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

[jbreher]

Coinbase, Binance, Goldman, And Other Big Crypto Players Met Behind Closed Doors To Discuss The Future Of Crypto

https://www.investinblockchain.com/coinbase-binance-goldman-other-big-crypto-players-met-behind-closed-doors-to-discuss-future-crypto/

oh. yay. derivatives. More tools for the pinstriped bandit class.

[1575560119]

1575560119

[1575560119]

1575560119

[ðºÞæ]

And Roger reinventing the wheel, going back in time and counts cash
https://youtu.be/34kHTtsJv70
https://bitcoincashnotes.com/

[jbreher]

This is under the assumption that the block size wouldn't grow when needed, blocks aren't full without outside attacks so there's no evidence that when the time comes we won't increase the block size to a common sense size.

Well, other than the evidence that blocks were kept small the last time they became persistently full. Which, in itself, is pretty strong evidence.

Once the need resurfaces (and it most certainly will), how long do you think it will take to implement the necessary change?

That was a short spam attack period, you know damn well that was artificial and everyone knew it.

Irony of the recent brouhaha over the definition of 'artificial' is duly noted.

Natural ... artificial ... what does it matter? Effect is the same. It's a vulnerability. An open attack vector if artificial. A suicide if natural.

[_javier_]

Craig Wright Dubs Binance a ‘Money-Laundering Bucketshop’, Calls John McAfee a Conman

https://www.ccn.com/craig-wright-binance-bucketshop-john-mcafee-a-conman

https://youtu.be/8_SoIXUBIhw

"You have things like CZ (Changpeng Zhao, Binance CEO) there and Binance which is super bucket shop which are basically money laundering organizations. They wash trades and money laundering. That’s how they make money."

disgusting interview of a disgusting actor.

middle finger to you too, "Doctor"

[jbreher]

This is under the assumption that the block size wouldn't grow when needed, blocks aren't full without outside attacks so there's no evidence that when the time comes we won't increase the block size to a common sense size.

Well, other than the evidence that blocks were kept small the last time they became persistently full. Which, in itself, is pretty strong evidence.

Once the need resurfaces (and it most certainly will), how long do you think it will take to implement the necessary change?

That was a short spam attack period, you know damn well that was artificial and everyone knew it.

Yes, I remember people posting the addresses of the spammers at the time. That's the good thing about 1mb blocks, spamming gets expensive.

Big blocks are a disaster if there isn't sufficient utility. Say you had 32 MB blocks and only < 2 MB of actual traffic. Someone could easily spam 28 MB per block for peanuts. Sustained over 1 day: 4032 MB of garbage for almost free. Good idea indeed.

You seem to be postulating some novel mechanism by which one can examine each transaction, and classify it as spam vs. notspam. Care to divulge your criteria?

[jbreher]

Hoan Kiem Lake is famous because a turtle god lives in it that gave the Vietnamese emperor a sword to fight off Chinese invaders.

Listen -- strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. ... Well you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
 - Dennis

[siggy_77]

I plan selling 50% of my Bitcoins. Was thinking to do that @$50k per coin. What do you guys think? Hold a bit longer and see where it goes?

I think 50K is pretty conservative

Depends.. when did you make the decision to sell at 50K? ... Did you come up with this plan while you were calm, rational, and not under the influence of FOMO, hopium, or any other mind altering condition?  

IF so, then you should follow your plan.

If not, then you should immediately stop reading WO, and any other bitcoin news for at least a week.  DO NOT look at the price for a week.  Completely disengage all contact from all things crypto for at least a week.  Then sit down, and calmly review your plans.  Decide a reasonable go forward plan with various sell points.  Never go full fiat (always plan on keeping at least a small BTC stash)  Once you have a plan, stick to it.

In short:  DO NOT make decisions based on FOMO.

[d_eddie]

You seem to be postulating some novel mechanism by which one can examine each transaction, and classify it as spam vs. notspam. Care to divulge your criteria?

We've been over this already haven't we.

Type 1. Legit transaction. The actor needs to move funds because the funds are needed to be elsewhere.

Type 2. Spam transaction. The actor wants to move funds for other collateral effects, such as clogging the queue.

I admit there is no easy criterion to tell one from the other onchain, after the fact.

Keeping blocks small shifts the balance in favor of Type 1, preventively.

[kingcolex]

And “resurfaces” is the wrong term as it implies that the need has previously surfaced, which it has not.  The need may never surface.

You've already banished it from your revisionist history?

There were some high fees in 2017. There was no need for a block size increase as demonstrated by the failure of BCH.

If it was “necessary”, BCH would have won. 

The result was a BTC dominance drop from an overwhelming ~85% to abut half. Are you prepared for a drop to about a quarter next time the stream is blocked? You're whistling past your own graveyard.

you're correlation isn't based on that, more so you had a huge campaign by altcoins including Bcash trying to sway investors and say shitcoins is going to be the next Bitcoin and overtake. I heard it over and over and over.

[kingcolex]

This is under the assumption that the block size wouldn't grow when needed, blocks aren't full without outside attacks so there's no evidence that when the time comes we won't increase the block size to a common sense size.

Well, other than the evidence that blocks were kept small the last time they became persistently full. Which, in itself, is pretty strong evidence.

Once the need resurfaces (and it most certainly will), how long do you think it will take to implement the necessary change?

That was a short spam attack period, you know damn well that was artificial and everyone knew it.

Irony of the recent brouhaha over the definition of 'artificial' is duly noted.

Natural ... artificial ... what does it matter? Effect is the same. It's a vulnerability. An open attack vector if artificial. A suicide if natural.

Funny, Roger had a win win with his attack to his followers, Bitcoin increases blocksize and shows it was indeed needing to have larger blocks (which then are filled with nonsense and can push nodes off) or it shows need for larger blocks like Bcash.

In reality all it did was show the reason the real Satoshi dropped the blocksize, spam attacks. The idea of increasing an attack vector because it makes you feel warm and fuzzy isn't smart. We haven't seen a natural rise to size limit yet, so no reason to falsely give death sentences without known outcome or possible adaptations.

[jbreher]

You seem to be postulating some novel mechanism by which one can examine each transaction, and classify it as spam vs. notspam. Care to divulge your criteria?

We've been over this already haven't we.

Type 1. Legit transaction. The actor needs to move funds because the funds are needed to be elsewhere.

Type 2. Spam transaction. The actor wants to move funds for other collateral effects, such as clogging the queue.

I admit there is no easy criterion to tell one from the other onchain, after the fact.

QFT.

Keeping blocks small shifts the balance in favor of Type 1, preventively.

By what mechanism?

[Febo]

Well I double checked, for what it is worth.
IF you think you spotted some errors you can double check all the relevant code here:
https://github.com/100trillionUSD/bitcoin

I see his flaw. "Bitcoin currently have a stock of 17.5m"   Then he uses this 17.5m as that was stock in 2012 and 2016 and 2020 and 2024 and 2028.

[becoin]

Craig Wright Dubs Binance a ‘Money-Laundering Bucketshop’

Too bad.
Even bucketshops are delisting CSW's coin.

[fillippone]

Well I double checked, for what it is worth.
IF you think you spotted some errors you can double check all the relevant code here:
https://github.com/100trillionUSD/bitcoin

I see his flaw. "Bitcoin currently have a stock of 17.5m"   Then he uses this 17.5m as that was stock in 2012 and 2016 and 2020 and 2024 and 2028.

Negative.
For past analysis he uses historical BTC supply, for future, projected one.

Two evidences for that:
1. In the coloured graph, SF data between halvings change every month, so by construction stock cannot be the same, montly,  let alone from 2012 to 2012 and beyond.
2. In the Github there's an excel where you can check he uses historically accurate suplly for all the calculations.

[VB1001]

Hats gallery finished !!!

Link imgur, click on the image to see it bigger > https://i.imgur.com/C9GMQVu.jpg

Thanks for your time and dedication, xhomerx10  

[kenzawak]

Hey guys, so I'm in Mexico City today.
This time, I didn't look for any ATMs or places that would accept BTC as payment.
But I wanted to try something I heard about.
Here they have a convenience store called Oxxo, kinda like 7-Eleven in the US. They are everywhere.
The cool thing is you can deposit cash there, cash that will be transferred in seconds to a crypto exchange. I used Bitso, the most popular one in Mexico.
All you gotta do is register on Bitso, ask to fund your account in Mexican Pesos. Then they send you a text with a code. You go to an Oxxo with that code, show it to the cashier and give him the amount of cash you wanna deposit. The minimum per day is 10 pesos (about 50 cents), the maximum is 5000 (around $250). There is a 2,6% fee + tax + fee at the store (total for me was 2,9%).
So I deposited 1500 MXN Pesos, had to pay 12 more Pesos to the cashier, got a receit for the transaction, walked two minutes back to my hotel and checked my account. There was 1456,50 MXN Pesos on it. I'll trade them for BTC and then withdraw it all to one of my regular addresses. No KYC is needed.
So any time you got a bit of cash in your pockets (even coins), you can do this. Pretty cool if you ask me.

[kenzawak]

A few more pics of where I am :











Oh and I also saw this yesterday. The ticket cost only 70 Pesos, which is about $4 ! The movie was good but I was a bit disappointed with what they did with some of the characters (Hulk & Thor). I know they wanted more comedy but I think they failed there.

[VB1001]

Bakkt Acquires Crypto Custodian, Partners With BNY Mellon on Key Storage

Pending bitcoin futures exchange Bakkt has acquired the Digital Asset Custody Company (DACC), secured insurance for assets it will hold in cold storage and revealed a partnership with BNY Mellon.

Adam White, the former Coinbase executive turned Bakkt COO, wrote in a blog post Monday that it acquired DACC to continue developing a secure digital asset storage solution. DACC’s team “share [Bakkt’s] security-first mindset,” he wrote, while also bringing experience in building its own secure and scalable custody solutions.

https://www.coindesk.com/bakkt-acquires-crypto-custodian-partners-with-bny-mellon-on-key-storage

[Paashaas]

Bakkt update; Custody at our Core.

https://medium.com/bakkt-blog/custody-at-our-core-15f6b26d16d6

[d_eddie]

Keeping blocks small shifts the balance in favor of Type 1, preventively.

By what mechanism?

By pissing off the spammers.