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

[JayJuanGee]

Zooming out...

Personally, I think that the charts would look more interesting if they were starting out at the same place in the beginning of the chart (of course continuing to be on the same scale), then we would easily be able to more easily see where each asset class has gone in terms of price, whether we are looking at a 3 month period (which does not tend to tell very much of an overall picture) or a 2 year or even longer than 5 year charts that make the same price performance comparison attempts. 

I am not trying to make more work for you Phil_S, but you do seem to already have the tools to fairly easily accomplish such charts, and I do like your color contrasts on those lines, which make your charts pretty easy to read and to see the contrast.

[1713564952]

1713564952

[1713564952]

1713564952

[1713564952]

1713564952

[1713564952]

1713564952

[1713564952]

1713564952

[xhomerx10]

Jeeezus...
There's a lot to unpack in there ....

Maybe have a "Best caption for this Pic" contest.

[suchmoon]

Jeeezus...
There's a lot to unpack in there ....

Maybe have a "Best caption for this Pic" contest.

It's from a movie (Johnny Mad Dog) but there are captions on the intertubes attributing it to a wedding in Somalia, or Liberia, or just generic "Africans" having a good time.

[vapourminer]

Jeeezus...
There's a lot to unpack in there ....

Maybe have a "Best caption for this Pic" contest.

 citadel citizens?

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

Good afternoon WO!
Observing @ $9,601

No major changes yet.

[Indymoney]

Good afternoon WO!
Observing @ $9,601

No major changes yet.

Good thing now staying above 9500$ hopefully next figure could be $10K.

[reliable]

Good afternoon WO!
Observing @ $9,601

No major changes yet.

Good thing now staying above 9500$ hopefully next figure could be $10K.

Let see if this can cross over 10k first or will to fall back below 9500$ now. Though seeing some good resistance form 2 days on this level but at times people start to book profits on some rise and this could lead to some fall and then we have panic sellers in the market that disturbs the whole market leading to more fall.

[Elwar]

For our Italian friends.

"I talenti visionari non mancano, ma nemmeno il senso degli affari fa difetto. Il sito dei Sea Builders offre numerose opzioni di acquisto, affitto o multiproprietà (i Bitcoin sono il mezzo di pagamento preferito, «ma accettiamo anche versamenti via Paypal, e puntiamo, dopo i primi tempi, ad abbattere i costi fino a 195 mila dollari per un modulo, un prezzo alla portata dell’americano medio» spiega Grant)."

https://www.iodonna.it/attualita/storie-e-reportage/2020/07/25/seasteading-case-del-futuro-in-mare/

[jbreher]

and a clinical inability to respond to simple questions or respond with a straight forward simple answer.  

What the hell are you on about? Looking back three pages, you have addressed exactly zero questions to me, let alone ones unanswered. Unless you're confusing yourself with some sock.

Let me summarize my interaction with you so far:

You claimed that your shitcoin BSv is as decentralized as bitcoin

Is your omission intentional? Or do you not understand? I said that from a technical viewpoint the BTC protocol and the BSV protocol are exactly as decentralized as each other.

I asked you to back it up, to define decentralization and metrics you used to arrive at such ludicrous conclusion

No. You inaccurately state your entrance into this branch of the thread. Are you lying, or trying to put one over on us? Or can you simply not remember what your position was those scant few days ago?

You went straight to implying that I was redefining 'decentralization', TOTALLY Without any supporting rationale for your implication.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg54783389#msg54783389

Indeed, it was myself who first asked you for a definition of decentralization, so that I may try to discern what it was you had issue with in my statement.

You did not request that I provide a definition of decentralization until further downthread, after actively evading the question yourself.

Fix you misquote please as I am not sure why my statement is included here. It is out of context.

It honestly took me a minute to figure out what you were complaining about here. Do people really not understand quote indentation?

::sigh:: fine. I'll 'fix' the quote. In my original post. Though there be nothing wrong with it as it stands. The quote in question (I assume you are referring to "I asked you to back it up"...) is clearly attributed to DaRude, but whatevs...

[jbreher]

and a clinical inability to respond to simple questions or respond with a straight forward simple answer.  

What the hell are you on about? Looking back three pages, you have addressed exactly zero questions to me, let alone ones unanswered. Unless you're confusing yourself with some sock.

Let me summarize my interaction with you so far:

You claimed that your shitcoin BSv is as decentralized as bitcoin

Is your omission intentional? Or do you not understand? I said that from a technical viewpoint the BTC protocol and the BSV protocol are exactly as decentralized as each other.

Ok, I'll bite.

The protocol? Not the actual network as in the current BTC and BSV mining state or diversification of nodes?

Correct. The actual coin/chain/protocol. The network that comes out of those concrete considerations is a function of many independent actors making many independent decisions. All based upon popularity. None of these networks has exclusionary barriers to any party playing any part in the network. And popularity is -- in my estimation at least -- an awfully weak place to plant your flag.

Or not... Because there are differences in the protocol that BSV introduced that leads to more centralisation.

Statement made as fait accompli, yet utterly dependent upon facts not entered into evidence. When BTC becomes so expensive to transact upon that the vast majority of the world's population literally cannot transact upon it, who is going to run a fully-validating non-mining client? If a person cannot afford to move an amount of BTC from A to B, do you really think they are going to dedicate a Raspberry Pi to monitoring a chain they have no hope of employing?

OTOH, a chain that has capacity to handle the world's sum of financial transactions has a much (much) larger pool of interested parties from which to draw.

Mainly the (too much) bigger blocks. You (more than significantly) increase the barriers of entry for verification/mining nodes and you indeed introduce a centralisation factor... which degree I am not going to evaluate. But it is there. And it is a difference in the protocol. Can we agree on that?

No. We cannot. There are offsetting factors, the above which is only one.

But should we wish to discuss concrete evidence, it is an indisputable fact that today, BTC validators must dedicate more storage capacity to the task than do BSV validators.
Yes, this is likely a temporary condition.

[jbreher]

Seems correlated?

I had no idea that gold price had achieved Vegeta.

(graph suffers from poor legend on axis of dependent variable)

[Toxic2040]

It honestly took me a minute to figure out what you were complaining about here. Do people really not understand quote indentation?

::sigh:: fine. I'll 'fix' the quote. In my original post. Though there be nothing wrong with it as it stands. The quote in question (I assume you are referring to "I asked you to back it up"...) is clearly attributed to DaRude, but whatevs...

Take a few more JB..

Conflating is a tad lazy in my opinion...indented or not.

I am talking about the root quote..'responding to simple..', your response... 'what the hell are...' and then the conflation of DaRudes and your discussion...'let me summarize...'.

thanks for trying anyway

[jbreher]

it scales in layers with the BTC blockchain being the settlement layer, or we up the block size ala BSV.

Such woud seem the fundamental dichotomy, yes.

What I am saying is when we do it the latter way it is going to be the realm of the super powerful to keep up with it enough to run nodes...

Not today. Certainly, it is well within the purview of insubstantial computers with good internet connections to do so for BSV today. At some time in the future, yes. Hobbyists will end up dropping off.

But that is not A Bad Thing. I mean, it's a tradeoff. Sure, its... nice if everyone is trivially able to validate the chain. But at what price? Demonstrably, so-called second layer solutions were not ready in time to stave off Blockalypse I. Nearly four years later, they still are not ready to stave off a potential Blockalypse II. (Of course, with none of the second layer solutions of which I am aware transacting on chain, they are completely invisible to the so-called 'validators' anyhow, though that's a separate discussion.)

But perhaps more germane... Humanity muddled along for one or two dozen thousand years with no discernible increase in standard of living. It is only in the last few centuries when specialization of labor has allowed us to rise out of the muck of scarcity into a stratified realm of (relative) abundance. Do you insist on developing and building your own automobile?  How about a semiconductor chip? Do you think everyone should design their own computer? Build their own fab to crank out the chips? One only need refer to the seminal essay 'I, Pencil' to see the folly therein. Why would the maintenance of the financial system be the one thing that is the enforced domain of the lowest common denominator?

I say they should not. The system should grow to accommodate demand. Those that are good at validation will remain validators. That are not will fall by the wayside, and find other things to do. Things more matched to their unique set of gifts. There is nothing wrong -- and everything right -- with that.

and we coalesce into a system worse than the current one.

B does not follow A. At least not without an explanation as to how A necessarily leads to B.

I think, going by that concept as a guideline, there would not be a need for BTC in the first place.

Nice try at reductio ad absurdium. Too bad it suffers from deeply flawed reasoning.

(Central) banks are highly specialized and extremely good at creating money out of thin air.

If your criteria for a good financial system include the wealthy enriching themselves by stealing purchasing power from everyone, then yes, I think they have that covered. What leads you to beleive that I think this state of affairs to be A Good Thing?

If you are about to engage in argument starting by constructing a straw man, you might first wish to minimize its flammability.

Then why come up with BTC and then also even include this message in the Genesis block? Looks like someone did indeed want to build his own automobile.

Wait - are you trying to claim that Satoshi did not so specialize in the development of a new monetary protocol? Do you realize the logical conclusion of this line of reasoning is that every last one of us should be devising our own singular and unique monetary protocol?

Which makes me wonder - by following your line of reasoning - why you became involved with BTC anyway, since the specialists had already covered the financial side of things with their expertise...

As above, the goals of those specialists don't match mine. My goals align more closely with what Satoshi's goals seem to have been.

Maybe the line for specialization of labour will have to be redrawn? How about those 3-D printers? Do you think, global supply chains will remain exactly as they are/used to be?

The lines for specialization of labor are in continual flux. Always have been. Well, at least from the time we first hit upon the value of such. And likely always will be.

How about those 3D printers? Are you about to tell me that every person will design each part they create out of first principles? Will everyone first design and build their own 3D printer?

Don't be ...     ....       ... ridiculous.

[jbreher]

Hard to keep your composure when you have princess M'agabe running at you with a defective rocket launcher and a AK-47 ....

I'm still scratching my head as to why the fact that the guy in back has the design of a hand on his shirt seemed the one thing in this image remarkable enough to somebody for them to highlight it.

[ProfTP]

slow and steady rising upward. I like what i see.

We are starting to get some momentum guys.

[rdbase]

Yelling Shazam did work this time!
Observing $9715!

Who created "Money printer go brrrrrr!":
https://youtu.be/_ZFhP632e9c

You referring to this where a black armed militia are planning on marching in Louisville, Kentucky today JoJo?

https://www.foxnews.com/us/black-armed-militia-planning-louisville-march-claims-its-not-f-ing-around

[LFC_Bitcoin]

PlanB
@100trillionUSD
Still hoping to buy the dip at $6000?
Don't hold your breath!
200WMA just passed $6000.
#Bitcoin  never ever dipped below 200WMA.
200WMA never decreased.
200WMA is increasing with $200 every month.

https://twitter.com/100trillionusd/status/1287078394908336130?s=21




If you know, you know ————>


.                                  🔴
                               🔴
                          🔴
               🔴🔴
          🔴
🔴🔴
(Credit for dots is @blockfolio on Twitter)

[Biodom]

PlanB
@100trillionUSD
Still hoping to buy the dip at $6000?
Don't hold your breath!
200WMA just passed $6000.
#Bitcoin  never ever dipped below 200WMA.
200WMA never decreased.
200WMA is increasing with $200 every month.

https://twitter.com/100trillionusd/status/1287078394908336130?s=21




If you know, you know ————>


.                                  🔴
                               🔴
                          🔴
               🔴🔴
          🔴
🔴🔴
(Credit for dots is @blockfolio on Twitter)

I like S2F and everything, but planB is 'teasing" the universe with his suggestions of a smooth sailing.
I would prefer that we just wait and see.
200 WMA will be broken at some point, hopefully not now, though.
It could be 5 years or 10 years from now, but broken it will be.

[Toxic2040]

noon wall charts

#dyor
1h


4h

#stronghands

[Icygreen]

On the weekly, USD down 1.7%, Bitcoin up 5.15%

A game of confidence and trust,