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

[Toxic2040]

hmmmm

flip a coin?


I will be honest..I am not sure what narrative drives the price above $10k right now and sustains it.  I still think we will see a pump over the next week if the fractal from last year holds. But I dont see it continuing in a years long bull run like everyone is hoping for. There is to much uncertainty in the world right now. Logic would dictate everyone pile into an actual hard money to preserve wealth but markets have never been rational.  

So basically...in typical bitcoin fashion...pump it up and then dump...thats my two sats

So yea...kinda feeling a little bearish today..will just have to see what happens over the next couple of weeks.




locally continued sideways...

lost in this cloud with what appears to be a small dip right out in front of us
should try and reclaim $9.5k support in the next 24 hours I believe
1h




slightly longer time frame still appears compressed and ready for a sharp move
4h




the daily is still tracking projected plot but change is imminent...again a sharp break away seems almost necessary at this point    #dyor
D

#stronghands

[JimboToronto]

No kidding. Not your keys, not your coins. Seeds are not keys.

I fully agree with everything you've said, except the above.

If you can go from your seed to your keys in a deterministic, well-defined and publicly known way, then the two are equivalent. Seeds are keys.

It's exactly like the difference between a key in QR code form and in alphanumeric form. They are the same, just expressed differently. As long as I have my seed, you can take my Trezor and crush it to little pieces. I still have my keys (encoded in the seed) and can use several methods (a new Trezor/Ledger or any other h/w wallet, Mycelium or any other s/w wallet, I can even do the calculations myself) to gain access to my coins. And no one has to (and should ever) know my seed, except me. The entire process can be done completely offline.

Having said all the above, I do believe it's good advice to use paper wallets, especially for the non-technically literate coiners among us, who can easily fuck things up by doing something stupid with the 'puter, just like a kid can be injured by playing with a sharp knife (not the knife's fault).

Sure, the seed could be thought of as a key, but I see it more as the seed being the key to a safe deposit box in which you keep your other keys.

You still have to trust the bank.

[AlcoHoDL]

No kidding. Not your keys, not your coins. Seeds are not keys.

I fully agree with everything you've said, except the above.

If you can go from your seed to your keys in a deterministic, well-defined and publicly known way, then the two are equivalent. Seeds are keys.

It's exactly like the difference between a key in QR code form and in alphanumeric form. They are the same, just expressed differently. As long as I have my seed, you can take my Trezor and crush it to little pieces. I still have my keys (encoded in the seed) and can use several methods (a new Trezor/Ledger or any other h/w wallet, Mycelium or any other s/w wallet, I can even do the calculations myself) to gain access to my coins. And no one has to (and should ever) know my seed, except me. The entire process can be done completely offline.

Having said all the above, I do believe it's good advice to use paper wallets, especially for the non-technically literate coiners among us, who can easily fuck things up by doing something stupid with the 'puter, just like a kid can be injured by playing with a sharp knife (not the knife's fault).

So you're not just telling me that a ledger nano is not "secure" without physical access?
I don't mean the software or transaction processing server, since the keys are stored only on the ledger and encoded into my written seed.
Did i miss something?

What I'm saying is that you can write your 24 seed words on a piece of paper and completely destroy the h/w wallet and anything related to the process of generating the seed. The seed alone is a map to get to your keys. No need to access any server or anything on the internet. You just need that little piece of paper. There is a mathematical one-to-one relationship between your seed and your keys. Nothing else is needed.

That's common knowledge, and combined with this:

The private keys are yours, and are generated randomly through the local chip. They're in no way connected to a server over at Ledger nor is Ledger capable of getting hold of your private keys.

...makes the private key itself secure, even if i can't read it (but i could compute it offline via the seed, store it in paper format and wipe the ledger).
But according to "not your keys, not your coins", as i lack physical access to the private key directly, the "not your coins" part becomes valid (somehow).

All good. Also, i'd be quite a fool to have all my hodlings on a single address.

I think you got what I wanted to say.

The "not your keys, not your coins" motto applies to the cases where the keys (raw keys, seed, whatever) are not held and managed by you, but by a 3rd party (exchange, etc.). If you have your 24-word seed, you have your keys. And if you haven't given the seed to anyone, you, and only you, have the seed (hence the keys).

One could argue that a paper wallet's QR code is not a real key. You still need a camera and s/w to decode the QR code, right? You see what I mean? The 24-word seed is just a smarter way to encode keys, just like a paper wallet's QR code (or alphanumeric code) encodes a key.

What's important is not the encoding itself (seed, QR code, alphanumeric string, whatever), but WHO HOLDS those keys... If it's you, and only you, who holds the keys, then those coins are yours and nobody can touch them. Seed or QR code makes no difference.

[AlcoHoDL]

No kidding. Not your keys, not your coins. Seeds are not keys.

I fully agree with everything you've said, except the above.

If you can go from your seed to your keys in a deterministic, well-defined and publicly known way, then the two are equivalent. Seeds are keys.

It's exactly like the difference between a key in QR code form and in alphanumeric form. They are the same, just expressed differently. As long as I have my seed, you can take my Trezor and crush it to little pieces. I still have my keys (encoded in the seed) and can use several methods (a new Trezor/Ledger or any other h/w wallet, Mycelium or any other s/w wallet, I can even do the calculations myself) to gain access to my coins. And no one has to (and should ever) know my seed, except me. The entire process can be done completely offline.

Having said all the above, I do believe it's good advice to use paper wallets, especially for the non-technically literate coiners among us, who can easily fuck things up by doing something stupid with the 'puter, just like a kid can be injured by playing with a sharp knife (not the knife's fault).

Sure, the seed could be thought of as a key, but I see it more as the seed being the key to a safe deposit box in which you keep your other keys.

You still have to trust the bank.

There's no bank in this case. It's just you, the seed, and mathematics. No 3rd party to trust.

[OutOfMemory]

I think you got what I wanted to say.

The "not your keys, not your coins" motto applies to the cases where the keys (raw keys, seed, whatever) are not held and managed by you, but by a 3rd party (exchange, etc.). If you have your 24-word seed, you have your keys. And if you haven't given the seed to anyone, you, and only you, have the seed (hence the keys).

One could argue that a paper wallet's QR code is not a real key. You still need a camera and s/w to decode the QR code, right? You see what I mean? The 24-word seed is just a smarter way to encode keys, just like a paper wallet's QR code (or alphanumeric code) encodes a key.

What's important is not the encoding itself (seed, QR code, alphanumeric string, whatever), but WHO HOLDS those keys... If it's you, and only you, who holds the keys, then those coins are yours and nobody can touch them. Seed or QR code makes no difference.

X-actly 
I was just in a slight rush of possibly having misunderstood ledger's security model.

[Torque]

Dude enters his seed holding 6 bitcoins into a Chrome extension???SMH
Bye bye bitcoin.
My condolences but good lord, being a hodeler since 2013 he really should have known better.

https://twitter.com/ericsavics1/status/1271589769336598528
(Apologies if already posted)

TBH, I don't trust these types of PSA video posts. They always seem to come out of the woodwork, usually during the start of Bitcoin bull runs, telling normies (with the underlying implied message) to "Stay away from bitcoin, you could easily lose it all... like I did."

It's hard to say, but it could just another (paid) troll PSA post. If I'm wrong and he's legit, well, he didn't do enough security homework.

Also, the guy looks late-20's early 30's but his twitter account is only a year old? Ok. What's also odd/suspicious, is that if you look at his tweet history going all the way back to the beginning when he first created the Twitter account, he almost always tweets about Bitcoin. Almost exclusively. I mean, what average Joe bitcoiner really does that on Twitter?

[JayJuanGee]

Dude enters his seed holding 6 bitcoins into a Chrome extension???SMH
Bye bye bitcoin.
My condolences but good lord, being a hodeler since 2013 he really should have known better.

https://twitter.com/ericsavics1/status/1271589769336598528
(Apologies if already posted)

I get so confused trying to figure out transactions, and from the links that he provided about where his bitcoin's went, I thought that there were 12 bitcoins sent.

 Am I missing something?

Also, it looks like ericsavics@ericsavics1, the guy who lost his coins, had created a BTC address for the hacker to send back funds, and it looks like, so far,  he received 79 transactions (at the time of my typing this post) that amount to 0.54615978 BTC, which presumably are donations from various members of the BTC community.

Regarding his mistake, yeah, it surely does seem as if he should have known better, even though it is one of those kinds of mistakes that anyone could get tricked into, accidentally... so I am not sure what lessons to get from this kind of mistake.  Perhaps, one lesson is that each of us should practice with our devices and our storage mechanisms on a regular basis to make sure that they work and using small amounts to transact, but I also understand that there are some risks with overly playing around too, so there tends to be some responsibility in ongoing learning how to be your own bank because if you fuck something up, then there is no one to go crying to in order to reverse the mistake, especially when it comes to sending coins and gosh, if you send all of the coins in your wallet at one time that is a pretty BIG deal, too.

Also, I suppose, if any of us is holding most or all of our coins in just a few spots (presuming that they are large amounts), then we might want to reconsider how and where we are holding our coins, too.

But, specifically, the mistake that ericsavics@ericsavics1 made was to enter his password or key words into a chrome browser when the keys should be entered into the device (presumably a Trezor, Ledger or one of the other hardware wallets?)... Many longer term studiers of those hardware wallet products have likely heard over and over about that kind of mistake of not to enter your information over the browser but instead to verify on the device, but like I said it does seem to be a mistake that anyone could make, especially if they do not practice using their hardware device or their wallet on a regular basis and/or they are not studying various aspects of the bitcoin space on a regular basis (which I don't necessarily expect normies to be spending anywhere near as much time as me (I admit I have a problem, but I still believe that I am capable of making lots of mistakes and not knowing some basic things) or any of you other fucking WO regulars in terms of ongoingly studying bitcoin related matters).

[JimboToronto]

The creation of wallets on computers, using of printers, etc.  is potentially a risk if they fall into hacker's hands. Using the phone to take the picture of your paper seed and paste it in the app is also a risk. The pics may be uploaded in the cloud, etc. Typing your seed on a computer also is a risk of course. You never know what the trojans are capable of. There are hundreds of other risks related to router hacks, etc. I really don't see how one can claim paper wallets are 100% safe.

I would never use an internet-capable computer to create an address. I also am aware that print spoolers can be hacked so I use a printer that has never been, nor will ever be connected to an internet-capable computer.

Nothing is 100% safe. Paper can be stolen or lost in fires or other disasters, whether it's keys or seeds. Same with devices can also fail. Anything online is of course extra unsafe.

Splitting your keys, encrypting them, duplicating them, and keeping them in multiple off-site locations is as close to 100% safe as you can get.

[bitebits]

About forks (click to enlarge):


GNU/Linux Distributions Timeline Version 19.04

[JimboToronto]

You still have to trust the bank.

There's no bank in this case. It's just you, the seed, and mathematics. No 3rd party to trust.

The hardware manufacturers and their firmware?

[Torque]

About forks (click to enlarge):


GNU/Linux Distributions Timeline Version 19.04

That's really interesting about Android. I would have expected a lot more forks, even obscure ones, at this point.

[bitebits]

The creation of wallets on computers, using of printers, etc.  is potentially a risk if they fall into hacker's hands. Using the phone to take the picture of your paper seed and paste it in the app is also a risk. The pics may be uploaded in the cloud, etc. Typing your seed on a computer also is a risk of course. You never know what the trojans are capable of. There are hundreds of other risks related to router hacks, etc. I really don't see how one can claim paper wallets are 100% safe.

I would never use an internet-capable computer to create an address. I also am aware that print spoolers can be hacked so I use a printer that has never been, nor will ever be connected to an internet-capable computer.

Nothing is 100% safe. Paper can be stolen or lost in fires or other disasters, whether it's keys or seeds. Same with devices can also fail. Anything online is of course extra unsafe.

Splitting your keys, encrypting them, duplicating them, and keeping them in multiple off-site locations is as close to 100% safe as you can get.

Still need to trust the software generating the private keys. A number of browser based 'paper wallet generators', which can be run offline, have had security issues (no true randomness, etc).

Are you using Bitcoin Core? Guess that should be considered safe, after verifying the hash of the download.

[JayJuanGee]

I doubt that using paper wallets (PW) is safer than hardware wallets (HW). There are two exceptions, though. Neither is fool proof and forgetting your seed or giving to some program is equal to a disaster. The second exception is the problem detected for Trezor which was solved with additional passphrase.

When you generate the seed on HW it is seen only on the device. No internet, no theoretical possibility of someone seeing it. You have to write it  on paper, not by making pictures. Then you can memorize the 24 words and put in safe location just in case your memory fails. When you make transactions you need to press the button of the device which is both safe and easier than using other softare.  Moreover, HW display shows the address you are sending the coins. There are trojans which can detect a BTC address in the clipboard and then replace it with the hacker's address, so you may think you paste the right address. The creation of wallets on computers, using of printers, etc.  is potentially a risk if they fall into hacker's hands. Using the phone to take the picture of your paper seed and paste it in the app is also a risk. The pics may be uploaded in the cloud, etc. Typing your seed on a computer also is a risk of course. You never know what the trojans are capable of. There are hundreds of other risks related to router hacks, etc. I really don't see how one can claim paper wallets are 100% safe.

I will admit that I have used the copy / paste feature to send and receive both through hardware wallets and through sending from one exchange to another or some other kind of on the computer screen verification that goes through the browser and might not be using a hardware wallet in all instances.  

So, yeah there could be copy and paste and even some key stroke capturing software that could jeopardize the security of those kinds of online (or thorugh the computer) transactions.    I had not previously considered the copy / paste vulnerability, but it surely makes sense upon reflection.

Regarding BIP39, I agree the points of AlcoHoDL and others agreeing with him that the back up way of being able to have 12, 18 or 24 seed words is the same as a private key, just a different form and sure there are likely some vulnerabilities that come from that form of back up just like there are trade offs in either not having a back up, or adding an additional word that the end user or software could screw up, or problems that might come from how paper wallets might be generated, stored, maintained (practiced) and recovered.  

From my understanding, not all new wallets are BIP39 compatible, so surely there is some agreement with Jimbo's somewhat anti-BIP39 assertions, but maybe for different reasons and sometimes the advocates of non-BIP39 standards might be trying to sell a different product, different form of security, a different way of backing up (such as multi-sig) or maybe going back to systems that don't have back ups, which supposedly have some different kinds of security trade offs too (as ivomm seemed to have been arguing) that might not be necessarily better from an objective standard (if any objective way of measuring these security/usability matters could be measured at any specific time that could end up changing down the road, too).

No kidding. Not your keys, not your coins. Seeds are not keys.

I fully agree with everything you've said, except the above.

If you can go from your seed to your keys in a deterministic, well-defined and publicly known way, then the two are equivalent. Seeds are keys.

It's exactly like the difference between a key in QR code form and in alphanumeric form. They are the same, just expressed differently. As long as I have my seed, you can take my Trezor and crush it to little pieces. I still have my keys (encoded in the seed) and can use several methods (a new Trezor/Ledger or any other h/w wallet, Mycelium or any other s/w wallet, I can even do the calculations myself) to gain access to my coins. And no one has to (and should ever) know my seed, except me. The entire process can be done completely offline.

Having said all the above, I do believe it's good advice to use paper wallets, especially for the non-technically literate coiners among us, who can easily fuck things up by doing something stupid with the 'puter, just like a kid can be injured by playing with a sharp knife (not the knife's fault).

Sure, the seed could be thought of as a key, but I see it more as the seed being the key to a safe deposit box in which you keep your other keys.

You still have to trust the bank.

Maybe I am not technical enough, but there is no "could be" about BIP39 seeds.. they are both keys and back up keys... just in a different format... From what I understand, it's another way of getting your keys.. like having an actual key copy that you stuck under the potted plant, just in case you forget the code, the battery goes dead in the lock or some other malfunction of the electronic lock that you placed on your front door.

You still have to trust the bank.

There's no bank in this case. It's just you, the seed, and mathematics. No 3rd party to trust.

The hardware manufacturers and their firmware?

Aren't there potential vulnerabilities in both software and in firmware?

Even if software is open source, mere mortals are frequently going to have trouble understanding the extent to which there might be exploitable vulnerabilities, right?

The creation of wallets on computers, using of printers, etc.  is potentially a risk if they fall into hacker's hands. Using the phone to take the picture of your paper seed and paste it in the app is also a risk. The pics may be uploaded in the cloud, etc. Typing your seed on a computer also is a risk of course. You never know what the trojans are capable of. There are hundreds of other risks related to router hacks, etc. I really don't see how one can claim paper wallets are 100% safe.

I would never use an internet-capable computer to create an address. I also am aware that print spoolers can be hacked so I use a printer that has never been, nor will ever be connected to an internet-capable computer.

Nothing is 100% safe. Paper can be stolen or lost in fires or other disasters, whether it's keys or seeds. Same with devices can also fail. Anything online is of course extra unsafe.

Splitting your keys, encrypting them, duplicating them, and keeping them in multiple off-site locations is as close to 100% safe as you can get.

Still need to trust the software generating the private keys. A number of browser based 'paper wallet generators', which can be run offline, have had security issues (no true randomness, etc).

Are you using Bitcoin Core? Guess that should be considered safe, after verifying the hash of the download.

That's kind of what I was saying (in my above response).. but of course, you said it first... but still, I said something similar.

[AlcoHoDL]

You still have to trust the bank.

There's no bank in this case. It's just you, the seed, and mathematics. No 3rd party to trust.

The hardware manufacturers and their firmware?

They won't know your seed, it never leaves the device.

It's like when you buy a safe. The company that makes the safe won't know the combination you chose in the privacy of your own home. They just know how the safe works, but not what combination you set. And with the Trezor code being open-source, any backdoor would be exposed before a hacker could organize an attack. When it comes to cryptography, open-source is the only way to go, otherwise, you'll never know what deal the company that make the s/w have made with the NSA...

Unless you mean the case where Trezor's servers get hacked, and a compromised firmware update gets released, which, combined with a compromised version of Trezor Bridge on the PC (hacked by the same hacker), somehow manages to upload the keys to the hacker's server. I guess that theoretically this could happen, but I think it would be extremely difficult for a hacker to be able to pull this through.

Regardless of the practicalities, the one-to-one seed --> key mathematical mapping holds true. So, seed = key,  and we should treat it as such, protecting it from leaking on the net, not showing to anyone, backing it up, etc.

I'd think a paper wallet would be more at risk from common thieves stealing it from you, or degradation (always keep backups, even just photocopies).

In the end, whatever we choose, we've got to be extra careful with our security practices. The word "obvious" is very dangerous when it comes to Bitcoin and cryptography in general.

Two tips:

Don't put all your eggs in one basket.
Plausible deniability -- A $5 wrench is too damn cheap.

[JayJuanGee]

hmmmm

flip a coin?


I will be honest..I am not sure what narrative drives the price above $10k right now and sustains it.

Poor toxic. Having doubts about king daddy.  

Have you heard of the "stock to flow narrative"?

 

 

[Biodom]

hmmmm

flip a coin?


I will be honest..I am not sure what narrative drives the price above $10k right now and sustains it.  I still think we will see a pump over the next week if the fractal from last year holds. But I dont see it continuing in a years long bull run like everyone is hoping for. There is to much uncertainty in the world right now. Logic would dictate everyone pile into an actual hard money to preserve wealth but markets have never been rational.  

So basically...in typical bitcoin fashion...pump it up and then dump...thats my two sats

So yea...kinda feeling a little bearish today..will just have to see what happens over the next couple of weeks.

one thing is for sure: hot money retail crowd is not into bitcoin at the moment and are, instead, chasing bankrupt companies, lol.
Bitcoin is currently fighting to be considered hard money, but only history would eventually show if it succeeds or not. I am willing to believe in this narrative, but there are no guarantees.

Here are my thoughts:
1. If stocks seriously tank (20% probability), btc would tank just as well with bear market continuing. Yes, until we exceed 20K, we are still technically in a local bull market within a longer bear market.
2. If stocks are approximately flat or very slightly decline (60% probability), btc would appreciate, but not hundreds of %% per year and will NOT reach S2F numbers (at least at the predicted time).
3. If stocks appreciate (20% probability), btc could reach S2F numbers in time (2021).

Therefore: 20/100 (1:5 or 20%) chance (IMHO) that the S2F goal (55K-100K) would be reached in 2021 (no indication for later).
I think that planB now realized this, so he came up with S2FX, which does not have an exact timeframe and generally talks about the 2020-2024 period, which could be backloaded and also caused by inflation closer to mid decade.

EDIT: in order to be real hard money, bitcoin would have to deal, somehow, with all those Defi/lending companies that pay up to 4% interest (in BTC!). It is not clear to me how this is possible with hard btc number, or, at least, maybe possible, but prone to collapse with fast price moves.

[Toxic2040]

Poor toxic. Having doubts about king daddy.   

Have you heard of the stock to flow narrative?

 

 

Vaguely aware of such a concept yes..  Narratives interacting with black swan events tend to be disrupted..that all I was saying.

I am fairly certain that no matter how long it takes...we are heading in the direction we all wish to go. That what happens in the short term (ie. the next year or so), I am prepared...as I think you are as well.

Whilst I cant say I have no doubts...I consider them trivial.

[virasog]

In the end, whatever we choose, we've got to be extra careful with our security practices. The word "obvious" is very dangerous when it comes to Bitcoin and cryptography in general.

Two tips:

Don't put all your eggs in one basket.
Plausible deniability -- A $5 wrench is too damn cheap.

[OutOfMemory]

Dude enters his seed holding 6 bitcoins into a Chrome extension???SMH
Bye bye bitcoin.
My condolences but good lord, being a hodeler since 2013 he really should have known better.

https://twitter.com/ericsavics1/status/1271589769336598528
(Apologies if already posted)

I get so confused trying to figure out transactions, and from the links that he provided about where his bitcoin's went, I thought that there were 12 bitcoins sent.

 Am I missing something?

Also, it looks like ericsavics@ericsavics1, the guy who lost his coins, had created a BTC address for the hacker to send back funds, and it looks like, so far,  he received 79 transactions (at the time of my typing this post) that amount to 0.54615978 BTC, which presumably are donations from various members of the BTC community.

Regarding his mistake, yeah, it surely does seem as if he should have known better, even though it is one of those kinds of mistakes that anyone could get tricked into, accidentally... so I am not sure what lessons to get from this kind of mistake.  Perhaps, one lesson is that each of us should practice with our devices and our storage mechanisms on a regular basis to make sure that they work and using small amounts to transact, but I also understand that there are some risks with overly playing around too, so there tends to be some responsibility in ongoing learning how to be your own bank because if you fuck something up, then there is no one to go crying to in order to reverse the mistake, especially when it comes to sending coins and gosh, if you send all of the coins in your wallet at one time that is a pretty BIG deal, too.

Also, I suppose, if any of us is holding most or all of our coins in just a few spots (presuming that they are large amounts), then we might want to reconsider how and where we are holding our coins, too.

But, specifically, the mistake that ericsavics@ericsavics1 made was to enter his password or key words into a chrome browser when the keys should be entered into the device (presumably a Trezor, Ledger or one of the other hardware wallets?)... Many longer term studiers of those hardware wallet products have likely heard over and over about that kind of mistake of not to enter your information over the browser but instead to verify on the device, but like I said it does seem to be a mistake that anyone could make, especially if they do not practice using their hardware device or their wallet on a regular basis and/or they are not studying various aspects of the bitcoin space on a regular basis (which I don't necessarily expect normies to be spending anywhere near as much time as me (I admit I have a problem, but I still believe that I am capable of making lots of mistakes and not knowing some basic things) or any of you other fucking WO regulars in terms of ongoingly studying bitcoin related matters).

One of my first suspicious thoughts was that he might have made up the steal to trick "heartwarm" people into donating some satoshis, and after you posted this, i thought it seems to have worked out if my ego's assumption was right.

As you like to say: perhaps, perhaps, perhaps.
Perhaps we'll never know  

* BobLawblaw angrily grumbles about just seeing a $5M USD/BTC market buy followed by shorts starting to get liquidated.

* BobLawblaw mumbles something about up and number. Maybe.

Bob, i think i can feel you, just that watching these kind of market "moves" makes me more SMH than angry.
But hey, as long as BTC is used to serve as fiat speculator's whore, we kind of have to get used to these dynamics.
Honestly, i don't think it will be easy. Ever. But it would be better.
Do yourself something good today  

[JayJuanGee]

hmmmm

flip a coin?


I will be honest..I am not sure what narrative drives the price above $10k right now and sustains it.  I still think we will see a pump over the next week if the fractal from last year holds. But I dont see it continuing in a years long bull run like everyone is hoping for. There is to much uncertainty in the world right now. Logic would dictate everyone pile into an actual hard money to preserve wealth but markets have never been rational.  

So basically...in typical bitcoin fashion...pump it up and then dump...thats my two sats

So yea...kinda feeling a little bearish today..will just have to see what happens over the next couple of weeks.

one thing is for sure: hot money retail crowd is not into bitcoin at the moment and are, instead, chasing bankrupt companies, lol.
Bitcoin is currently fighting to be considered hard money, but only history would eventually show if it succeeds or not. I am willing to believe in this narrative, but there are no guarantees.

Surely, we all know that there are no guarantees in anything, and of course, like you suggested, in bitcoin, we have some real interesting attempts create a technical system of hard money that is of the ilk that has never been seen previously, and surely any previous attempts had never gotten past theoretical stages, while bitcoin now has a bit more than an 11 year of actual operations and surely built upon several other previous systems and tweaked along the way, too.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying, and I really appreciate your framing of your answer with a decent amount of specifics that both allow for a better understanding regarding from where you are coming, but also an opportunity to show differences of opinion even if some of the differences might be trivial in the whole scheme of things, your framework does allow for points of potentially meaningful discussion.

Here are my thoughts:
1. If stocks seriously tank (20% probability), btc would tank just as well with bear market continuing. Yes, until we exceed 20K, we are still technically in a local bull market within a longer bear market.

Likely that is a fair probability assignment, yet I am not sure if you can presume that BTC would tank to the same degree nor on the same timeline as stocks.. Let's say that some kind of Japan-like bearmarket ensues.. Maybe after a few years bitcoin might start to recover, perhaps?  Or, let's say equities are down 10-20 years, and that would not necessarily mean that bitcoin might not start to recover in that, even if maybe bitcoin crashes deeper and harder, but there remains a considerable amount of difficulty to ONLY ascribe a long term correlation expectation to bitcoin under such circumstances.. and even there are variants in the degree of such a worse case scenario in terms of recovery, supply lines, war, another currency taking over or all currencies stagnate?  Maybe you are suggesting gold is going to prosper in such a scenario while bitcoin languishes, which seems quite unlikely too, except maybe some weird scenario in which internet and computers no longer exist, and you are likely not predicting that scenario to be within your 20% worse case scenario, right?

2. If stocks are approximately flat or very slightly decline (60% probability), btc would appreciate, but not hundreds of %% per year and will NOT reach S2F numbers (at least at the predicted time).

Again, you seem to be too bearish.   A stock market flat or slightly decline seems to be a great scenario for bitcoin.

So, maybe you are overly playing the correlation hypothesis, and really, Biodom, I will concede that 2020 has had a decent amount of bitcoin to stock market correlation.  I will even concede that we can look back at bitcoin's history and we can identify a large number of short periods of bitcoin correlation to the stock market, but if we look at bitcoin in a broader context, the correlation hypothesis is really difficult to argue as being objectively correct... except for those people who are wanting to ongoingly argue, amplify (and see) correlation where it is likely a lot less present and persistent than they would like to assert, except during various short term price moves.

By the way, the stock to flow narrative could be off by 50% for a decent amount of time and still be correct, but it might still need to be adjusted in order to account for the new data, but would not make the stock to flow model as wrong, just needing some tweakenings.

3. If stocks appreciate (20% probability), btc could reach S2F numbers in time (2021).

We could also have over performance of equities and underperformance of BTC, right?

In other words, even though there may be a certain amount of truth that overperformance of equities might allow for continued decent performance of BTC and even BTC staying with the existing stock to flow numbers, I still doubt that mere great performance of equities necessarily would mean that S2F has to follow.  In other words, stock market performance is not included into the stock to flow model (as we all know) even though it may (emphasis on may) have some effects depending upon how severe equities might go in one direction or another.

Therefore: 20/100 (1:5 or 20%) chance (IMHO) that the S2F goal (55K-100K) would be reached in 2021 (no indication for later).

If you have a lot of faulty premises, then your numbers are going to come out faulty, too, which I think is what happened here.

 

I think that planB now realized this, so he came up with S2FX, which does not have an exact timeframe and generally talks about the 2020-2024 period, which could be backloaded and also caused by inflation closer to mid decade.

I doubt that PlanB is as worried as you are  making him out to be.  He is likely just ongoingly playing with his numbers or his formula to make sure that it is reflecting ongoing events.  Of course, anyone can look at past variants, too in order to see how much the model may be shifting, rather than solid, but even if it continues to get tweaked, I doubt that it has really been shown to have major flaws.. and really any of us should be taking the model with a grain of salt, anyhow... I recall initially he was projecting the 2021-ish time frame as $50k, then he went to $100k, then he went to $288k, and sure whatever number he comes up with may or may not happen, and who cares?  Sure some people might become overly reliant on such model and its predictions, and thats on them for not being critical enough in their thinking about it.. or maybe having a plan for either way.. since it is hard to really predict the future with any precision, which is part of the reason that any of us should be having some broad picture plans that account for a variety of scenarios that include both extremely bullish, bearish and even mediocre, and of course, tweaking along the way while trying to somewhat stay with a scenario is a whole hell of a lot easier than NOT acting and waiting and waiting and waiting for the odds to get in your favor and that's almost never going to happen.. in other words it is way better to be acting on way incomplete information because tweaking along the way is way easier than if you never had any momentum or stake in the first place.

EDIT: in order to be real hard money, bitcoin would have to deal, somehow, with all those Defi/lending companies that pay up to 4% interest (in BTC!). It is not clear to me how this is possible with hard btc number, or, at least, maybe possible, but prone to collapse with fast price moves.

Who cares?  Let them collapse.   If people are so dumb (or greedy) to believe that they have to earn interest on an already asymmetric bet (aka king daddy) then maybe they deserve to lose their bitcoin.. its not going to kill bitcoin if a bunch of them go belly up.  Is it?