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

[freebit13]

to which I say: WHERE THE HELL IS MY CHOICE TO LIVE WITHOUT A GOVERNMENT?

I am very curious what no government means to you, and why you'd want to live in a place without one. I mean, it's one thing to want less government intrusion, but are we talking less/no taxes, or are we talking no police department, no public schooling, no fire department. Where do you draw the line?

Oh yeah and about the eternal "what about the roads/fire department/schools/etc." - let's build them. Now that we have Blockchain technology and an increasingly stable currency on top of it we can build all sorts of things on a voluntary and decentralized basis at least for the reason that we don't want to be dependent on the government providing these services. Wouldn't that be a neat thing? Grow the institutions to replace the current system from the ground up. Let's plant some seeds.

Yeah, let's build them! Let's take your knowledge of building roads, my knowledge of building roads, and combined, I'm willing to bet that we'll have a total of zero knowledge of how to build roads. Since we can't do it, someone will have to. But that someone is going to want to be paid for their investment/hard work, so you'll probably have to pay tolls every few miles. Oh, wait, some people can't afford those tolls. Those people better stay home or get ready to walk it, because they're fucked.

The same logic can be applied to pretty much everything else. It's a good society...for those who can afford it. But hey, at least we don't need those poor deadbeats mooching off our roads and having police protection and shit. That's reserved for the people who deserve it. That's for the people with wealth.

Dreams and reality rarely intersect.

What? That's not an argument... that's not even logical. If people are not paying taxes then they would be able to afford the tolls... and only those that use the roads would have to pay for them. It's like you're arguing that people are being expected to work for free... that's just misleading.

Try to think of a system where everyone only pays for what they use... that what's possible with Bitcoin technology.

[hdbuck]

Im poor, and i am ok with staying home.  Bring on the anarchism.

Shouldn't you say "bring some food and hookers" ?

Well i have guns, property with extensive gardens,  and a long time girlfriend... So dont need food or hooks.  I would trade food for ammunition and solar panels, but depending on when shit hits the fan i may not need those thing by then.

How about beers? when never have enough anyway

[BubbaGumpShrimpinBoatCapn]

to which I say: WHERE THE HELL IS MY CHOICE TO LIVE WITHOUT A GOVERNMENT?

I am very curious what no government means to you, and why you'd want to live in a place without one. I mean, it's one thing to want less government intrusion, but are we talking less/no taxes, or are we talking no police department, no public schooling, no fire department. Where do you draw the line?

Oh yeah and about the eternal "what about the roads/fire department/schools/etc." - let's build them. Now that we have Blockchain technology and an increasingly stable currency on top of it we can build all sorts of things on a voluntary and decentralized basis at least for the reason that we don't want to be dependent on the government providing these services. Wouldn't that be a neat thing? Grow the institutions to replace the current system from the ground up. Let's plant some seeds.

Yeah, let's build them! Let's take your knowledge of building roads, my knowledge of building roads, and combined, I'm willing to bet that we'll have a total of zero knowledge of how to build roads. Since we can't do it, someone will have to. But that someone is going to want to be paid for their investment/hard work, so you'll probably have to pay tolls every few miles. Oh, wait, some people can't afford those tolls. Those people better stay home or get ready to walk it, because they're fucked.

The same logic can be applied to pretty much everything else. It's a good society...for those who can afford it. But hey, at least we don't need those poor deadbeats mooching off our roads and having police protection and shit. That's reserved for the people who deserve it. That's for the people with wealth.

Dreams and reality rarely intersect.

What? That's not an argument... that's not even logical. If people are not paying taxes then they would be able to afford the tolls... and only those that use the roads would have to pay for them. It's like you're arguing that people are being expected to work for free... that's just misleading.

Try to think of a system where everyone only pays for what they use... that what's possible with Bitcoin technology.

I cant help but find humor in the argument that people will instantly be unwilling to pay for road construction just because there is no federal government.  That shit kills me.

[NotLambchop]

...I am convinced that decentralized/voluntary/anarchistic forms of societal organization are far superior to centralized forms in terms of their efficiency...

This is not, nor has it been in recent history, a reality.  The fact that such arrangements have never persisted is, in itself, proof of their implausibility.  A world where there is no crime, for instance, is superior to a world where crime exists.  But such an ideal is as implausible as the utopian volunteerism you describe.  

Huh? What utopian volunteerism?  Are you hallucinating or am I sleeping?  Both?

Nah, not unless you type in your sleep.  And unless you're ErisDiscordia's alt account, you are also not being spoken to.  But since you weighed in...  What is it that's bothering you?

This is a new account with 6min. post limit, so shoot for coherency in your reply.

[hlynur]

i highly doubt that during the process of transformation towards such a system the whole problem with gobal monopolistic companies backing up their status by influencing politics would simply disappear. Privatization in certain economical sectors like water or electrical power supply has led to very ugly developments at the expense of citizens in a lot of countries around the world.

global monopolistic companies owe their existence to global monopolistic governments.  you can't have one without the other.  the centralized state is no less causally responsible for the privatized water arrangement operated by a centralized corporation than it is for the socialized water arrangement operated by a central state.

fair point and i must admit that i partly agree with ErisDiscordia's argumentation in his last post.
The only problem i see is the transformation towards such changes.
As these companies have already gained a certain amount of power & money i can't figure out a smooth process there.
I rather expect them manifesting the status quo even further through cartels and nepotism when governments pull back regulation in certain sectors.
this could derange into companies owning complete parts of cities and simply replacing the governmental structures as we have them today. (which would definitively be at the expense of the lower classes because of the purely profit-driven structure)

But as often seen during human history perhaps shit must hit the fan until a real change can occur.
Another problem i see is the mentioned voluntary support for the poorer part of the pyramid.
Watching the dissolving and individualistic orientied society in these days, i always get the feeling the masses are so used to the dog-eat-dog world
that they unlearned what it means to act social and really take part in a community.

Although i have to add there are positive events from time to time that give me hope for a reverse trend and this development could change over the next decades.

[BitcoinWisdom]

Is this normal to not show any lower bids?

Bitcoin Wisdom is just generally fucked and never reports the right volumes.

a) btcwisdom truncates the order book, for speed reasons as the owner says. seeing that his site is usually up during heavy trading days when the others go down, i'm inclined to follow his logic.

b) the way the order book information is displayed is unintuitive at first maybe, but before claiming it's all wrong, first understand how prices are grouped. explanation is in the btcwisdom thread in the service subforum.

c) never heard of volume being wrong. quick check matches volume shown on tradingview. care to find some evidence for your claim?

I'm the one claiming lot's of data that bitcoinwisdom is showing is fucked up:

MACD numbers are wrong, they do not match tradingview (and my own calculations at all).

Volumes are correct if you refresh the page, but if you keep it open for a couple of hours (without internet connection loss obv). It'll start showing some real messed up volumes for the past couple of candles. If you refresh the page after that the volumes will be correct again.

What seems to be correct however is:
Price, Orderbook

In the end I got tired of websites showing me wrong data, I wrote my own (private).

If you are looking for a better site tho, I can suggest tradingview (as far as I checked their numbers are correct).

Didn't know about the volume error when not refreshing page. Sounds plausible, but seems benign to me if it's solved with a reload.

Re: MACD. Did you account for different MACD parameters? Both tradingview and btcwisdom allow you to set your own parameters, which in case of tradingview includes price source itself.

According to to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MACD or http://stockcharts.com/help/doku.php?id=chart_school:technical_indicators:moving_average_conve

MACD formula is

MACD = [stockPrices,12]EMA - [stockPrices,26]EMA
signal = [MACD,9]EMA
histogram = MACD – signal

Standard MACD uses EMA to calculate signal. Trading View uses Simple MA to calculate by default, If uncheck tradingview's MACD option "Simple MA(Signal Line)", the chart will be same.

[hdbuck]

...I am convinced that decentralized/voluntary/anarchistic forms of societal organization are far superior to centralized forms in terms of their efficiency...

This is not, nor has it been in recent history, a reality.  The fact that such arrangements have never persisted is, in itself, proof of their implausibility.  A world where there is no crime, for instance, is superior to a world where crime exists.  But such an ideal is as implausible as the utopian volunteerism you describe.  

Huh? What utopian volunteerism?  Are you hallucinating or am I sleeping?  Both?

Nah, not unless you type in your sleep.  And unless you're ErisDiscordia's alt account, you are also not being spoken to.  But since you weighed in...  What is it that's bothering you?

This is a new account with 6min. post limit, so shoot for coherency in your reply.

rofl. i like you noobie  

[MikeH]

"can a monkey live without bones?"
- K. Pilkington

[octaft]

What? That's not an argument... that's not even logical. If people are not paying taxes then they would be able to afford the tolls... and only those that use the roads would have to pay for them. It's like you're arguing that people are being expected to work for free... that's just misleading.

Try to think of a system where everyone only pays for what they use... that what's possible with Bitcoin technology.

Sure, they'll have more money and be "makin' it rain" with all the extra proceeds from not paying taxes. Except, oh wait, their wages will probably be less than the taxes they would have paid, since there won't be any government mandated minimum wage anymore. "Oh, you want $7 an hour? Sorry, this dude's willing to work for $4. Can I get you to come down to $3.50?" That's before we consider all the price collusion they'll now face at the stores they buy goods at. They might be able to barter, but if they can't afford the privatized protection, who is to stop them from getting robbed?

This is assuming you don't mean that "omg I want the government to die so we can live survival of the fittest style" kind of anarchy. I know others tend to toss people into that mold of anarchy as soon as the word comes up, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you don't want to pull out your bat and shotgun and win your food the old fashioned way, but if this IS what you meant, I imagine would leave most of the poor pillaged and murdered inside of 2 months by other poor, since the victim can't afford the protection and the thief can't really afford food. Presumably the thief will be "fitter" than the victim. EDIT: This should be addressed to the 2nd guy, not you.

See why this situation sucks for the poor?

We're both speculating, to be sure, but it's definitely not as simple as some of you are making it.

I cant help but find humor in the argument that people will instantly be unwilling to pay for road construction just because there is no federal government.  That shit kills me.

Please show me where I said that. I said SOMEONE will have to do it, and they're going to want to make something for it, which is understandable. The problem comes for those who can't afford it, and read my logic above for why they likely won't be able to.

[Richy_T]

I've read Dickens, thank you. Victorian work houses were Victorian, as in under the monarch Queen Victoria. Adjusting for changes in technology, I hardly see modern public housing as an improvement. When people have to get their limbs sawed off one by one because they can't get off their fat asses long enough to prevent diabetes, those limbs are just as gone as they would be if they were caught in the machinery.

Dickens was often a despicable liar. I'd be very wary about taking anything he wrote as the truth.

[San1ty]

Is this normal to not show any lower bids?

Bitcoin Wisdom is just generally fucked and never reports the right volumes.

a) btcwisdom truncates the order book, for speed reasons as the owner says. seeing that his site is usually up during heavy trading days when the others go down, i'm inclined to follow his logic.

b) the way the order book information is displayed is unintuitive at first maybe, but before claiming it's all wrong, first understand how prices are grouped. explanation is in the btcwisdom thread in the service subforum.

c) never heard of volume being wrong. quick check matches volume shown on tradingview. care to find some evidence for your claim?

I'm the one claiming lot's of data that bitcoinwisdom is showing is fucked up:

MACD numbers are wrong, they do not match tradingview (and my own calculations at all).

Volumes are correct if you refresh the page, but if you keep it open for a couple of hours (without internet connection loss obv). It'll start showing some real messed up volumes for the past couple of candles. If you refresh the page after that the volumes will be correct again.

What seems to be correct however is:
Price, Orderbook

In the end I got tired of websites showing me wrong data, I wrote my own (private).

If you are looking for a better site tho, I can suggest tradingview (as far as I checked their numbers are correct).

Didn't know about the volume error when not refreshing page. Sounds plausible, but seems benign to me if it's solved with a reload.

Re: MACD. Did you account for different MACD parameters? Both tradingview and btcwisdom allow you to set your own parameters, which in case of tradingview includes price source itself.

According to to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MACD or http://stockcharts.com/help/doku.php?id=chart_school:technical_indicators:moving_average_conve

MACD formula is

MACD = [stockPrices,12]EMA - [stockPrices,26]EMA
signal = [MACD,9]EMA
histogram = MACD – signal

Standard MACD uses EMA to calculate signal. Trading View uses Simple MA to calculate by default, If uncheck tradingview's MACD option "Simple MA(Signal Line)", the chart will be same.

The formula you describe is correct however your results aren't. The argument you make about tradingview I knew about so I made sure I compared apples with apples (I'm no fool):

TradingView MACD Histogram Previous 30 Minutes:



-1.17

BitcoinWisdom MACD Histogram Previous 30 Minutes:



-2.2

Bitcoincharts.com MACD Histogram Previous 30 Minutes:



You can't hover over the Histogram to be sure, but it looks close to 1.2 (the same as TradingView has)

[Richy_T]

Nah, not unless you type in your sleep.  And unless you're ErisDiscordia's alt account, you are also not being spoken to.  But since you weighed in...  What is it that's bothering you?

"Public forum". Do you have a problem understanding that concept? There are PMs available if you choose to have private conversations.

And no one was talking about any kind of Utopia. (That tends to be the realm of the collectivists - Just a little more government and everything will be wonderful. No, we just need to get the right people in power, honest.). You bringing that into things is what is known as a "straw man" argument.

Libertarians don't shoot for Utopia. We just believe that voluntary interactions are not only preferable from an idealistic standpoint, they also produce a superior (though still far from perfect) outcome.

[freebit13]

What? That's not an argument... that's not even logical. If people are not paying taxes then they would be able to afford the tolls... and only those that use the roads would have to pay for them. It's like you're arguing that people are being expected to work for free... that's just misleading.

Try to think of a system where everyone only pays for what they use... that what's possible with Bitcoin technology.

Sure, they'll have more money and be "makin' it rain" with all the extra proceeds from not paying taxes. Except, oh wait, their wages will probably be less than the taxes they would have paid, since there won't be any government mandated minimum wage anymore. "Oh, you want $7 an hour? Sorry, this dude's willing to work for $4. Can I get you to come down to $3.50?" That's before we consider all the price collusion they'll now face at the stores they buy goods at. They might be able to barter, but if they can't afford the privatized protection, who is to stop them from getting robbed?

This is assuming you don't mean that "omg I want the government to die so we can live survival of the fittest style" kind of anarchy. I know others tend to toss people into that mold of anarchy as soon as the word comes up, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you don't want to pull out your bat and shotgun and win your food the old fashioned way, but if this IS what you meant, I imagine would leave most of the poor pillaged and murdered inside of 2 months by other poor, since the victim can't afford the protection and the thief can't really afford food. Presumably the thief will be "fitter" than the victim. EDIT: This should be addressed to the 2nd guy, not you.

See why this situation sucks for the poor?

We're both speculating, to be sure, but it's definitely not as simple as some of you are making it.

I cant help but find humor in the argument that people will instantly be unwilling to pay for road construction just because there is no federal government.  That shit kills me.

Please show me where I said that. I said SOMEONE will have to do it, and they're going to want to make something for it, which is understandable. The problem comes for those who can't afford it, and read my logic above for why they likely won't be able to.

Nope, I'm not a gun toting, survival of the fittest type, but I do have more faith in humanity and I believe that when it comes down to it, people end up helping each other... I don't buy into that apocalyptic Hollywood type crap fed to everyone in which people turn in to monsters and everything goes Mad Max... no way, we don't live in the dark ages anymore, just go an look for positive videos on the internet and you'll find plenty, it's just not 'news'. Apparently the New York blackout turned into a more of a block party than looters and rioters and strangers invited strangers into their homes for the night... people aren't all mad you know.

My view is that if you create positions of power, you will have certain types of people (psychopaths, sociopaths etc.) who will gravitate towards those positions because of the advantages it affords them. Most normal people just want to get on with life and enjoy it, but the power structures allow them to be taken advantage of... it's just the way things work. It's not that all humans are evil, it's just the power structures we live in that allow a few evil to rule over the many good... and not by chance in my opinion.

If you get rid of centralized power, you get rid of centralized corruption... automatically.

The argument that no roads, schools, hospitals etc. would be built without government is an old one, but is not very valid because most of the best roads are always private toll roads, government roads suck simply because they are made by companies on govenrment payroll which everyone know is a free ride, that also just the way things are. The best hospitals and schools are also private. I understand your argument that the poor can't afford these things, but that's exactly why there are charity organizations, those won't just go away without the gov. If everyone had more money from not paying taxes for things they don't use, then there would be more money to go round and it wold lift everyone up and more people might help poor people... just look at Kiva today...

[oda.krell]

Fun! I'll jump into the discussion if you don't mind, and play devil's advocate for a moment (I'm personally mostly agnostic I guess in the discusion statists vs. libertarians/anarchists)...

How do countries like Switzerland, Sweden, Norway fit in?

They are, by all meaningful definitions, heavily leaning towards "strong state", but are economically incredibly powerful (per capita, which is the relevant metric here).

Sure, you can explain part of that by independent causes (Norway: natural resources, Switzerland: banking culture), but hardly all of it. The way it looks to me, at least in /some/ countries "statism" works just fine, from an economical perspective.

[hdbuck]

Fun! I'll jump into the discussion if you don't mind, and play devil's advocate for a moment (I'm personally mostly agnostic I guess in the discusion statists vs. libertarians/anarchists)...

How do countries like Switzerland, Sweden, Norway fit in?

They are, by all meaningful definitions, heavily leaning towards "strong state", but are economically incredibly powerful (per capita, which is the relevant metric here).

Sure, you can explain part of that by independent causes (Norway: natural resources, Switzerland: banking culture), but hardly all of it. The way it looks to me, at least in /some/ countries "statism" works just fine, from an economical perspective.

True but i dont see the point for countries that are already failing both socially and economically to keep up with statism?!

[freebit13]

Quick thought: I'd say size has a lot to do with is size... large unmanageable bureaucracies are a sociopaths dream come ture

[BubbaGumpShrimpinBoatCapn]

Quick thought: I'd say size has a lot to do with is... large unmanageable bureaucracies are a sociopaths dream come ture

Especially when the population is divided into a million little factions.  Nobody trusts each other so cannot accomplish anything without big brothers help.  The best way to sort that out is smaller borders.

http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110603162634/petoriathelittlecountrythatcould/images/c/c9/250px-Petoria.jpg

http://www.youthunitedpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Petoria.gif

[freebit13]

Quick thought: I'd say size has a lot to do with is... large unmanageable bureaucracies are a sociopaths dream come ture

Especially when the population is divided into a million little factions.  Nobody trusts each other so cannot accomplish anything without big brothers help.  The best way to sort that out is smaller borders.

Not quite... you'll need big brother to take care of more borders...

Anyone got any news on the current dip? What's with all the dumping? Why the current dowtrend?

[oda.krell]

Quick thought: I'd say size has a lot to do with is size... large unmanageable bureaucracies are a sociopaths dream come ture

Agreed. But the argument becomes a bit nuanced then, no?

"Statism doesn't work for very large countries".

And the conclusions (assuming the above is true) would also be a bit more subtle: you could fix large dysfunctional nation states either by breaking them down into more manageable units (c.f. "Bioregionalism"), or by reducing the power of the state. In which case I suspect a break-up into smaller sub-nations is becoming more likely as well.

[Richy_T]

Sure, you can explain part of that by independent causes (Norway: natural resources, Switzerland: banking culture), but hardly all of it. The way it looks to me, at least in /some/ countries "statism" works just fine, from an economical perspective.

A mostly free market can support quite a lot of nonsense. Heck, even the minor capital reforms the Chinese have allowed have boosted their economy enormously.

With the productivity increase that technology has brought, we should be seeing astounding progress right now. As it is, even with what's going on, things are still pretty good. It's that hard to keep people down.