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

[Dabs]

Only the coins from the genesis block can not be moved. That may or may not be true about forks or altcoins. This is due to some bug or feature as moving the coins from the genesis block coinbase transaction wasn't something expected.

What can be moved are any coins sent after the genesis block, such as those random coins being sent today. Only the person who still holds the private key to the address in the genesis block, specifically the coinbase address; the address the first 50 coins were minted to, can move the later coins.

What is more likely is that several computers or servers were used to mine the first million coins. Since there were no pools, each mined coin comes from a wallet on different computers. While it is plausible that Satoshi kept the wallets for all of those coins, (indeed, it would have been a simple backup to a collected or total wallet for all those addresses), it could also be possible that each address had private keys that were eventually discarded.

That implies the first million coins are locked up by whatever key security was implemented at the time, which is double SHA2-256 behind RipeMD-160 or the other way around, whatever, is like trying to crack legacy bitcoin addresses, even if we knew the public keys as that functionality which hides public keys until coins are first spent from an address.

In any case, even with key or address reuse, many coins have never been brute forced out of their owners. It's always been an inside job or someone stole the private keys. On chain dice addresses have never been hacked by third parties. Stolen maybe, but not brute forced for the private keys.

[JSRAW]

This thread is so quiet at the moment.

**Sighs**

Oh, I do miss the excitement of a mid to peak bull run. I’m always here, reading but I don’t really have much to post about in this thread atm

I was busy with classes, work, and catching up with old friends last weekend IRL and in the end, taking care of all drunk bastards    Sometimes I think that's the only reason I get the call for every gettogether.  

This 4 figure looks boring as well so not checking price movement-portfolio etc.

My backlog is piling up, for this will check a couple of posters and JJG's posts history (He covers almost everything in his post  )

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

Back!
Good afternoon WO.
Still observing @ $9,678
Feels like we are stuck here forever LOL

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

It's not Sunday evening fellas!

[bkbirge]

"According to Baradaran, we already have a public ledger, it’s called the Federal Reserve."
https://cointelegraph.com/news/live-crypto-blockchain-hearing-at-us-senate-banking-committee

I'm pretty sure the Fed's ledger isn't available to examine by the public. This seems like obfuscation.

Also looks like the usual talking heads are weighing in with just enough knowledge to hurt themselves...
https://cointelegraph.com/news/cnbc-host-goes-full-bitcoin-maximalist-with-55k-forecast-after-halving

[jbreher]

@jbreher: I read about CSW's wallet-cracking attempts here at the WO thread. You are assuming that Satoshi has used a cryptographically strong passphrase to secure his keys. It's a valid assumption which I also share and have mentioned in the discussion, but it appears you are reading only parts of my posts... Note, however, that, at the time those wallets were created, Bitcoin was nearly worthless. I'm pretty sure many users at the time had completely unsecured wallets in their PCs, they just didn't care much about security. That's what CSW is allegedly attempting to exploit.

I get all that, and largely agree. I however counter with 'I read ON THE INNERWEBZ...' (i.e., so it must be true).

IOW, I question whether there is any truth to this story at all. I don't doubt you have read such. I have read such as well. But never from any credible source, and never with any source attribution.

[kurious]

cybercash, as imagined in 1998
~
please note, they wrote hodlers wrong

Can you give me name of the book from which you snapshotted that page, please. I will buy and read it, that is likely a interesting book on digital cash.

The Sovereign Individual

it's not my snapshot, I just found it. here are some more quotes: https://imgur.com/a/eV74v#0

Just read the rest.  Prescient stuff - bang on the money, so-to-speak!

[jbreher]

Incidentally, it is working splendidly so far.

Yeah jbreher, splendidly is far from a couple of recent reorg occasions.

With no known negative consequences.

eta: Other than the loss of the coinbase tx revenues for the initial orphaned miners.

[AlcoHoDL]

@jbreher: I read about CSW's wallet-cracking attempts here at the WO thread. You are assuming that Satoshi has used a cryptographically strong passphrase to secure his keys. It's a valid assumption which I also share and have mentioned in the discussion, but it appears you are reading only parts of my posts... Note, however, that, at the time those wallets were created, Bitcoin was nearly worthless. I'm pretty sure many users at the time had completely unsecured wallets in their PCs, they just didn't care much about security. That's what CSW is allegedly attempting to exploit.

I get all that, and largely agree. I however counter with 'I read ON THE INNERWEBZ...' (i.e., so it must be true).

IOW, I question whether there is any truth to this story at all. I don't doubt you have read such. I have read such as well. But never from any credible source, and never with any source attribution.

OK, I think we agree on this. I was never meant to say it was necessarily true. I just found it interesting and mentioned it, in relation to CSW's comment that Bitcoin will somehow die in 2019. I saw/heard this comment being spoken by CSW himself in a YouTube video. Found it, link below (just press Play, I've positioned it at the exact time he says it):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXMCzhwm554&feature=youtu.be&t=1205

I watched it again and it seems unrelated to the wallet cracking rumour, but still quite interesting IMHO. I must admit that I felt a little scared when I first heard that comment. I really thought he knows or is able to do/cause something very big that could result in a total collapse of Bitcoin. Most likely just CSW spreading fear...

[mindrust]

I liked this one a lot.

John McAfee's $1m math has been decrypted.


https://www.tradingview.com/chart/BTCUSD/uRoL0eSr-I-just-love-trend-curves-Here-is-another-one-Bitcoin-long-term/

BOO yea $1Million Incoming!

Sell at $60k in 2021 or sell at a $1Million one year later, hard to decide.  

This is a high probability tbh and I am pretty sure %90 of this thread and %99.9 of any other Bitcoiners will be dumping as soon as it hits $50k. I wonder how will they (maybe me) feel a year later. 

[fillippone]

I liked this one a lot.

John McAfee's $1m math has been decrypted.


https://www.tradingview.com/chart/BTCUSD/uRoL0eSr-I-just-love-trend-curves-Here-is-another-one-Bitcoin-long-term/

BOO yea $1Million Incoming!

Sell at $60k in 2021 or sell at a $1Million one year later, hard to decide. 

This is a high probability tbh and I am pretty sure %90 of this thread and %99.9 of any other Bitcoiners will be dumping as soon as it hits $50k. I wonder how will they (maybe me) feel a year later. 

Well,
I do share the enthusiasm in a dull day like today.
But if I want to dream I prefer doing so with Plan B article who gives a sort of rationality and substance to the past prices.
PlanB is actually more bullish after 2028 halvening with a multimillion dollar valuation based on SF model!

Yeas, we do have a lot to dream about.
The important thing is to keep hodling!

[jbreher]

@jbreher: I read about CSW's wallet-cracking attempts here at the WO thread. You are assuming that Satoshi has used a cryptographically strong passphrase to secure his keys. It's a valid assumption which I also share and have mentioned in the discussion, but it appears you are reading only parts of my posts... Note, however, that, at the time those wallets were created, Bitcoin was nearly worthless. I'm pretty sure many users at the time had completely unsecured wallets in their PCs, they just didn't care much about security. That's what CSW is allegedly attempting to exploit.

I get all that, and largely agree. I however counter with 'I read ON THE INNERWEBZ...' (i.e., so it must be true).

IOW, I question whether there is any truth to this story at all. I don't doubt you have read such. I have read such as well. But never from any credible source, and never with any source attribution.

OK, I think we agree on this. I was never meant to say it was true. I just found it interesting and mentioned it, in relation to CSW's comment that Bitcoin will somehow die in 2019. I saw/heard this comment being spoken by CSW himself in a YouTube video. Found it, link below (just press Play, I've positioned it at the exact time he says it):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXMCzhwm554&feature=youtu.be&t=1205

I watched it again and it seems unrelated to the wallet cracking rumour, but still quite interesting IMHO. I must say that I felt a little scared when I first heard that comment. I really thought he knows or is able to do/cause something very big that could result in a total collapse of Bitcoin. Most likely just CSW spreading fear...

Yes, I have heard CSW state similar things before as well. Of course, that noes not necessarily provide any credence to the story that he is trying to brute force a wallet formerly held by satoshi, that Craig has somehow gotten ahold of. For just one hole in the story, how on earth would he have come into possession of satoshi's wallet? Seems improbable.

Perhaps equally probable (note I did say perhaps) is the rather unlikely notion that Craig is indeed satoshi, and therefore has always legitimately owned the early mined coins in question. I think the current story - that the private keys therein are held in a trust guarded by multisig, and that he will not have access to the other components of the multisig until 2020 as per terms of the trust creation, is at least plausible. Note that I think he has consistently held to this story. For years.

In your video, Krawicz seems to give tacit confirmation of Craig's statement that BTC contains a fatal flaw that could be so exploited. Though his retort -- 'I'll find out and let you know' -- belies more a blind faith than any rational analysis. From other statements, it seems clear that Krawicz has complete faith in the Satoshi/CSW claim, and I have never heard him say anything convincing about his reasons for so believing.

AAR, if indeed CSW does have control of the 980K or 1.1M BTC or whatever, he does have a pretty big tool at his disposal. I doubt however that merely dumping them at market price would have a lasting devastating effect upon BTC, no matter how much pain it causes in the short term.

Shelby has been advancing the proposition that Craig has access to enough currently dark mining power to couple the potential dumping attack with another attack of miners reverting to the original protocol (still possible under the so-called 'soft' fork), claiming all funds in SegWit addresses (which are of course pay-to-anyone under the previous rules, which are still valid as there was never a hard fork). This would force Core to either accept the loss of all such funds, or hard fork off to a parallel chain, where the protocol fully invalidates this earlier ruleset. Indeed, Shelby thinks this attack (irrespective of whether or not CSW has anything to do with it) to be an inevitability at some point.

I'm not so sure that scenario is so certain. Though I should point out that I have been publicly musing about such a scenario almost from the time the soft fork approach to 'solving malleability' was first posited. Indeed, the forces towards such an attack only grow with BTC price appreciation and more germanely with use of SegWit addresses.

IF CSW has access to 1.1M BTC and IF CSW and/or allied miners deign to mount such an attack, then that may be devastating to BTC. Seems a lot of coin tosses would have to land on edge for such to be the case, but...

Heck, I wouldn't even think such an action unethical. It's just part of the game theory. It's not as if these ideas have not been hashed and rehashed publicly since years. Anyone astonished by these ideas either has not been paying attention or is in active denial.

[jbreher]

This is a high probability tbh and I am pretty sure %90 of this thread and %99.9 of any other Bitcoiners will be dumping as soon as it hits $50k.

That seems silly to me. If they would be dumping at $50K, why did they not already dump four years earlier and with that much less certainty of experience at $20K?

[serveria.com]

Hey WO brothers!

Witnessing lil pump   beartrolls also gone for now that's a good sign  

[serveria.com]

I liked this one a lot.

John McAfee's $1m math has been decrypted.


https://www.tradingview.com/chart/BTCUSD/uRoL0eSr-I-just-love-trend-curves-Here-is-another-one-Bitcoin-long-term/

BOO yea $1Million Incoming!

Sell at $60k in 2021 or sell at a $1Million one year later, hard to decide.  

This is a high probability tbh and I am pretty sure %90 of this thread and %99.9 of any other Bitcoiners will be dumping as soon as it hits $50k. I wonder how will they (maybe me) feel a year later. 

I'm sure nobody in his right mind is selling 100% at 50k. Some part possibly but not all...

[JayJuanGee]

Sorry to be bearish gents but I think we wont bottom this summer till we get to about 4900.

I was convinced of this by powerful entities who communicated with me on a recent DMT adventure.

Apparently they trade Bitcoin in transdimensional hyperspace.

I obviously dont post much during times like this bc its no fun but I promised to report.


via Imgflip Meme Generator

Oh gawd..... .... another sorcerer wannabe.  

[edited out]

Your starting to sound like jonov

Sure.. that's another angle... Haven't heard from that broke-ass dude for a while.  Maybe he will be able to buy back all the coins that he sold for under $6k, but guys like that get to cock-assured and too greedy.. .so my hopes are not too high in his ability to recover from dumb.

Have to add I'm deeply disappointed with Lambie lately. He was a permabull when he first appeared but it seems he has turned into a bear now. What is more alarming he started posting his bearish prophecies of the so-called "one last dump before up" theory and now this $4900 bottom post. I'm worried that's a way how most beartrolls earn their merits and post count (also respect from other members) - post bullish things first, turning into bears later. So guys be smart, think twice! We're getting surrounded by werewolves.      

Have to say Im disappointed you would get so suspicious over someone being short term bearish. Im not out to get you. I just like to post my thoughts from time to time. Its not a conspiracy to trick you into giving up on Bitcoin and bowing to the dollar as your master.

Am I pumping shitcoins? Am I deviating from my firm belief that Bitcoin will be the global reserve currency and 1 coin will make any human wealthy in the next decade. Of course not.

Am I tone vays calling for 1k, a price that hasnt been seen for years. Nope, just concerned we will revert to prices seen a few months ago.

Did you get suspicious of Hairy when he was actively shorting as a hedge in 2018 and calling for lower prices for a long while? Hell im not even shorting, just waiting for what I consider cheap coins this summer before I deploy my last fiat for the mega run all in hodl. If it doesnt happen, nbd, its not like I dont have a lot of Bitcoins.  

Pray you get surrounded by hyenas like me.   Im over 90 percent net worth in Bitcoin and have been since '14. If you ever find a day where the average joe is even close to as big of a Bitcoin believer as me then our Lord and Savior King Bitcoin will already be the global reserve currency on that same day.  


Still short term bearish. Id say fight me   but I dont really feel like posting much unless im short and long term bullish.

I will say 4900 is pretty extreme, its more like a floor I dont see us going under. 7-8k would be a more reasonable outcome imo, but this is Bitcoin and shit happens.  I think people shouldnt cry if 4900 is reached bc its still very bullish as a higher low than 3100 of Dec. 15.

You do seem to bring a decent amount of the wrath upon yourself with your ongoing extreme ways of speaking (like one of those know it all dweebs that many of us hated in high school but has only become a phenomenon on the interwebs because we are not able to beat him up in the locker room), but do what you gonna do....   hahahahahaa

 

[El duderino_]

I have a small trip to Amsterdam next week though where I will meet the goose & cryptoqueeen.

This sounds great.

Will be great

Looking forward, good food good wines and good BTC minded and friendly company

[Torque]

IF CSW has access to 1.1M BTC and IF CSW and/or allied miners deign to mount such an attack, then that may be devastating to BTC. Seems a lot of coin tosses would have to land on edge for such to be the case, but...

Heck, I wouldn't even think such an action unethical. It's just part of the game theory. It's not as if these ideas have not been hashed and rehashed publicly since years. Anyone astonished by these ideas either has not been paying attention or is in active denial.

Like to omit the inferences to the rest of that dramatic story, don't you jbreher? Like afterward life will be great, and the entire crypto community will all be singing kumbaya in BSV land?

If any of that would to occur (which we all know it won't), it wouldn't suddenly endear ANYONE to BSV, BCASH, or any other Bitcoin shitcoin/derivative thereof.

If BTC were destroyed due to CSW's actions, it's not like when the smoked cleared all the existing Bitcoin^TM advocates, users, merchants, exchanges, brokers, and investors would suddenly race toward BSV or BCash. Quite the opposite infact.

Sorry to disappoint your glorious troll 'vision'.  

[El duderino_]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5166448.40

For those that like a jjg discussion

[jbreher]

IF CSW has access to 1.1M BTC and IF CSW and/or allied miners deign to mount such an attack, then that may be devastating to BTC. Seems a lot of coin tosses would have to land on edge for such to be the case, but...

Heck, I wouldn't even think such an action unethical. It's just part of the game theory. It's not as if these ideas have not been hashed and rehashed publicly since years. Anyone astonished by these ideas either has not been paying attention or is in active denial.

Like to omit the inferences to the rest of that dramatic story, don't you jbreher? Like afterward life will be great, and the entire crypto community will all be singing kumbaya in BSV land?

If any of that would to occur (which we all know it won't), it wouldn't suddenly endear ANYONE to BSV, BCASH, or any other Bitcoin shitcoin/derivative thereof.

If BTC were destroyed due to CSW's actions, it's not like when the smoked cleared all the existing Bitcoin^TM advocates, users, merchants, exchanges, brokers, and investors would suddenly race toward BSV or BCash. Quite the opposite infact.

Sorry to disappoint your glorious troll 'vision'.

Your flight of fancy is quite amusing as well, Torkey-poo.

Firstly, I clearly indicated that these potentialities are each improbable, and more so in the aggregate.

Second, I made no claim as to the effect upon BSV or BCH.

Though for a rational person, who believes in the promise of crypto in general: If their preferred chain would be shown to a have a fatal flaw, they would likely look to other cryptos to find one that can fulfill their expectations.

You yourself can be as irrational as you care to. Ain't no skin off my back.