It is interesting how close to a BTC difficulty change the BCH fork and hash battle is occurring however. Provocative.

Yes.  What a coincidence.  Go figure.

Even more provocative - ABC seems to be kept alive due to a black_hat/white_knight act of Roger. He has redirected 4 EHash of power on the Bitcoin.com pool from BTC to BCH.

Spicy!

Wait, are you trying to tell me that CSW's whole plan relied on Roger sitting by idly looking at his pool mining BTC while all of his work and savings in Bcash are destroyed because there wasn't enough hash to support Bcash?

Of course not, silly. I'm merely forwarding actual information not yet entered into discourse here. What is _your_ contribution?

Though an autocratic redirection of BTC pool power without assent of all participants is kind of interesting in its own right.

More info in the Bitcoin Cash thread.

The "small" hashrate redirected by ANTMINER is probably their own. Bitcoin.com can redirect the hashrate at will as stated on its TOS AND also clearly publicly announced its intention to do so. We could try to argue about the details, the ethics or whatever... but in the end he (Ver?) did it because he CAN.

Everything went as (probably) expected and there were no surprises... obvious suspected bluffs from Wright side became factual bluffs.

Only a blind wouldn't expect that. In other breaking news, the sun has came up from the east today and appears to be settling in the west, more details at your 10o'clock news hosted by jbreher!

Anyone can show some numbers on how much it's costing CSW per day to keep that hash power on SV chain?

[bitserve]

It is interesting how close to a BTC difficulty change the BCH fork and hash battle is occurring however. Provocative.

Yes.  What a coincidence.  Go figure.

Even more provocative - ABC seems to be kept alive due to a black_hat/white_knight act of Roger. He has redirected 4 EHash of power on the Bitcoin.com pool from BTC to BCH.

Spicy!

Wait, are you trying to tell me that CSW's whole plan relied on Roger sitting by idly looking at his pool mining BTC while all of his work and savings in Bcash are destroyed because there wasn't enough hash to support Bcash?

Of course not, silly. I'm merely forwarding actual information not yet entered into discourse here. What is _your_ contribution?

Though an autocratic redirection of BTC pool power without assent of all participants is kind of interesting in its own right.

More info in the Bitcoin Cash thread.

The "small" hashrate redirected by ANTMINER is probably their own. Bitcoin.com can redirect the hashrate at will as stated on its TOS AND also clearly publicly announced its intention to do so. We could try to argue about the details, the ethics or whatever... but in the end he (Ver?) did it because he CAN.

Everything went as (probably) expected and there were no surprises... obvious suspected bluffs from Wright side became factual bluffs.

Only a blind wouldn't expect that. In other breaking news, the sun has came up from the east today and appears to be settling in the west, more details at your 10o'clock news hosted by jbreher!

Anyone can show some numbers on how much it's costing CSW per day to keep that hash power on SV chain?

As a ballpark figure straight from my ass (could be as much as one order of magnitude off) I would say around $1 million a day. Not much..... And it is probably coming from Calvin's pocket mostly not CSW.

Unlike CSW, Calvin already left the door open to join the largest chain. The most probable outcome is that he will announce defeat in the next hours/days if SV keeps dropping in price and become economically unsustainable for him.

[P_Shep]

I have 0.00000212 BAB *AND* BSV now. (leftover on bitfinix from dumping my BCH)

Can I buy an island?

[DaRude]

It is interesting how close to a BTC difficulty change the BCH fork and hash battle is occurring however. Provocative.

Yes.  What a coincidence.  Go figure.

Even more provocative - ABC seems to be kept alive due to a black_hat/white_knight act of Roger. He has redirected 4 EHash of power on the Bitcoin.com pool from BTC to BCH.

Spicy!

Wait, are you trying to tell me that CSW's whole plan relied on Roger sitting by idly looking at his pool mining BTC while all of his work and savings in Bcash are destroyed because there wasn't enough hash to support Bcash?

Of course not, silly. I'm merely forwarding actual information not yet entered into discourse here. What is _your_ contribution?

Though an autocratic redirection of BTC pool power without assent of all participants is kind of interesting in its own right.

More info in the Bitcoin Cash thread.

The "small" hashrate redirected by ANTMINER is probably their own. Bitcoin.com can redirect the hashrate at will as stated on its TOS AND also clearly publicly announced its intention to do so. We could try to argue about the details, the ethics or whatever... but in the end he (Ver?) did it because he CAN.

Everything went as (probably) expected and there were no surprises... obvious suspected bluffs from Wright side became factual bluffs.

Only a blind wouldn't expect that. In other breaking news, the sun has came up from the east today and appears to be settling in the west, more details at your 10o'clock news hosted by jbreher!

Anyone can show some numbers on how much it's costing CSW per day to keep that hash power on SV chain?

As a ballpark figure straight from my ass (could be as much as one order of magnitude off) I would say around $1 million a day. Not much..... And it is probably coming from Calvin's pocket mostly not CSW.

Unlike CSW, Calvin already left the door open to join the largest chain. The most probable outcome is that he will announce defeat in the next hours/days if SV keeps dropping in price and become economically unsustainable for him.

I'm getting a bit less than that. Before the fork bcash was trading at ~$450 so mining 1800 bch/day puts it at around $810k, so to 51% would require $405k, but looks like the hash rate doubled since they started the race, so that puts him back at around $810k/day.

Or to go about it the different way whats the going rate per exahash?