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

[tarmi]

I'll hold that bag at $550, Boys. I threw back all those falling knives so all I have in my hands now is a big pile of fiat I want to get rid of.

good!

post your trading history or screenshots, so we can mock you later.

[raid_n]

no they're building bitcoin infrastructure not googlecoin infrastructure..( some of this is proprietary). It has nothing do with being to big to fail.. its just we're strengthening it by making use of it in business.

It doesn't matter that they are building bitcoin infrastucture, because if "googlecoin" would be created, and it would be of better code quality, then they can easily just take in "googlecoin" aswell.
What I am telling you is that the support services are not dependent on bitcoin. So, it does not mean that the funds invested into the industry will guarantee the success of bitcoin.

Bitcoin is like the worlds first computer game. The entire industry won't concentrate in developing this single game. The industry will build many games with increasing levels of complexity and depth. The industry is not dependent of this one first game.

It is often not the best solution that wins but the most widely used one.
You are mixing up too many things. It makes a lot of sense to not add too many features to bitcoin because you can build layers on top that do that for you
What you are proposing is one protocol to do it all. Specification wise this would be a nightmare as anyone who wants to comply with the protocol has to implement everything

[edit] and if you think that the official bitcoin protocol is lacking in quality then go do something about it and start coding!

[empowering]

no they're building bitcoin infrastructure not googlecoin infrastructure..( some of this is proprietary). It has nothing do with being to big to fail.. its just we're strengthening it by making use of it in business.

It doesn't matter that they are building bitcoin infrastucture, because if "googlecoin" would be created, and it would be of better code quality, then they can easily just take in "googlecoin" aswell.
What I am telling you is that the support services are not dependent on bitcoin. So, it does not mean that the funds invested into the industry will guarantee the success of bitcoin.

Bitcoin is like the worlds first computer game. The entire industry won't concentrate in developing this single game. The industry will build many games with increasing levels of complexity and depth. The industry is not dependent of this one first game.

Google the following:
Google lively
Google print and radio ads
Dodgeball
Google video
Google answers
Google wave


Actually Google do not have a magical Midas touch

[kkaspar]

So do you think that the 3-4 year head start of the network and community means nothing ?

I agree that there maybe a better coin and it may do well and it may be competition to Bitcoin... but then the same is still true of Apple and Google


    If wishes were horses
    Beggars would ride:
    If turnips were bayonets
    I would wear one by my side

I agree that it means something, but if you want to develop into the range of 100bil.$+ market cap, then it's very little something.
It would be great if bitcoin could get it's act together and would speed up code development and the development of the market system.

[empowering]

no they're building bitcoin infrastructure not googlecoin infrastructure..( some of this is proprietary). It has nothing do with being to big to fail.. its just we're strengthening it by making use of it in business.

It doesn't matter that they are building bitcoin infrastucture, because if "googlecoin" would be created, and it would be of better code quality, then they can easily just take in "googlecoin" aswell.
What I am telling you is that the support services are not dependent on bitcoin. So, it does not mean that the funds invested into the industry will guarantee the success of bitcoin.

Bitcoin is like the worlds first computer game. The entire industry won't concentrate in developing this single game. The industry will build many games with increasing levels of complexity and depth. The industry is not dependent of this one first game.

But Bitcoin is a protocol and therefore it is more sensible to compare it to the history of other protocols rather than computer games?

To an extent I agree I do not think this is a Higlander scenario

There can be more than one

[MatTheCat]

I'll hold that bag at $550, Boys. I threw back all those falling knives so all I have in my hands now is a big pile of fiat I want to get rid of.

good!

post your trading history or screenshots, so we can mock you later.

Funny.

In a previous post in this thread, billyliar admitted that he 'blinked and missed' the whale dump.

Could it be that billyjoeallen is a just a big old bullshitter?

[mmitech]

another 457BTC dump...


Edit: I like it how a 500 BTC got add right away    these traders will get burned so hard when they realize they could buy cheaper

[magicmexican]

another 457BTC dump...

stamp is really dumpy today with a lot of market order big dumps, compared to flat'ish btc-e, sup?

[kkaspar]

But Bitcoin is a protocol and therefore it is more sensible to compare it to the history of other protocols rather than computer games?

To an extent I agree I do not think this is a Higlander scenario

There can be more than one

Bitcoin is different from protocols because it does have a very specific unit price.
Imagine if e-mail would have been created in a way that later adopters have to fill the pockets of early adopters, so they can also send an e-mail. People wouldn't accept this and would create an alternative where everyone has a fair chance with using this protocol.
So, in my idea, bitcoin is not neutral enough to be called an protocol. Gaming suits better to it, especially with the amount of gambling that's happening at the markets.

[zyk]

no they're building bitcoin infrastructure not googlecoin infrastructure..( some of this is proprietary). It has nothing do with being to big to fail.. its just we're strengthening it by making use of it in business.

It doesn't matter that they are building bitcoin infrastucture, because if "googlecoin" would be created, and it would be of better code quality, then they can easily just take in "googlecoin" aswell.
What I am telling you is that the support services are not dependent on bitcoin. So, it does not mean that the funds invested into the industry will guarantee the success of bitcoin.

Bitcoin is like the worlds first computer game. The entire industry won't concentrate in developing this single game. The industry will build many games with increasing levels of complexity and depth. The industry is not dependent of this one first game.

But Bitcoin is a protocol and therefore it is more sensible to compare it to the history of other protocols rather than computer games?

To an extent I agree I do not think this is a Higlander scenario

There can be more than one

There are more than one.....BTC and LTC....the first one 10 times more expensive and 4 times slowlier with a fucked up

reputation of plundering widows and orphans, vehicel of drug lords and moneylaundering...

and me is the public relations departement of LITCOIN

[Davyd05]

But Bitcoin is a protocol and therefore it is more sensible to compare it to the history of other protocols rather than computer games?

To an extent I agree I do not think this is a Higlander scenario

There can be more than one

Bitcoin is different from protocols because it does have a very specific unit price.
Imagine if e-mail would have been created in a way that later adopters have to fill the pockets of early adopters, so they can also send an e-mail. People wouldn't accept this and would create an alternative where everyone has a fair chance with using this protocol.
So, in my idea, bitcoin is not neutral enough to be called an protocol. Gaming suits better to it, especially with the amount of gambling that's happening at the markets.

derp we already have multiple types of crypto. Doesn't change the fact bitcoin has the most money flowing in to development

[meanig]

But Bitcoin is a protocol and therefore it is more sensible to compare it to the history of other protocols rather than computer games?

To an extent I agree I do not think this is a Higlander scenario

There can be more than one

Bitcoin is different from protocols because it does have a very specific unit price.
Imagine if e-mail would have been created in a way that later adopters have to fill the pockets of early adopters, so they can also send an e-mail. People wouldn't accept this and would create an alternative where everyone has a fair chance with using this protocol
So, in my idea, bitcoin is not neutral enough to be called an protocol. Gaming suits better to it, especially with the amount of gambling that's happening at the markets.

Flesh out this hypothetical currency where early adopters have no incentives and the luddites take most of the spoils. What would the incentive for adoption be?

[empowering]

So do you think that the 3-4 year head start of the network and community means nothing ?

I agree that there maybe a better coin and it may do well and it may be competition to Bitcoin... but then the same is still true of Apple and Google


    If wishes were horses
    Beggars would ride:
    If turnips were bayonets
    I would wear one by my side

I agree that it means something, but if you want to develop into the range of 100bil.$+ market cap, then it's very little something.
It would be great if bitcoin could get it's act together and would speed up code development and the development of the market system.

Patience young grasshopper

[zyk]

But Bitcoin is a protocol and therefore it is more sensible to compare it to the history of other protocols rather than computer games?

To an extent I agree I do not think this is a Higlander scenario

There can be more than one

Bitcoin is different from protocols because it does have a very specific unit price.
Imagine if e-mail would have been created in a way that later adopters have to fill the pockets of early adopters, so they can also send an e-mail. People wouldn't accept this and would create an alternative where everyone has a fair chance with using this protocol.
So, in my idea, bitcoin is not neutral enough to be called an protocol. Gaming suits better to it, especially with the amount of gambling that's happening at the markets.

Bitcoin is  in reverse ponzi where the insiders are cashing out at Gox even as nobody here want to believe whats happenig in front of their very

eyes. GTFO and over to LITCOIN

[threecats]

stamp looks like a drunk wandering along the edge of a cliff ....

[kkaspar]

derp we already have multiple types of crypto. Doesn't change the fact bitcoin has the most money flowing in to development

You just can't comprehend, that the money isn't flowing into bitcoin, but into the development of handling cryptos in general?

[tarmi]

I'll hold that bag at $550, Boys. I threw back all those falling knives so all I have in my hands now is a big pile of fiat I want to get rid of.

good!

post your trading history or screenshots, so we can mock you later.

Funny.

In a previous post in this thread, billyliar admitted that he 'blinked and missed' the whale dump.

Could it be that billyjoeallen is a just a big old bullshitter?

as far as I am concerned he could be that poor bastard who is buying all the coins @ 550. I really dont care.

[derpinheimer]

Gox just admitted insolvency...

You are not a Fudster normally?

I guess I over reacted to the gox Dev admitting coins were stolen via transaction malleability. Maybe it's not that bad? I didn't have a chance to sell my coins so i hope they are solvent..

[mmitech]

Probably true. But I'd be careful making too much of that whale dump. Go back to July 10 (or so) in 2013. Marked the end of the post-April bear market. Buying pressure slowly, but clearly started building up after the bottom, 2h, then 6h BB started looking really nice, then: HUGE dump.

Took price development back for about a week, but didn't alter the general direction.

What I'm trying to say is: not sure yet if this is the reversal or not, but whales can occasionally be dumbfucks as well, and can lose money. Whoever dumped that huge load back in July 18 never got his coins back for the same price (unless he was on gox in the past days, but that doesn't quite cut it.)

Market was already correcting before whale turned up with his 10K of auctioned/stolen/Gox'd BTC.

I started shorting on Bitfinex again (being sure not to set any stop losses for the fkers to farm) as I seen that the charts were badly oversold and couldn't resist. This was at about $633 and I got in at about $623. 10K whale never turned up until $595.18.

So taking his market input out of the equation, charts were already well on their way to forming yet another bear wedge with support at $530, similar to the $765 bear support wedge through Jan 2014. With the whales sell off, this bearish wedge has broke to the downside, at least on Stamp. This alone wouldn't count for anything other than an anomaly, except like I said, the whale tricked bots into blowing $3 million USD at his $797 sell wall, in addition to soaking up the same again in market liquidity at lower prices.

I am always prepared to keep my mind open to possibilities that veer beyond my own take on the market, as this is real money that I am playing with here. However, for me, $530 was not a bottom. It was the support of a bear wedge and this whale dump has simply brought a jack-boot down upon the still bearish market.

Disagree with your assessment on yesterday. I'm keeping my eyes open for signs that the reversal happens, simply because my short term buys would become "real" holds again in that case.

Yesterday was such a day. Strong signals on 6h BB, CMF sharply up. Low on volume, because weekend, so no certainty yet, sure. Earlier today came the retracement. Of course we were short term overbought, that's what happens in either case, when a trend reverses, or when it's a false breakout. That "retracement" however was fucked up brutally by our friend, the whale.

So back to square one, imo. Looking bearish again, I agree with you, but to really count as a continuation of a bear market we would damn well need to see sub-500 coins at some point, I'm sure you agree. And getting there is sure taking some time.

The longer we bounce between 530 and 580, the less more I'll warm up to the idea that sub-500 coins won't happen anymore. Except maybe for a flash crash if gox outright declares that they're bankrupt and the the sheep hit the sell button without thinking twice.

I do base my trades on 4h chart short term and 3d for mid/long term calls, A reversal was about to form up at 620-640 but looking at the 4h chart it seemed like a bull trap, the price could start raising and we could be done with the down trend if everything went normal, but Gox complicated things here...

I was so sure about 600's resisting, but then gox fucked up and fucked all the charts, it was then when I sat down and reconsidered all my positions, to be honest even with holding bitcoin, I really wish that 350-450 to happen, because most of people are waiting for it, it is a psychical thing, if it happens once we can move on, until then the image is really blurry and the only thing I can think out of this, is downtrend...

[cbutters]

Shaking in a corner:

"Always darkest before the dawn..... Always darkest before the dawn"
 

Clutching my coins with white knuckles..... I'm now all in hoping that we are close to the bottom with dreams of a reversal.... I'm probably too premature on moving to this position, but hopefully not too far off.