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

[ErisDiscordia]

...I provided explanations for my various assertions...

Can you show me where, please?

[1714688090]

1714688090

[tarmi]

Bitcoins are owned by evil people?  Well if we want to get philosophical about it, we all are sinners so I guess it could be true.  

I worship Zeus, and to me, you christian sinners should all burn in hell rot in Hades.

Did the Greeks actually worship Hades? Was it reluctantly? Maybe the Disney film is messing me up lol      

Hades was a fearsome figure. to many, simply to pronounce his name was frightening, so Greeks used euphemisms to call his name> like "the notorious", "the one who receives many" (that one is hilarious), "the rich one" (because he controlled all the riches - minerals) etc.

[aminorex]

If I can't opt out, it's not a community, its a gang.  

Again, reverting into bad logic when coming to the belief the community is ganging up on you.

It's not really logic so much as an analysis of the distinction between a community and a gang.  A community is voluntary and does not initiate violence.  A gang in involuntary, and initiates violence.
It's what we ordinarily mean when we use these words in quotidian communication.

[stylin]

Bitcoin defender! I think it's great that someone took the time to make an argument on this site, even though the community is so small.

http://www.youargue.com/topic/191I0

[MoreFun]

It is interesting that bitfinex has similar walls approx +$1 above stamp ($630 - $631 and $640 - $641).

[seleme]

Log scale downtrend. I'm such an ass...

Don't worry, as soon as it starts going up you'll find some image to prove you've always been right. Nothing new for ya  

Disclaimer: still mainly in fiat.

[TERA]

It is interesting that bitfinex has similar walls approx +$1 above stamp ($630 - $631 and $640 - $641).

It's the same wall. Bitfinex adjusted the price by $1 as a fee for the cross-execution.

[delphic]

Overstock CEO just emailed 41.7 people about Bitcoin and why he believes in it!  That is bullish!  (It is the Wired article that came out a while ago about him.  It is a good article BTW.)

I feel sorry for whoever the 0.7 person was.

[Richy_T]

...I provided explanations for my various assertions...

Can you show me where, please?

Have you not been paying attention? It's because any other perspective is silly and ridiculous.

QED.

[JayJuanGee]

...I provided explanations for my various assertions...

Can you show me where, please?

It is likely true that I have been giving short shrift to aspects of this topic regarding role of government and/or the equating of government taxes with theft; however, in the past couple of days (or has it only been 1 day?), I have provided several fairly lengthy explanations of my various assertions... and each of my posts speak for themselves in terms of the extent to which I provided justifications therein.  You can easily read each and every one of my various posts.. and judge for yourself. 

However, I suspect the fact that you did NOT appreciate my description of situation 1 and situation 2, then likely you are NOT going to appreciate my other descriptions, which I remain of the position that each of my post is meant to be self-sustaining in the context of the thread. 

You seem to want more of an explanation in places that I feel that already that I have adequately explained.  For example, my outlining situation 1 and situation 2 was to ensure with thread participants on this topic that we are talking about the same thing.. and some posters are trying to equate situations 1 and 2 (including yourself) that in my view should clearly and logically be understood as different... b/c the actor in situation 2 is different from the actor in situation 1 (which makes a very meaningful and material difference).

Maybe you will come to the conclusion that I have NOT adequately explained myself through my various posts or that I have NOT adequately justified the points that I was attempting to make in my various posts.   Or, maybe you are of the opinion that my tone has NOT been kind and gentle enough.  I assure you that I have NO ill feelings towards you or towards anyone else participating in the discussion of this topic; however, as I have repeated, I cannot understand why we continue to discuss this topic b/c it seems that we have each had an opportunity to make our points. Also, as asserted by Octaft, the burden does NOT seem to be on me to explain any further than I already have.

Further, if you want, we can continue our communication regarding this topic by PM - since truly it does seem to be transgressing far afield from the topic of this thread.

[BitChick]

Overstock CEO just emailed 41.7 people about Bitcoin and why he believes in it!  That is bullish!  (It is the Wired article that came out a while ago about him.  It is a good article BTW.)

I feel sorry for whoever the 0.7 person was.

My bad.  41.7 million.

I have have been making typos all day.  Not sure why.  Oh well.

[zyk]

...I provided explanations for my various assertions...

Can you show me where, please?

It is likely true that I have been giving short shrift to aspects of this topic regarding role of government and/or the equating of government taxes with theft; however, in the past couple of days (or has it only been 1 day?), I have provided several fairly lengthy explanations of my various assertions... and each of my posts speak for themselves in terms of the extent to which I provided justifications therein.  You can easily read each and every one of my various posts.. and judge for yourself. 

However, I suspect the fact that you did NOT appreciate my description of situation 1 and situation 2, then likely you are NOT going to appreciate my other descriptions, which I remain of the position that each of my post is meant to be self-sustaining in the context of the thread. 

You seem to want more of an explanation in places that I feel that already that I have adequately explained.  For example, my outlining situation 1 and situation 2 was to ensure with thread participants on this topic that we are talking about the same thing.. and some posters are trying to equate situations 1 and 2 (including yourself) that in my view should clearly and logically be understood as different... b/c the actor in situation 2 is different from the actor in situation 1 (which makes a very meaningful and material difference).

Maybe you will come to the conclusion that I have NOT adequately explained myself through my various posts or that I have NOT adequately justified the points that I was attempting to make in my various posts.   Or, maybe you are of the opinion that my tone has NOT been kind and gentle enough.  I assure you that I have NO ill feelings towards you or towards anyone else participating in the discussion of this topic; however, as I have repeated, I cannot understand why we continue to discuss this topic b/c it seems that we have each had an opportunity to make our points. Also, as asserted by Octaft, the burden does NOT seem to be on me to explain any further than I already have.

Further, if you want, we can continue our communication regarding this topic by PM - since truly it does seem to be transgressing far afield from the topic of this thread.

bitcoiners seem to be out of their minds .......common sense: those who print need to be at least made known of the guillotines awaiting them !!

[JayJuanGee]

Overstock CEO just emailed 41.7 people about Bitcoin and why he believes in it!  That is bullish!  (It is the Wired article that came out a while ago about him.  It is a good article BTW.)

I feel sorry for whoever the 0.7 person was.

Yeah... he he he     I thought that fact was very sad too, until I opened up the attachment and saw that he had e-mailed 41.7 million of his closest friends.. something like that.  He is one popular dude to have that many close friends.  I did NOT get an e-mail, so I am NOT in such intimacy with him.

...I provided explanations for my various assertions...

Can you show me where, please?

Have you not been paying attention? It's because any other perspective is silly and ridiculous.

QED.

EXACTLY.... if you cannot see the logic of the obvious, then it seems likely that you gotta go study up on some basics and possibly to work on your analytical skills... .. Maybe take a few classes or practice reading, writing and math.. things like that.    The brushing up is going to vary from person to person.... ... and I suppose my main point here is that if you cannot see the difference between a thief and a government, and we CANNOT get beyond that basic logical point, then why are we wasting time to engage in a discussion that is NOT going to get us anywhere....   Clearly, I consider the two to be different, and clearly I feel that I need NOT explain anymore than I already have about why the two are different.

In any event, I have NO issues with exploring various possible discussions on a broad array of topics, so long as they do NOT devolve and continually repeat into the ridiculous and silly realm.... such as continuing to assert that governments are the same as thieves b/c they make you pay taxes.  I would laugh, if it were NOT causing me to cry over such need to repeat what to me seems obvious.   

[Richy_T]

You seem to want more of an explanation in places that I feel that already that I have adequately explained.  For example, my outlining situation 1 and situation 2 was to ensure with thread participants on this topic that we are talking about the same thing.. and some posters are trying to equate situations 1 and 2 (including yourself) that in my view should clearly and logically be understood as different... b/c the actor in situation 2 is different from the actor in situation 1 (which makes a very meaningful and material difference).

The difference does not change the situation.

My four legged animal is brown. Your four legged animal is black. My four legged animal is a dog. It does not therefor follow that your four legged animal *is not* a dog.

Theft is taking without permission. In both situations, more than adequately explained by yourself, permission is not given and taking occurs. It does not matter the why for that does not matter under the definition of theft. What it is about your situation 2 that does not fit the definition?

[keithers]

Haven't been to this thread in a while...there are so many new pages...   I was just looking at the buy walls at Stamp.  They are super thin right now.  A couple of big sell orders and we could see prices in the high $500s for a bit...

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[Richy_T]

In any event, I have NO issues with exploring various possible discussions on a broad array of topics, so long as they do NOT devolve and continually repeat into the ridiculous and silly realm.... such as continuing to assert that governments are the same as thieves b/c they make you pay taxes.  I would laugh, if it were NOT causing me to cry over such need to repeat what to me seems obvious.  

Asserting "Taxes are like theft because they involve taking without permission" leaves room for reasonable men to argue and come to an understanding about each others positions and can be enlightening. What is the nature of ownership, taking, permission. How strict is the definition etc.

Asserting "Taxes are not like theft because I believe taxes are not like theft" leaves nowhere to go and is the reason people are finding discussing with you frustrating.

And I can assure you that my academic credentials are sufficiently reasonable that you won't make me feel insecure about them.

[Yololintian]

Overstock CEO bought in the 800s and now is getting desperate 

Honestly though I hate that guy; something about him just seems off to me. He's one of those guys spreading bullshit. On these forums you will find the same people but they have no power and are usually hodlers, but when someone in his position shouts BUY BUY BUY, to me its not constructive and its more pyramidschemeesque. Some people will get me wrong, and that's fine. I like when important people give good reasons for bitcoins future utility, or cryptocurrency in general.
The funny thing is I didn't even read the article, or letter, or whatever it is this guy wrote about bitcoin until just now, even though I heard about it earlier today and glanced at it and came up with some preconcieved conclusions about it. But now that I just actually read it, I don't change any of my conclusions. Read the whole article - it does not give any good reasons to invest in bitcoin or anything. It talks about how great this CEO guy is and how he believes it bitcoin and how he is such an innovative person, just awesomeness, exactly why I need to put my money into bitcoin immediately. The whole article appeals to his character or whatever and that's why we should believe in him.
Honestly I think its great that this guy wants to risk a lot of money buying bitcoin; there is a good chance he and others will make a lot of money off of bitcoin in the future. I just don't think we need any more bullshit from this guy who really has nothing to add to the community; he seems desperate to use bitcoin just because it might save his company or something.

[octaft]

[snip]
I am NOT opposed to change, and I am NOT opposed to lessening government or getting rid of it, in the event that better systems can be established.  Bitcoin can certainly assist in the direction of providing freedom to greater numbers of people and transparency to monetary and/or other transactional systems. 

This is nice to hear and I assure you I am trying to understand your position and have a good debate.

What bothers me now is your reaction to the idea of "taxation = theft". When this was mentioned you went into a rather angry tirade stating over and over again, that this concept is so ridiculous, that it shouldn't even be taken seriously, but nowhere have I seen you actually explain why. I think this is a hint to why we differ, even though I could put my signature below your quote up there. It seems that to you government = society (or a meaningful representation thereof). Which, incidentally to me represents a concept so absurd and obviously untrue, that it shouldn't even be taken seriously. I won't explain why, though. If queried, I will repeat again how ridiculous it is

I think that on the face of the matter, your bare assertion that situation 1 and 2 are substantially similar is  illogical,  incomprehensible and unworthy or serious discussion...  Even though the two situations may appear to be similar, they are NOT.. which should be obvious and clear on the face.  I think that i adequately explained this over and over and in sufficient detail without having to have the need to elaborate about the obvious, and I do NOT see the point of continuing such a silly-ass discussions if some people continue to think and to argue that taxes and thievery are the same things.... b/c posters like this are living in a sort of parallel reality of LaLa land and a simplistic world to be making such basic assertions to attempt to equate situations that are clearly NOT the same.... even though they "feel the same."  

And this after you put taxation and theft side by side and basically described them in the same words? I am inclined to believe now that you are trolling in some sophisticated manner, otherwise this huge overreaction would seem to me to be the defense mechanism of a very dearly held dogma.

Weren't you supposed to be explaining the steps we're going to take to achieve your ideal? Maybe your buddies will help you, but given the history of them ducking me whenever I ask them to explain the hard stuff, I'd say you might be on your own.

[hmmkay]

Overstock CEO bought in the 800s and now is getting desperate  

Honestly though I hate that guy; something about him just seems off to me. He's one of those guys spreading bullshit. On these forums you will find the same people but they have no power and are usually hodlers, but when someone in his position shouts BUY BUY BUY, to me its not constructive and its more pyramidschemeesque. Some people will get me wrong, and that's fine. I like when important people give good reasons for bitcoins future utility, or cryptocurrency in general.
The funny thing is I didn't even read the article, or letter, or whatever it is this guy wrote about bitcoin until just now, even though I heard about it earlier today and glanced at it and came up with some preconcieved conclusions about it. But now that I just actually read it, I don't change any of my conclusions. Read the whole article - it does not give any good reasons to invest in bitcoin or anything. It talks about how great this CEO guy is and how he believes it bitcoin and how he is such an innovative person, just awesomeness, exactly why I need to put my money into bitcoin immediately. The whole article appeals to his character or whatever and that's why we should believe in him.
Honestly I think its great that this guy wants to risk a lot of money buying bitcoin; there is a good chance he and others will make a lot of money off of bitcoin in the future. I just don't think we need any more bullshit from this guy who really has nothing to add to the community; he seems desperate to use bitcoin just because it might save his company or something.

I'd imagine abusing bitcoin from someone who studied something in the field of economics, he however studied philosophy which for me gives him the favor of doubt in genuinely supporting the ideas behind bitcoin.