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

[JayJuanGee]

^IMO Gentlemand is probably the #1 garbage poster in this thread.  He has some dumb Howard Stern routine where he just says deranged, Jewish pornographic industry type stuff over and over.  The purpose of Howard Stern is  just to try and cause moral decay and collapse of the civilization he spams.  Standard Protocols of the Elders of Zion BS.  Odds of Gentlemand being a kike are pretty high.  If not he's an idiot and just emulates them for no reason and doesn't even know what he's doing.

You are on a roll, roach.

Seems to be a strategy, just drop names to get some attention.   

[Last of the V8s]

https://twitter.com/ProofofResearch/status/1090527731278852096
he's on a crusade that guy that did the quadriga report


also hd wallets are stupid

[realr0ach]

https://twitter.com/ProofofResearch/status/1090527731278852096
he's on a crusade that guy that did the quadriga report

Wait, that post says:

"3. Bitfinex has not honored withdrawals for MONTHS. "

Is this true?  I haven't kept up with the completely fraudulent scam exchange known as Bitfinex lately.

[JayJuanGee]

I am a little bothered by the way some bitcoin folks have perverted the original statement that really came from Ronald Reagan, which was "trust but verify."  The current bitcoin maximalist statement that is circulating around, including coming frequently out of the mouth of Max Hillerand is "don't trust verify," which to me says something quite different from the "original": "trust but verify."

Entirely agree. You can easily trust someone, because you verify.

I think the phrase is ok. Using Bitcoin you don't need to trust, you just verify. Persons, you trust... but verify just in case you need to remove that trust.

I mean, I don't trust you sent me a tx.... I just verify you in fact did. There's no trusting needed there, just directly verifying.

I don't really have a problem with the statement, "don't trust, verify" - especially when it comes to bitcoin matters.  I am just a bit bothered by the possible perversion of a historical reference of the Reagan statement of "trust but verify" that meant something else in that other context (in which he was referring to his talks with then Russian leaders).  So, perhaps I am just being too picky, merely because of the different historical origins of that particular statement.

[HairyMaclairy]

https://twitter.com/ProofofResearch/status/1090527731278852096
he's on a crusade that guy that did the quadriga report


also hd wallets are stupid

I better pull that 1 ETH that I still have on Bitifinex off... 


Care to expand re HD wallets?

[JayJuanGee]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6661167/1-American-killed-1-injured-gunmen-Acapulco.html
A sad business, crypto-anarcho related, but too cloud-cuckooland in the end.

From the description in the article, it seems that the John Galt that got shot and killed is the same one who is fairly famous in the bitcoin community (including being a guest on podcasts).  For example, when he attended the anarchopulco conference, there was a recent one (I believe either late 2017 or early 2018) in which he debated several bcash supporters, and Galt was the only bitcoin maximalist defending the bitcoin position against the bcashers.

[JayJuanGee]

Hm?  I wonder whether my posts or your posts would be measured as more valuable for society?  Since I tend to attempt to be helpful and to be honest with information

Your posts are self serving lies to try and hype a pump and dump scam you're invested in.  I've already spelled out how all this stuff works in this thread where any caveman or child can understand it and you know none of your lies hold up weight to that truth yet you still spam the lies over and over.  This is why I'm not a shitcoiner.  I'm not able to sit here in your circle jerk of lies like some demon from the 9th planes of hell where everything out of your mouth is false.

Oh my!!!!!

[yefi]

Peter Vessenes is such an incredible a..ho.e .  claiming 25% of btc marketcap, what a shitshow.

It's almost like he's trying to be openly obtuse. The Japanese court ought to instantly reject these claims, but the incredibly bureaucratic nature of things probably means claimants will be waiting years now.

So the plot thickens. Apparently, under Japanese law standard practice is to accord 50% voting rights to rejected claims. That means CoinLab would hold majority voting rights and could veto CR taking everyone back to bankruptcy. It has been suggested that this may be a means for Vessenes to extract a favourable settlement for his claims which he knows stand on weak ground.

[realr0ach]

That economy though:

[yefi]

Apart from the one idea about attempting to spend as many bitcoins as possible before death, there's going to be a lot of this loss of coins through death happening, which is a little bit problematic for intergenerational maintenance and passing down of value... even though the overall loss of coins is bullish on the BTC price due to increased scarcity.

It's a dilemma. Do you relinquish control and permit your funds to be spent without your express permission, or do you maintain that control but recognise that your stash will die with you.

[HairyMaclairy]

Peter Vessenes is such an incredible a..ho.e .  claiming 25% of btc marketcap, what a shitshow.

It's almost like he's trying to be openly obtuse. The Japanese court ought to instantly reject these claims, but the incredibly bureaucratic nature of things probably means claimants will be waiting years now.

So the plot thickens. Apparently, under Japanese law standard practice is to accord 50% voting rights to rejected claims. That means CoinLab would hold majority voting rights and could veto CR taking everyone back to bankruptcy. It has been suggested that this may be a means for Vessenes to extract a favourable settlement for his claims which he knows stand on weak ground.

Vessenes claim is for damages for breach of a local agent licensing agreement for a bankrupt exchange.

It would be more accurate to say that Vessenes’ claim is utterly worthless.

[HairyMaclairy]

Apart from the one idea about attempting to spend as many bitcoins as possible before death, there's going to be a lot of this loss of coins through death happening, which is a little bit problematic for intergenerational maintenance and passing down of value... even though the overall loss of coins is bullish on the BTC price due to increased scarcity.

It's a dilemma. Do you relinquish control and permit your funds to be spent without your express permission, or do you maintain that control but recognise that your stash will die with you.

You generally shouldn’t try to control things from beyond the grave (notable exceptions being dependent vulnerables such as children who cannot make their own decisions or pets)

Make up too many stupid rules and it just ends up getting litigated.

[bitserve]

Peter Vessenes is such an incredible a..ho.e .  claiming 25% of btc marketcap, what a shitshow.

It's almost like he's trying to be openly obtuse. The Japanese court ought to instantly reject these claims, but the incredibly bureaucratic nature of things probably means claimants will be waiting years now.

So the plot thickens. Apparently, under Japanese law standard practice is to accord 50% voting rights to rejected claims. That means CoinLab would hold majority voting rights and could veto CR taking everyone back to bankruptcy. It has been suggested that this may be a means for Vessenes to extract a favourable settlement for his claims which he knows stand on weak ground.

Are you sure it is not to 50% of ACCEPTED claims as everywhere else in the world?

[smartcomet]

you had 50 btc but gambled it away buying shitcoins?  and you still want to keep the shitcoins? imho hodl refers to bitcoin, not to shitcoins.

Actually, no, I "earned" 50 BTC worth of shitcoins (well, I don't consider them shitcoins, but whatever) ... my mistake was not cashing them out to BTC when I had the chance, and in hindsight, cashing out those BTC to fiat (maybe some, not all) so that I can live comfortably for a couple years, and then find a normie job without worrying about the future. (50 BTC was $1m USD back in Jan 2018? Something like that.)

And continue to earn or hodl everything.

But hey, no one's perfect. Either learn from your mistakes, or learn from other's mistakes. Still think they were pretty good bets.

A bitcoin would help so much, I'm not going homeless, and I've got a family to keep warm.

Thanks for sharing.

In the end, you win some you lose some in this game.

I won a lot and lost a lot. I cashed out a lot when BTC was 1100$ and bought a (now the most expensive in the world) Ducati. Even tho that could have been a Ducati AND a Lambo I still don't regret that decision.

I sold 1200 ETH which I got by mining form the very start and by daytrading at a good profit. But in hindsight....

I had a nice Dash masternode purring. Sold it for a good profit, but in hindsight....

I had 98.5 BTC at my top. Now I only have a fraction

What I learned was:
- Take some profit now and then and enjoy that. That can never be taken away.
- Be patient
- Don't trade when there are emotions involved

So, some valuable lessons, a great adventure, and some nice spoils of war. Not what it could've been but I'm very happy.

This year I'm saving and trying to rebuild a decent stash of BTC as much as that is possible. Having more then one whole BTC is a win in my book already.

One’s wealth meets one’s ability.

When one gained or lost some wealth, one is only lucky or unlucky.

The ability includes financial knowledge, understanding people and human nature, understanding history and so on. When one masters the ability, one can know the world in a high vision.

[HairyMaclairy]

Peter Vessenes is such an incredible a..ho.e .  claiming 25% of btc marketcap, what a shitshow.

It's almost like he's trying to be openly obtuse. The Japanese court ought to instantly reject these claims, but the incredibly bureaucratic nature of things probably means claimants will be waiting years now.

So the plot thickens. Apparently, under Japanese law standard practice is to accord 50% voting rights to rejected claims. That means CoinLab would hold majority voting rights and could veto CR taking everyone back to bankruptcy. It has been suggested that this may be a means for Vessenes to extract a favourable settlement for his claims which he knows stand on weak ground.

Are you sure it is not to 50% of ACCEPTED claims as everywhere else in the world?

Supposedly it is 100% of accepted claims and 50% of disputed claims.  

Japanese bankruptcy processes are not as sophisticated as in the West. For starters, you aren’t supposed to go bankrupt. Loss of face and all that.

[bitserve]

Peter Vessenes is such an incredible a..ho.e .  claiming 25% of btc marketcap, what a shitshow.

It's almost like he's trying to be openly obtuse. The Japanese court ought to instantly reject these claims, but the incredibly bureaucratic nature of things probably means claimants will be waiting years now.

So the plot thickens. Apparently, under Japanese law standard practice is to accord 50% voting rights to rejected claims. That means CoinLab would hold majority voting rights and could veto CR taking everyone back to bankruptcy. It has been suggested that this may be a means for Vessenes to extract a favourable settlement for his claims which he knows stand on weak ground.

Are you sure it is not to 50% of ACCEPTED claims as everywhere else in the world?

Supposedly it is 100% of accepted claims and 50% of disputed claims.  

Japanese bankruptcy processes are not as sophisticated as in the West. For starters, you aren’t supposed to go bankrupt. Loss of face and all that.

oh I see what you mean now. I thought it was about the majority of (approved) creditors (50%) had in any important decision being voted.

Anyway, it is stupid.... I remember there was some guy that claimed a couple trillion or something like that. Surely rejected but.... now he has the majority of voting rights? Ridiculous.

[JayJuanGee]

Apart from the one idea about attempting to spend as many bitcoins as possible before death, there's going to be a lot of this loss of coins through death happening, which is a little bit problematic for intergenerational maintenance and passing down of value... even though the overall loss of coins is bullish on the BTC price due to increased scarcity.

It's a dilemma. Do you relinquish control and permit your funds to be spent without your express permission, or do you maintain that control but recognise that your stash will die with you.

You generally shouldn’t try to control things from beyond the grave (notable exceptions being dependent vulnerables such as children who cannot make their own decisions or pets)

Make up too many stupid rules and it just ends up getting litigated.

Note that Yefi is not referring to what a guy (or gal) does after being dead, but instead trying to figure out what to do before dying, in terms of putting that information out there that could end up being compromised (spent without your permission).

[HairyMaclairy]

Now would be an appropriate time to put pressure on Vessenes by other means.  Lean on his board of directors and VCs.  Organize a boycott of New Alchemy. Go after the ICOs on his platform.

Not that it’s anything to do with me.  Not my dog in the fight.

[HairyMaclairy]

Apart from the one idea about attempting to spend as many bitcoins as possible before death, there's going to be a lot of this loss of coins through death happening, which is a little bit problematic for intergenerational maintenance and passing down of value... even though the overall loss of coins is bullish on the BTC price due to increased scarcity.

It's a dilemma. Do you relinquish control and permit your funds to be spent without your express permission, or do you maintain that control but recognise that your stash will die with you.

You generally shouldn’t try to control things from beyond the grave (notable exceptions being dependent vulnerables such as children who cannot make their own decisions or pets)

Make up too many stupid rules and it just ends up getting litigated.

Note that Yefi is not referring to what a guy (or gal) does after being dead, but instead trying to figure out what to do before dying, in terms of putting that information out there that could end up being compromised (spent without your permission).

The article was talking about a multi-sig deadman’s switch but ok, my comment was misplaced.

I feel that if you can’t find people in your life that you can trust with your life savings then you need to work on your relationships.  Appreciate those in unstable marriages may disagree but that’s kinda the point.

[bitserve]

Apart from the one idea about attempting to spend as many bitcoins as possible before death, there's going to be a lot of this loss of coins through death happening, which is a little bit problematic for intergenerational maintenance and passing down of value... even though the overall loss of coins is bullish on the BTC price due to increased scarcity.

It's a dilemma. Do you relinquish control and permit your funds to be spent without your express permission, or do you maintain that control but recognise that your stash will die with you.

You generally shouldn’t try to control things from beyond the grave (notable exceptions being dependent vulnerables such as children who cannot make their own decisions or pets)

Make up too many stupid rules and it just ends up getting litigated.

Note that Yefi is not referring to what a guy (or gal) does after being dead, but instead trying to figure out what to do before dying, in terms of putting that information out there that could end up being compromised (spent without your permission).

The article was talking about a multi-sig deadman’s switch but ok, my comment was misplaced.

I feel that if you can’t find people in your life that you can trust with your life savings then you need to work on your relationships.  Appreciate those in unstable marriages may disagree but that’s kinda the point.

Trust is never completely absolute (people can even lose their mind and turn into a completely different person - I have unfortunately witnessed that). I chose to give some persons I trust, enough info so that they could recover my stash by working together (plus some effort). If "they" decided to betray me... well, not only I am confident enough that won't happen.... they should also better kill me as part their plan.

It's not that much money anyways... currently.

Anyways, if JJG doesn't trust some else enough... then I guess that he has no reason to leave anything to anyone. So no problem there.