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

[STT]

Dont like that scenario much tbh, we have a decentralized blockchain but the little people arent allowed to use it and thats progress apparently.   Cant say I agree, capitalism is capital from and by the people with the means of production with the people not the government or the corporate elite.   Your scenario doesnt resemble capitalism then presuming the future stays true with what has served free people in the past.    

Over all the markets we are tending towards your scenario but I hope Bitcoin is something a bit different to that, its a big question for our times I dont know how it will turn out.    Just going to read Ray Dalio a min
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/billionaire-investor-ray-dalio-on-capitalisms-crisis-the-world-is-going-to-change-in-shocking-ways-in-the-next-five-years-2020-09-17?mod=hedge-fund-moves-and-insider-trades

[1715094169]

1715094169

[1715094169]

1715094169

[1715094169]

1715094169

[1715094169]

1715094169

[1715094169]

1715094169

[JayJuanGee]

https://twitter.com/michael_saylor/status/1306636046948610049

We acquired 21,454 BTC via 78,388 off-chain transactions, then secured it in cold storage with 18 on-chain transactions.  #Bitcoin scales just fine as a store of value.

TBH, I'm not sure why the Bitcoin community is high-fiving each other over this revelation.

I mean sure, it's exciting that a corporation has figured out how to take a large long position in BTC without rocking the boat. I'm sure that other corporations will begin to follow suit in the coming 3-6 months or within the year. The more institutional corporate hodlers, the better. This is overall good news.

But look, if the straight-laced corps with good intentions have figured out how do this, then so can the nefarious Wall Street whale traders as well as other country's seedy deep pocket whale traders (China, Russia, Germany, England, etc). These guys have hundreds of millions $$$, if not billions $$$, at their disposal too. And the difference is that they don't have to make any public announcements, or get their respective legal teams and corp shareholders involved to fight through a bunch of red tape and months of wrangling before they do it. They can and will take up such positions covertly. These types will be the first to dump all their btc at the top of the next bubble, for sure. This is not so great news.

You have a tendency to figure out some negative angle for good newses.

If you heard Saylor in a couple of interviews, you should figure out that he seems to have a pretty BIG grasp on bitcoin, even though he had ONLY been studying bitcoin for about one year, and maybe a bit more cram studying in the past 6 months or so.

You should listen to his interviews on the Pompliano podcast from a couple of days ago and on the Guy Swann podcast from today, and maybe your opinion on the subject might change.... and maybe not too, you do tend to be a bit of a stubborn one from what I recall.        Each of the interviews are a bit over an hour, but you could listen to them at speeded up, such as 1.5x or 2x, perhaps.

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey Might Allocate Some Corporate $10 Bln into Bitcoin: Willy Woo.

Prominent trader and entrepreneur Willy Woo has hinted that the head of Twitter, Jack Dorsey—who has $10 bln in corporate funds under his control—just might allocate part of that mammoth-sized amount to acquire Bitcoin in the near future to prevent this money from losing value.

Yes,... Microstrategy has provided a bit of a roadmap for the feasibility of such actions by institutional players.

Whether companies decide to take a 10% or 50% of their cash reserves, the amounts at their disposal surely start to add up to a lot of value in the event that some of the more aware, alert and even flexible companies start to see a path forward for accomplishing such bitcoin allocation measures (hedging).

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey Might Allocate Some Corporate $10 Bln into Bitcoin: Willy Woo.

Prominent trader and entrepreneur Willy Woo has hinted that the head of Twitter, Jack Dorsey—who has $10 bln in corporate funds under his control—just might allocate part of that mammoth-sized amount to acquire Bitcoin in the near future to prevent this money from losing value.

Go on @jack, you know it makes sense big man!

Yeah I have been waiting for some big companies buying 100,000,000 or more in coin

No need to wait any longer.  The time is upon us (imminently, soon ^tm)

[Toxic2040]

evening charts

4h



D


D w/ doubled cloud



#stronghands

[jojo69]

[BobLawblaw]

https://twitter.com/guydbennett/status/1306951372638748673

[Toxic2040]

[btcbeliever]

https://twitter.com/michael_saylor/status/1306636046948610049

Everything at an exchange is "off-chain".

Almost all bitcoin transactions in the future will be done on exchanges, between bank accounts, or through digital warehouses without any bitcoin moving on chain. I'm not holding mine like that but you know most people and companies will, out of fear or because they don't know any other way.

The end game is bitcoin becomes the settlement layer for the world. Transaction costs are going way up in the future, you're not going to want to do on-chain transactions when it costs $1000+ to do so, but if you're settling a billions dollars, that's a tiny price to pay.

The fact is, whether we like it or not, very few individuals (other than those of us here) will hold private keys in 10 years. The transaction costs alone will ensure it.

how do you determine on-chain transations to cost so much?

[nullius]

how do you determine on-chain transations to cost so much?

He can’t.  His post is just a roundabout way of saying, “Bitcoin cannot scale, and will thus become a banker’s toy as bone-crushing transaction fees force everybody into the next generation of Paypal.”  Baloney.

Almost all bitcoin transactions in the future will be done on exchanges, between bank accounts, or through digital warehouses without any bitcoin moving on chain. I'm not holding mine like that but you know most people and companies will, out of fear or because they don't know any other way.

Nice list.  You are basically describing a centralized shitcoin that’s like meta-Paypal 2.0 with magic “blockchain” pixie dust sprinkled on top.  Who needs it?  (Not the banks, who do not like transparent blockchains for their own use!  There is a reason why JPMorgan Chase (!) paid the erstwhile Zcash Company to adapt zk-SNARKs to their own bigbank confidentiality requirements.  See also Greg Maxwell’s discussions of bigcorp interest in Confidential Transactions—which are accordingly implemented in Blockstream’s Liquid.  Only idiots make their own finances publicly transparent; bigcorps are not so stupid.)

Notably, you omitted Lightning Network, and other off-chain things not under the control of banks and other regulated corporations.

The end game is bitcoin becomes the settlement layer for the world. Transaction costs are going way up in the future, you're not going to want to do on-chain transactions when it costs $1000+ to do so, but if you're settling a billions dollars, that's a tiny price to pay.

I could see perhaps something on the order of magnitude of $100 (in today’s current value) on-chain transaction costs, but $1000+?  Smells like FUD.

Bitcoin needs to be accessible to even relatively poor individuals for long-lived channel management on a future L2:  Scrape together, say, $100 to open a channel that runs for years.  N.b., I am not saying it will cost that much!  Just taking that as a figure that will seem high to most people, it would be less expensive overall, amortized over the channel lifetime, than the ripoff fees that regulated money transmitters charge to the “unbanked” in many regions.  Proportionately, the poor always get ripped off the worst!  Speaking from experience—if I had back all of the money that I have ever paid to move small amounts of money without a bank account...

That is not some bleeding-heart egalitarian hogwash.  It is simply a functional description of what is necessary to be something other than just another bankers’ tool.

$1000+ tx fees would mean that Bitcoin is destined to fail—or worse, to become an abomination against financial freedom—and that I should dump it and get out right now.

Fortunately, I do not believe you.  On-chain scalability improvements, combined with off-chain layering, must and will keep “Be Your Own Bank” financial independence within the reach of ordinary individuals—including those who are not early-entrant “Bitcoin rich”.  Just look at the excellent work in Segwit v1, soon nascent, and then consider what the same types of continuing incremental improvements will bring to the baselayer—and what types of new protocols they will support.

The fact is, whether we like it or not, very few individuals (other than those of us here) will hold private keys in 10 years. The transaction costs alone will ensure it.

That would turn Bitcoin into a bankers’ wet dream:  The totally controlled, centralized, regulated basis for a cashless dystopia in which everybody can be tracked, traced, and forced to ask permission to use money.

That is not a new allegation, and it’s not true.

The fact is, whether you the bankers like it or not, cryptographic cleverness will continue to enable technologies that put the individual in direct control of his own money.

[Hueristic]

[jbreher]

lose: unfind ... loose: untight

Its so good two C you’re hi regard for proper use of the English language!  I like it alot.

I'm gratified to learn of your pleasure thereof. That's there for those who don't know any better.*

Just cause I ain't talk good mostish should not be construed to imply that I am incapable of employing formal grammatical constructs.

*Given the pervasivity of that particular misuse, I sometimes worry that the entire innerwebs is trolling me.

...

You skipped over the most salient point. You have no fckin clue.

[Tash]

Almost all bitcoin transactions in the future will be done on exchanges,

No.
Could you not afford proper Bitcoin schoolery and had to attend shitcoin classes.
I and only I deceit who i pay and not some exchange dealing with all kinds of garbage and losing or misappropriating my coins.
Kraken or other such junkyards want see my precious Bitcoin.

[VB1001]

https://btcartgallery.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/unnamed27.png

GoodMorning+coffee+WO+StrongHats

[-CryptoViking-]

https://btcartgallery.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/unnamed27.png

GoodMorning+coffee+WO+StrongHats

I would merit you for this photo if I had any merit left, I will use that as my wallpaper from now on.

I see most of the people, according to the poll, expect a little rise in price today same as me.Next week we should attack 12-13k, Uni was a good boost, traded it and bought more BTC

[jbreher]

You would think an MIT grad and subsequent computer simulations modeler would've understood Bitcoin back in 2013.

I'm no MIT grad and I got it almost immediately back then.

Hell within a few days of research, I completely understood how groundbreaking a breakthrough it was, and how it would fundamentally change the financial world.

While that all makes sense, one must first actually stick their head in the rabbit hole before one can start to understand.

edit: 'tis one of my regrets that I did not give the rabbit hole more than a cursory glance at first sight. Oh well. C'est la guerre.

Huh, jbreher?

What's your rabbit hole story?  You may have said.  I cannot remember specifics.

You did not start buying BTC right away?  At least small amounts?  You may have sold too many too soon.  I think that i heard you reveal something like that, previously.

I've said a little. Perhaps not a lot. I was made aware in 2010. I already had a huge revulsion for the tenets of partial reserve banking, so I was primed. But I was A Busy Guy. No time to look into a neckbeard curiosity that had 'little chance of panning out' (i.e., I walked past the rabbit hole and noticed it's presence, but did not stick my head in).

Even at that, I was buying well before I registered hereupon.  Ponderate upon that if you must.

No, I've not sold a whole lot. 'Divestment phase' != 'Liquidating out for stinky fiat'. At least not in my reading.

I did ...lose a whole lot. In a boating accident couple of scammy scams. As said earlier, C'est la guerre.

I have probably been interacting with you since mid-to-late 2014.. perhaps early 2015, and seems that you had accumulated some BTC in Bitcoin's pre-2013 era.

Sure, maybe a lot of us do not accumulate as many BTC as we retroactively conclude that we should have, and of course, June 2011 would have given you a whole year to accumulate single digit BTC and then a bit more than another 1/2 year to acquire BTC in the teens (below $20).

Yup. Even after (significant) losses, my all-in cost for what I still hold is about $20 each.

So, sure, there could have been some selling too much too soon.

Not at all. I have sold ... a little. For a good price. Anyone else here claiming they sold some at $20250?

(yes, I know you are wedded to stamp's numbers. But GDAX went above 20250)

Bueller...?

... Bueller...?*

*Fun factoid: The guy who played that teacher -- Ben Stein -- used to be President Richard M Nixon's speechwriter.

Another factoid I let slip a while back: At the top of the market in late 2017, I sold enough to buy My Personal Lambo^tm.  

Some of us are well into the divestment phase.  

Probably one of the first times that you mentioned that mostly "divestment phase" perspective of yourself.  

Again, not at all. From the same time frame as above: I have already stated that I have retired. Which means I need to fund my Lavish Lambo Lifestyle^tm* off my accumulated holdings. Hence, Divestment phase.

I mean, if you can't connect 'retired from wage slave status' (even at a job I loved - and one upon which Bitcoin, computer networking, and pretty much any tech-touching field is utterly dependent upon my contributions to such) with 'divestment phase'? Well, then that's on you.

*(Rhetorical question - if it is well within your means, is the Lavish Lambo Lifestyle^tm actually ... lavish?)

Could be one of the reasons that you seem to have a decent amount of relative valuing of dollars rather than bitcoin?  

How long have we known each other? If I valued USD more than Bitcoin, I'd have liquidated.

On the other hand, such a purported status would not seem to justify your seeming tendency to have been spending many years gambling with long shot bcash nonsenses.

So sue me. (I've got a pretty big war chest - you better be sure of your case).

No, I just think that a Bitcoin that has not been intentionally crippled by an insane, economically-ignorant restrictive production quota upon transaction capacity has more inherent value than one which has been so crippled. And that my thesis will be proven prescient come Blockalypse II. But you know this already.

You also know that I am not in the BCH camp. I was until they started adopting pages from the Core/Blockstream playbook, and started adding gratuitous protocol changes. At which point, the standard-bearer for satoshi's original design was advanced by BSV.

The confirmed science and math that Satoshi didn't understand has to do with how poorly this system functions as a currency. We tried it for a few years. It doesn't work. It's only a bad speculative vehicle, which now people realize and have been dumping for 4 years. The project failed. Neat idea, but fractional reserve banking is clearly better based on all proven and confirmed science and math. I'm glad Satoshi tried this out, but now we know it doesn't work and we can go back to the way things are proven to work best.

Too bad Satoshi wasn't a smart guy like Craig Wright.

To be fair, for the entire interval of satoshi's public involvement, transaction volume never came anywhere near the (relatively very high level for the time) blocksize cap that he enacted under prodding from his most significant collaborator.

Plus, he explicitly explained exactly how trivial it would be to increase said blocksize cap such that transaction volume was never artificially throttled. Extending to exemplary code. To the eventual exasperation of those of us who would like the system to exceed such exceedingly tiny limits. As reliance on such economicallly braindead external exigencies is extreme folly.

In other words, pretty much long settled that BIG blocks are not the way to go,

'Settled'? Au contraire mon frere.

I mean, if you think that the wise decision is to outsource your strategy to the 100 IQ masses, knock yourself out.

No - at the point that we've not even started up the S-Curve inflection point of adoption, it is waaaaay too early to be calling any sort of eventual winner.

[jbreher]

like, who gives a f--k..it is not 2017 anymore...that is done..and what's done is done.

While true, it may be the mirror image of 2016 again.

[jbreher]

(FWIW, in some clusterfork of a Reputation thread, I mentioned that I would offer jbreher a (virtual) beer if he ever consistently repudiated his beloved forked shitcoins and Faketoshi-apologia, and admitted that he was wrong about Segwit, Core, etc.  The offer stands.)

I might be convinced to share a draft with you some day. Yet you persist in slander. Preference for the BSV protocol != 'Faketoshi-apologia' (WhateverTF that might be). And that entire matter of starting a brigaded neg campaign against me. Not like it hurt me in any way, but that's just fucking rude.

Either way, repudiation of what I believe to be a better design just ain't gonna happen.

If Blockalypse II comes and goes without the same sort of reduction in BTC Dominance that accompanied Blockalypse I, I'll likely acquiesce. In the same sense that I have waved goodbye to the sonics of 2" 30 ips tape. But repudiate the better design? Ain't gonna happen.

[jbreher]

* Another subject that I recently began to write about, and did not yet finish:  Fractional reserve banking is mathematically impossible with Bitcoin.  Because fractional reserve banking is not what most people think it is—it is worse—it creates money out of thin air, whereas it is impossible to loan new bitcoins into existence out of nowhere.

Sorry, but that's just ignorant. It is also impossible to create gold (the elemental metal) out of nowhere. Explain me paper gold and gold leasing. The physical metal as a financial asset is undercapitalized by an inscrutable multiple.

_Impossible_ to suffer such rehypothecation? Not at all, young padawan.

[JayJuanGee]

The fact is, whether we like it or not, very few individuals (other than those of us here) will hold private keys in 10 years. The transaction costs alone will ensure it.

That would turn Bitcoin into a bankers’ wet dream:  The totally controlled, centralized, regulated basis for a cashless dystopia in which everybody can be tracked, traced, and forced to ask permission to use money.

That is not a new allegation, and it’s not true.

The fact is, whether you the bankers like it or not, cryptographic cleverness will continue to enable technologies that put the individual in direct control of his own money.

Whoaza, nullius!!!!!   I agree with pretty much everything in your rant in rolling's direction, and I had not really read through your earlier post that you linked at the end of your rant, and I see that holy shit your bot is programmed into some decent rantening, and linkening of rants, today.  Go nullius go!

Actually, I did not even respond to rolling earlier because actually I was going to merit his comment in the earlier parts, until I got towards the last sentence or two of his comment, and I thought to my lil selfie, "wat?"  "regular peeps not going to be able to use bitcoin?"  "What dee fuckity u b talkin bout, willis?"  I had thought that usually rolling had been making comments/posts that made some kinds of senses, or that generally the rolling avatar understood what bitcoin offered, but that comment/post from rolling seemed as if he got on the wrong train and was "out there as fuck," and surely you, nullius, identified the crux of the various problemas with rolling's comment.  

It is like he no does not understand what dee fuckie is bitcoin.  In spite of considerable mainstream and normie fusion regarding what Bitcoin is, there are no real or actual signs that bitcoin is being designed to fit into some kind of mainstream "business as usual" tool.  Bitcoin has been disruptive from the start, and surely in its earliest days of design and operation, it seemed to have flown under the radar for a number of years, including that it was not even really any kind of meaningful threat to status quo governments or status quo financial institutions, but surely, some smarter peeps are starting to better understand what bitcoin is offering and continuing to offer - which is truly not business as usual.

I personally do no necessarily see the idea of government as bad, especially in terms of needs for ways to attempt to protect regular peeps from institutions and from forces that strive to undermine the individual's life and freedoms in a whole lot number of ways, and surely bitcoin is serving as a force for good in the individual empowerment potential direction, which in part merely just gives individuals more options in how to use it, and also even for government officials to have kick them in the butt incentives to be more responsible, especially in the financial management direction.

And, to me, nullius, it sounds as if bitcoin is providing you, personally, a whole fucking lots of options (as an ongoing aspiring unbanked person) to be able to have abilities to participate in various aspects of civil society that were less available to you prior to bitcoin, and surely bitcoin is likely going to give more and more options to peeps like you (and sure other peeps, and even all peeps/normies can unite in various ways once they start to appreciate the power of bitcoin, even if they do not start using it (and benefiting from it) directly).

In any event, even if some powerful folks would like to turn bitcoin into one of their toys, so far there is no evidence that bitcoin is really cooperating in that direction, and sure some of those fucktwats can go play around with some of the shitcoins, even though they may likely be to smart in terms of how willing they are to get their asses burnt by that shit, and so probably, even the fucktwats are going to come over to bitcoin, and likely bitcoin is going to end up making them more honest, even if they try to make it their little play thing from time to time, they NOT going to be too likely to be successful, at least the evidence seems to be playing out that way, so far... in baby bitcoin's little life.

It's still early dayz boyz and girl!!!  

[Krubster]

Jokes aside. Looking back, 2020 will be remembered as the beginning of the next bull-run.

Gentlemen, brace yourself. We're in for a ride.

[Last of the V8s]

  BTC Dominance