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

[Raja_MBZ]

To be fair, the question extended beyond BTC to crypto.

And the bottom is most definitely not in for shitcoins. 

"Definitely not"? IMO, it "probably is" for most of 'em. My baby ADA looks quite ready to fly too; I even dared to leverage long it a few weeks back at MEX (2.1x), so far in a nice profit. Not willing to take profits just as of yet.

Let's see, let's see...

[StartupAnalyst]

GET the BTC!

https://phemex.com/references/articles/try-to-solve-our-2-btc-puzzle#puzzle-rules

I have no F**king clue! LOL

I thought this line break was the entrance to the maze, but I guess I'm wrong...

[JimboToronto]

https://www.inc.com/quora/too-many-people-fall-into-this-one-huge-financial-trap-good-news-its-easy-to-avoid.html

Your credit score should really be called a "sucker score" because it's a number that exists for only one reason: to tell banks how much money they're going to be able to make off of you. The higher it is, the more of your money goes to them.

That's not how they sell it, of course. They sell it as a metric for determining "credit worthiness". But if you really break down what makes a credit score higher or lower, you'll see that they aren't being honest about what it actually is.

For example, if you're the type of person who doesn't use credit all that much, but can make large purchases and pay them off in a matter of days or weeks, that should be an indicator that you're the most "credit worthy" person on the planet. Right? Shouldn't the people who do that have the highest credit scores?

Nope. You're actually penalized for that, and your credit score goes down. Banks hate you, because you don't carry debt long enough for them to make anything off of you.

No kidding.

[Icygreen]

My guess is Vietnam too.
Tossing at Phantom Rang (no clue why... just hinting because of kites in the background and googled kite destinations in Vietnam and liked the name).

You are a bit late, the competition was already won  
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg53659752#msg53659752

Damn real life pulling me away from WO thread!

Phan Rang is a good guess, have spent a lot of time there in the past before it became discovered as a kite destination. Water not as blue as the previous photos but the landscape in the area is stunning weathered exposed aggregate rocks down to the ocean. Visit by motorbike if ever you have the chance.



I see the corn tried to shake a few out before catching a bid higher.  Down to 8500 and right back up to 8700

[Icygreen]

I have been to a local Bitcoin meet-up this evening.
Host/Valet: Giacomo Zucco
Special Guest: Saifedean Ammous.
I think you know the guy.



Best quote of the night:

“The most subsersive thing you can to with bitcoin is saving”

 ❤️#nohomo

That was great!

Edit: the concept has been told a few times:

"The only crime you should do with Bitcoin is saving and that's the most powerful of the crimes"
@saifedean

https://twitter.com/mir_btc/status/1219341317500821505?s=21

I really like both these guys. That's a conference I'd like to attend.
Nice quotes also, I'll try to remember them.

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

Chill! I'm just another Jupiter passing by. Jupiter doesn't need anything to be happy. Jupiter=happines....I don't need sex or your coins to go to the moon to be happy because i'm beyond the moon.

Of course, you don't need anything.  You are a typical shit-stirrer who fails / refuses to provide information about any of your own particulars while trying to act like you know more than you do regarding bitcoin and/or good practices.... 

For what reason, hard to determine besides you are a fucktwat disingenuine poster who is not really here to contribute value. but just stir nonsensical shit.

[infofront]

To be fair, the question extended beyond BTC to crypto.

And the bottom is most definitely not in for shitcoins. 

Yeah, it should've been two polls. Though IMO the shitcoin bottom is probably in too.

[STT]

I think the use of BTC is quite important but the idea of saving is fair also, even in FIAT this idea is lost to the consumer culture of borrow now and pay later which ends with people in an unhappy place obligated into debts and constricted in job choices etc.     Credit Score just goes up by issuing debt ie. borrowing then repaying, it seems quite a failed idea (echos of 2008) when they ignore perpetually revolving debt which is never repaid which is most western governments now.      If you mimic your national QE issuer in a constant turn over you are rewarded with lower rates.    
  Unless the debts are zero'd at some point we'll never know where we are really at.   My take on markets is that is the end game, that natural order has the tides stronger then kings or governments and QE or whatever failures in FIAT are ongoing do fail, we do get a resolved situation.   Some think this whole modern era of revolving debt (to the detriment of capitalism) continues for 50 years at least, I think its a house of cards and it just takes a breeze to ruin that idea.   Its a fragile system we are in, I think the black swan dude talks about those concepts.
   Funny thing about Nicolas Taleb is that he isnt for Bitcoin afaik but as a person of Lebanese nationality he does then recommend use of BTC with regard to the failures of government which is confusing then.

[I might be wrong and he is more positive on BTC but he was advocating holding treasury bonds so he is a hard read.   He certainly has BTC available from ages ago as he was gifted it many times over]


BTC confirming above 8000 should be a positive but for the moment we might continue to trade between the 50 and 200 day average though they really aren't boundaries, a pullback seems fair for building upwards.   I did wonder if it might go as far as 11k upwards as soon as this month end but the typical advance, pullback, advance is more regular and sustained for a truly bullish trend if that is what we are forming right now.

[LUCKMCFLY]

Economists mostly follow traditional models, only some see beyond.

Successful Bitcoin holders have low time preference & judge over extended periods, e.g. risk-adjusted return over 4-year holding periods. If an economist has not researched this strong market signal for explanations of supply & demand, they don't have a useful opinion about it.

Source: https://twitter.com/NickSzabo4/status/1219805247536693248

[realr0ach]

I have been to a local Bitcoin meet-up this evening.
Special Guest: Saifedean Ammous.

If you can't figure out who the sucker in the room is, it's you.  Ever notice all these jackass paid shills like Pompliano and Andreas Antonopolous, all they talk about is things like "accelerating Bitcoin adoption", which really just means trying to trick other people into buying into the Ponzi scam?  And that's literally all they do 24 hours a day:  try to fool people into giving up their hard earned labor for completely valueless, imaginary timestamps.  Probably the biggest ripoff joke in the entire history of mankind, to trade your labor for something even less valuable than a piece of fiat paper - a timestamp.

If something actually has value, you don't need to try and trick other people into using it.  Nobody wakes up in the morning trying to trick people into using oil.  I don't need to convince anyone to buy silver because it's an actual commodity resource that's needed regardless.  Only Keynesian scams (imaginary widgets based on artificial scarcity) need these 'hype men' to try and trick people into buying them.

[realr0ach]

Stock to flow is looking insane, guys:

https://www.reddit.com/r/niggercoin/

[Hueristic]

Imagine how disappointed they'll be when they figure that they neither have privacy nor their money anymore lol

Well shit I owe you a merit for this.

i gotcha

Thanks.

You are a scammer

Being a scammer requires a victim. Who have I scammed, somac.? Name the aggrieved party or STFU.

JJG is certainly aggrieved, so there is that.


... how did I miss so many pages !!!!

[bitebits]

Let's say you come up with $1million as nice round number. Again, this could as low as $500K in some countries and just for a very modest lifestyle up to $5 million for US, with many years to live, and with a nice lifestyle.

Daym you need $5m to live in the US?

Wellllll...

The traditional financial advisor .. um ... advice is to plan on withdrawing 4% annually.

So 4% of $5M is $200K. Is that enough? Before taxes? It's an individual target.

Note that the 4% assumes normal retirement age and life expectancy. If retiring early or planning on living to 268 years of age, you might wanna reduce the percentage for calculation purposes.

I might have different assumptions about the traditional 4%, which I thought was meant to be a perpetually sustainable withdrawal rate because it is presumed that you are going to be able to average at least 4% per year returns (some years higher and some years lower).  So, 4% should even work for someone who lives to  268 years old.

Some tricky parts are 1) withdrawing beyond 4% per year (and dipping into principle, and then if you end up living longer after you have depleted the principle).. 2)  NOT being able to sustain at least 4% on average returns on your investments, and if you believe that is actually happening to your investment, then you need to reduce your withdrawal rate.. most investment advisors believe 4% to be safe because they believe that they can achieve at least that level of returns in a sustainable way or 3) you have miscalculated how large of a principle that you need.. and the 4% returns is not enough (that is in the $5million $200k per annum is not enough)...

Part of the reason that you would want to error in the high side of obtaining a higher principle before your retire (or pull the fuck you lever) is to attempt to be able to account for the various unknowns, including cost of living increases that might happen or prolonged downturn in the economy that would end up reducing your returns and things like that... Of course, if you expect that you are going to die earlier than you can dip in to your principle and even completely liquidate your principle, but then yeah, you could become kind of fucked if you continue to live..  

Needs a bit of an attention span on the subject, but would recommend reading this series in case you want to learn more about the ‘safe withdrawal rate’. The guy really made an effort:

https://earlyretirementnow.com/safe-withdrawal-rate-series/

[mindrust]

What if you invest some of that %4 back into bitcoin?

Investment of an investment. Investmentception. Infinite money. *mindblown

[VB1001]

Today we learned that Apple dropped its plans to end-to-end encrypt users' iCloud data backups.
I've been researching the issue of secure cloud backups recently; here are my recommendations.

https://twitter.com/lopp/status/1219670250767208451


How to Securely Back Up Data to Cloud Storage
https://blog.lopp.net/how-to-securely-back-up-data-to-cloud-storage/

[JayJuanGee]

Let's say you come up with $1million as nice round number. Again, this could as low as $500K in some countries and just for a very modest lifestyle up to $5 million for US, with many years to live, and with a nice lifestyle.

Daym you need $5m to live in the US?

Wellllll...

The traditional financial advisor .. um ... advice is to plan on withdrawing 4% annually.

So 4% of $5M is $200K. Is that enough? Before taxes? It's an individual target.

Note that the 4% assumes normal retirement age and life expectancy. If retiring early or planning on living to 268 years of age, you might wanna reduce the percentage for calculation purposes.

I might have different assumptions about the traditional 4%, which I thought was meant to be a perpetually sustainable withdrawal rate because it is presumed that you are going to be able to average at least 4% per year returns (some years higher and some years lower).  So, 4% should even work for someone who lives to  268 years old.

Some tricky parts are 1) withdrawing beyond 4% per year (and dipping into principle, and then if you end up living longer after you have depleted the principle).. 2)  NOT being able to sustain at least 4% on average returns on your investments, and if you believe that is actually happening to your investment, then you need to reduce your withdrawal rate.. most investment advisors believe 4% to be safe because they believe that they can achieve at least that level of returns in a sustainable way or 3) you have miscalculated how large of a principle that you need.. and the 4% returns is not enough (that is in the $5million $200k per annum is not enough)...

Part of the reason that you would want to error in the high side of obtaining a higher principle before your retire (or pull the fuck you lever) is to attempt to be able to account for the various unknowns, including cost of living increases that might happen or prolonged downturn in the economy that would end up reducing your returns and things like that... Of course, if you expect that you are going to die earlier than you can dip in to your principle and even completely liquidate your principle, but then yeah, you could become kind of fucked if you continue to live..  

Needs a bit of an attention span on the subject, but would recommend reading this series in case you want to learn more about the ‘safe withdrawal rate’. The guy really made an effort:

https://earlyretirementnow.com/safe-withdrawal-rate-series/

I did a quick glance at the article, and I will concede that the article seems to presume that some capital (principle) depletion will be happening with about a 4% withdrawal rate, so I will concede that there are plans and professionals out there that presume capital depletion happens with a 4% depletion rate - which seems to have been what jbreher had said.

Surely, depletion of principle based on a 4% withdrawal rate was not my presumption, but I still believe that 4% remains a good guideline to consider as a target withdrawal rate - whether you believe that 4% is sustainable forever or not in terms of whether it is going to deplete your principle. 

Surely, I was never asserting that timeline should NOT be accounted for, because even I have emphasized that both I expect to die an also that I don't have any intentional goal to leave assets to heirs, but if they coincidentally get assets, I don't have a problem with that. In other words, my personal best case scenario would be to have spent nearly every single penny while NOT being a burden on anyone and just leaving enough to cover the expenses of my burial and the handling of my estate so no one would have had to work for free in wrapping up my affairs.

So, surely everyone has to consider their timeline and also has to consider the extent to which they want to dip into their principle from the beginning of their liquidation period or if they prefer to defer dipping into their principle until a later date, and to have some supplemental plan that involves dipping into their principle or depleting most of all of it within a certain period of targeted time - and how their withdrawal rate is playing out, once they begin to employ their regular withdrawing of their income off of their investments.

The younger that the invest is when s/he begins to attempt to live off of passive investment income, the more potential years that such investor has to plan ahead for, so that would likely mean either erring by having a larger principle amount or monitoring much more closely how well his/her principle amount is holding its value after beginning to withdraw from it. 

For example, if the investor is 5 years into making his/her 4% per year withdrawals, and his/her asset is performing way higher than expected, then s/he might want to tweak the withdrawal rate up a bit, and the contrary is true, too. 

So, there is no way that I had been suggesting any kind of blind employment of a 4% withdrawal rate, but instead that each person has to monitor their withdrawal rate for themselves, and 4% remains a decent beginning guideline that can be tailored up or down, even before entering into the employment of the plan... and in order to approximate whether such a rate is going to be reasonable for the investor's situation (including considering historical standard of living and how that might be maintained or changed during the anticipated period of withdrawal).

[JayJuanGee]

What if you invest some of that %4 back into bitcoin?

Investment of an investment. Investmentception. Infinite money. *mindblown

You are the king of your own destiny, so you have the power to do whatever you like.

Most of the time, if you are entering into a liquidation phase (rather than being in accumulation or maintenance), based on your time considerations and how much capital you have accumulated, your psychological status is going to evolve in such a way that you don't really have any need to continue to invest in an accumulation or a maintenance kind of way.

So, if you are feeling some inclination to keep investing back in, then that might be a decently strong sign that you are not quite ready (psychologically or financially or whatever) to enter into a liquidation phase.  In other words, you are still either too much in accumulation or maintenance (psychologically, perhaps?) rather than liquidation.

[Cryptotourist]

You are the king of your own destiny, so you have the power to do whatever you like.

I have spoken.

[Cryptotourist]

JJG, it's Thursday.
Well, according to @jupiter9, where else? - in Jupiter of course.

[exstasie]

Imagine being someone who still thinks the bottom isn't in.

The market is still half bears? Plenty of fuel left for the rocket, I see.

To be fair, the question extended beyond BTC to crypto.

And the bottom is most definitely not in for shitcoins.  

A month or so ago, I was planning on another lower low on BTC pairs but honestly, I'm not sure anymore. A lot of coins are showing W-bottoms, big upside range expansions, or at least look like they might be bottoming out. I think the downside is actually pretty limited.