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

[cAPSLOCK]

This is a bear trap...

Just sayin'.

Strap in?  Or Strap on?  Pick your fav I guess...

Just quoting as a reminder...

[1714299672]

1714299672

[AlcoHoDL]

[...]

these days some of us are either aiming for 0.21BTC, and some of us have admitted to reaching more than 0.63BTC...

Just consider how much more insight Billy nocoiner would be able to achieve merely from being in a kind of 0.21BTC to 0.63BTC accumulation range.. holey shit.. and for sure whole coiners are on another level these days.

[...]

0.21 BTC... What a ride! We've come a long way... It used to be 21 BTC, then 2.1 BTC. Now it's 0.21 BTC. Soon we're going to have to start talking satoshis. Something like 2.1M sats, 210K sats, etc.

Seems really logical regarding a kind of transitioning from fractions to whole units.  The vast majority of normie peeps (maybe apart from mathematicians, statisticians and other numbers-oriented scientists like proudhon) have a decent amount of difficulties to work with fractions as easily as they are able to work with whole units.

Another kind of ironic dynamic seems to be that there seems to be a kind of natural progression from BTC to satoshis and skipping some of the labelling of the in-between units - and perhaps it really is NOT necessary to come to consensus regarding how to label the various in-between units.. at least not at this time, and dealing with satoshis might not even be that difficult.. such as working with large numbers of up to 100 million satoshis before we just convert over to bitcoin references.... o..k. o.k.  maybe I am getting a bit ahead of myself in terms of some of the practicalities that might come from some kinds of labelling of some of the in between units.. because there is a bit of a bigness in even dealing with millions of satoshis.. sometimes those large quantities will not sink in very well and then when it comes to labels, it could still be a bit cumbersome to be dealing with 8 digits before getting into bitcoin as a unit... so practicalities are likely needed, practicalities.... but surely, there can be some resonance to for some newbies to proclaim that they are striving to reach their first goals of 1 million satoshis or even 21 million satoshis.. does not really seem to be lacking in concreteness, especially if talking about wealth accumulation goals (or early-stage investment goals).

Owning whole coins used to be a routine thing. Now it's a holy grail. Soon it will be unreachable.

Check your privilege AlcoHoDL.. hahahahaha.. I hate to use that SJW expression.. but what the heck.

It is already very unreachable for the vast majority of peeps in the world - outside of the fairly well to do in the West.. and even the elite in the non-west to be able to easily get to whole coiner status.  Sure, there was a bit of a window between May and July-ish of this year, and it is seeming quite likely that tho0se kinds of windows are closing.. I am not completely sure that we might not get some buying opportunities in the $40ks or even in the lower $50ks.. but jeez.. in the $30ks is seeming less and less likely.. and gosh even being able to stack those levels to get to whole coiner status would be from peeps who have already accumulated decent amounts of wealth in property, 401ks, equities and perhaps some other assets but not from normie wage earners who are building their wealth and we know it can take a whole hell of a lot of time to build wealth, even to get to one years salary.. which one years salary might be way less than whole coiner levels in the non-west and even in the west maybe we could presume a kind of average of decently higher level earners to be slightly above the amount of a whole coin.. and moderately well-to-do (or is that just another way of saying middle-upper class?) couples might be earning in around the $120k arenas...

Think. Accumulate. HoDL. Don't end up being future sat beggars.  

Actually that is another decent reminder for just the mere practicality to ongoingly engage in building (stacking) of sat quantities - but there seem to be so many normies who are not even getting that message.  Yeah maybe or maybe not they will get to a kind of goal of getting to 1 BTC.. but surely they are not going to get to 1 BTC if they do not get the fuck started as soon as possible and just have a kind of plan in place that might even involve goals of stacking for a minimum of 4-10 years and surely if they set their goals fairly modestly then they would have decent chances of reaching and exceeding their goals several times.. but there is a certain kind of benefit to consistencies and persistence... and even if some people do end up reaching/exceeding their goals through gambling, I have never recommended that kind of methodology.. because establishing and following through with the ongoing employment of a prudent and even a potentially quasi-aggressive incrementalist approach will still likely end up presenting such planner/accumulator into circumstances in which future opportunities will present themselves.. even if the opportunities (such as buying sub $40k BTC) might not be in immediate realistic ways to be considering what is likely or probable... but who knows about that, either... but have to get started, put a plan in place and then be in a better position (most likely) to identify and take advantage of opportunities when they do present themselves in the future.

Can't disagree with any of the above. Regarding Bitcoin units, I've also thought about the vast gap between BTC and sats (that's an 8-orders-of-magnitude gap -- it's massive). It's not so convenient to use 0.021 BTC, but neither is 2,100,000 sats. Perhaps we could say that we are currently in a no-man's-land kind of level in between the units... Some have tried to use mBTC, μBTC, and so on (proudhon would probably like that -- math, science and all). In those units, 0.021 BTC = 21 mBTC, which is quite nice. For some reason, though, those units never took off...

Newbies... From my experience, it's currently VERY difficult for the average newbie to get started in Bitcoin, due to its apparent "expensive" status. They all tell me that it's too expensive to buy. And the problem is not only in terms of understanding that one BTC is divisible by 100,000,000 units. Even when I explain this to them, they still don't like the idea of owning "only" 0.021 BTC. It seems far too teeny weeny tiny an amount to them. They'd rather invest in cheap shitcoins instead -- they can be whole-coiners that way, except they conveniently omit the "shit" part in between...

Maybe this is really a feature, a way to filter out the weak hands... What do I know? At my time, common corn amounts were whole anyway, LOL!

[JayJuanGee]

These bears wtf   3rd bounce off 58.*K.

Why so negative?

From here I'll be looking for a 10-100x BTC by 2030.

Whoaza!!!!

Even if I do appreciate some aspect of your conservative approach.. that 10x is pretty damned conservative for more than 2 cycles from now (including the finishing of this cycle - so almost like 2.5 cycles).

I'll even be happy with a 2x to be honest.
I doubt gold will even do that.

You are a damned bear.  


Actually you may well be correct that gold is going to be having some troubles in the coming 8-10 years.. and part of the matter is that bitcoin is continuing to eat its lunch.... but there is also a kind of ambiguity in your way of framing the matter (a kind of incompleteness) because there is one aspect of gold's likely appreciation in terms of nominal dollar terms and then there is also a question of adjusted appreciation in terms of what the dollar is likely to do...

Accordingly, even in somewhat normal (if there is such a thing?) times, the dollar would depreciate quite a bit in 10 years.. maybe even close to half.... but surely there are arguments that would suggest that 2-3% annual depreciation still would only add up to less than 50% depreciation in 10 years.... whatever the damned depreciation arguments, you have already alluded to the fact that there seems to be almost no way that we could be living in close to normal times.  I do appreciate that the placement of the dollar as a more dominant of world reserve currencies - relative to its historical position - does actually allow for more dilution so that diluting the dollar can be absorbed in global ways rather than just domestic dilution... but still actual depreciation of the dollar (likely inflation) is somewhere in the ballpark of 10% to 20% per year.. so that brings us to best case scenarios of halvening of the value of the dollar in 10 years but more likely something like 1/4 value within 10 years.. absent some various smoke and mirror recovery mechanisms to force some kinds of higher levels of discipline that might well be part of a catch 22 that would be quite difficult to actually carry out.. even if such medicine might be good for the patient.. absent a kind of likely outcome of killing the patient with such seemingly needed imposition of disciplinary medicine.

I am getting a wee bit beyond any macro-economics knowledge that I have so I better stop while I still have some hope of a semblance of quasi-coherence.  

From a few of your posts naim027, you are starting to seem a bit distracted and focused on shitcoins.

If you do not correct, you may well need a batman slap soon or maybe some other kind of similar treatment, and hopefully, I do not start regretting even having had sent you even one merit because you had seemed to have made some decent points, earlier.. especially if you might not even be trying to focus ur lil selfie a wee bit better.  

Have you heard of king daddy?  Do you even close to understand what it is?  I doubt any of us expect you to be any kind of expert, but jesus fuck what's the deal with focusing on shitcoins and somehow considering that to be relevant to our savior, aka king daddy?  

This is a bear trap...

Just sayin'.

Strap in?  Or Strap on?  Pick your fav I guess...

Just quoting as a reminder...

Yeah.. for sure it is very "helpful" when you quote ur lil selfie to remind us of such purportedly "very important point" that you had already made earlier..


#nohomo


 

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[LoyceV]

Can't disagree with any of the above. Regarding Bitcoin units, I've also thought about the vast gap between BTC and sats (that's an 8-orders-of-magnitude gap -- it's massive). It's not so convenient to use 0.021 BTC, but neither is 2,100,000 sats. Perhaps we could say that we are currently in a no-man's-land kind of level in between the units... Some have tried to use mBTC, μBTC, and so on (proudhon would probably like that -- math, science and all). In those units, 0.021 BTC = 21 mBTC, which is quite nice. For some reason, though, those units never took off...

I've always liked mBTC as a unit: when I joined Bitcoin, it was worth about €0.20. Now it's worth just over €50, but it's still a convenient unit (for "daily" expenses).
I don't like for instance 0.00003 BTC, and I don't like 300000 sat for the simple reason it's annoying to count the zeros. With mBTC, anything from a coffee (0.05mBTC) to a jacket (2mBTC) has a convenient small number.
My assumption has always been Americans don't like milli because they're not used to SI, but "here" it's quite common to use "m" for anything from volume to distance. It's the default now in Electrum, but for LN sats seem to be used more often.

[AlcoHoDL]

Can't disagree with any of the above. Regarding Bitcoin units, I've also thought about the vast gap between BTC and sats (that's an 8-orders-of-magnitude gap -- it's massive). It's not so convenient to use 0.021 BTC, but neither is 2,100,000 sats. Perhaps we could say that we are currently in a no-man's-land kind of level in between the units... Some have tried to use mBTC, μBTC, and so on (proudhon would probably like that -- math, science and all). In those units, 0.021 BTC = 21 mBTC, which is quite nice. For some reason, though, those units never took off...

I've always liked mBTC as a unit: when I joined Bitcoin, it was worth about €0.20. Now it's worth just over €50, but it's still a convenient unit (for "daily" expenses).
I don't like for instance 0.00003 BTC, and I don't like 300000 sat for the simple reason it's annoying to count the zeros. With mBTC, anything from a coffee (0.05mBTC) to a jacket (2mBTC) has a convenient small number.
My assumption has always been Americans don't like milli because they're not used to SI, but "here" it's quite common to use "m" for anything from volume to distance. It's the default now in Electrum, but for LN sats seem to be used more often.

I think your example would be 3000 sat, but it still has quite a lot of zeros for such a small value. I also like mBTC, I hope it takes off some day. Better yet, I hope Bitcoin's value rises so much that the sat unit would then be as convenient as mBTC is now...

[d_eddie]

Can't disagree with any of the above. Regarding Bitcoin units, I've also thought about the vast gap between BTC and sats (that's an 8-orders-of-magnitude gap -- it's massive). It's not so convenient to use 0.021 BTC, but neither is 2,100,000 sats. Perhaps we could say that we are currently in a no-man's-land kind of level in between the units... Some have tried to use mBTC, μBTC, and so on (proudhon would probably like that -- math, science and all). In those units, 0.021 BTC = 21 mBTC, which is quite nice. For some reason, though, those units never took off...

I've always liked mBTC as a unit: when I joined Bitcoin, it was worth about €0.20. Now it's worth just over €50, but it's still a convenient unit (for "daily" expenses).
I don't like for instance 0.00003 BTC, and I don't like 300000 sat for the simple reason it's annoying to count the zeros. With mBTC, anything from a coffee (0.05mBTC) to a jacket (2mBTC) has a convenient small number.
My assumption has always been Americans don't like milli because they're not used to SI, but "here" it's quite common to use "m" for anything from volume to distance. It's the default now in Electrum, but for LN sats seem to be used more often.

I concur. I also like mBTC over all other units, including sats. I pushed my agenda here, looking for a marketing-friendly name (a "Finney" could be a bit too much of an inside reference, but I did like it), but even seasoned OGs like the WOers more or less dismissed the idea as worthless.

I was hoping a nice name* could help retail step in. It just didn't happen. I'm still thinking if retail was massively in, even at the mBTC level, fuckery with illiquid exchange books could be a lot harder to pull off.


* As in "I just bought 2 whole finneys!" vs. "I bought a paltry 0.002 btc" vs. "I bought 200.000 shitty sats"

[Paashaas]

James Webb telescope on track for launch 18 Dec next month.

Webb will have significantly larger field of view than the NICMOS camera on Hubble and better spatial resolution than is available with the infrared Spitzer telescope.

Hubble's extreme deep field image below. Some of those faint patches of light in it are galaxies dating back more than 13.2 billion years, Webb is expected to look even further to observe pioneer galaxies and stars. Ore we discover the universe is even bigger than we know.

To look closer in our own galaxy, there could be 300 million potentially habitable planets to discover.

So much new space porn coming, can't wait for it.

[LoyceV]

I don't like for instance 0.00003 BTC, and I don't like 300000 sat for the simple reason it's annoying to count the zeros. With mBTC, anything from a coffee (0.05mBTC) to a jacket (2mBTC) has a convenient small number.

I think your example would be 3000 sat

I used different amounts on purpose, and I was wondering if anyone would even notice

I concur. I also like mBTC over all other units, including sats. I pushed my agenda here, looking for a marketing-friendly name
~
I was hoping a nice name* could help retail step in.

A new name would suggest there's something wrong with "milli Bitcoin". We'll end up with Imperial units if everything needs a new name
It may grow eventually, just like quarters and dimes, but Bitcoin is too young for it yet. Even with euros we don't really have names for different coins or banknotes yet. Come to think of it: Bitcoin is already way ahead of the euro when it comes to "naturally created" names. That's not bad, considering it's much newer.

[JayJuanGee]

Rugged again haha. What a shit coin. Are you suckers really going to hold through another crypto winter? The writing is on the wall, sell before it gets worse.

Aren't you the most insightful of nocoiners that I never did meet?

He's not a nocoiner. He's got a few sats in the address in his profile, and he's hodling them.

I am Just Wondering "How The Heck This NoCoiner Got 20 Merit From a Single Post?"

I am here for the last five years and trying to get at least 100 Merit. But I am failed.

Of course, you gotta ask MNbag about making such a seemingly stupid-ass and irresponsible dispensation of smerits to such a dweeb called billynocoiner.

I already posted and criticized MNbag for exercising such bad judgement to have had merited billynocoiner with that quantity of merits.. but whatever, no need to have merit envy naim027... just focus on working on the quality of your own posts rather than being concerned about the merits that others are receiving.. For sure, there are subjective components involved in the merit system that allows nearly unlimited discretion to members regarding how to spend their smerits (once they earn them).. Of course, merit source members have more limitations involving being restricted from behavior that amounts to selling of their smerits, but still even merit source members have quite a bit of smerit spending discretion, so it does not seem be psychologically healthy to be questioning whether others deserve as many merits as they had been receiving. .even though sure, you are likely correct that billynocoiner did not deserve any kind of merits and there seems to be some weirdness in why any kind of genuine member would have reasonably concluded that billynocoiner deserves any merits.. let alone 20 for one post.. and put that on MNbag for contributing to that seeming nonsense.. Let's move on..

By the way, you are misquoting me too naim027.. Your quote seems to attribute me with a point that HI-TEC99 made. 

This one:  >>>>>"He's not a nocoiner. He's got a few sats in the address in his profile, and he's hodling them."<<<<<

Sure, mistakes are made, but try NOT to be erroneous in your post attributions.

Rugged again haha. What a shit coin. Are you suckers really going to hold through another crypto winter? The writing is on the wall, sell before it gets worse.

Aren't you the most insightful of nocoiners that I never did meet?

He's not a nocoiner. He's got a few sats in the address in his profile, and he's hodling them.

I am Just Wondering "How The Heck This NoCoiner Got 20 Merit From a Single Post?"

I am here for the last five years and trying to get at least 100 Merit. But I am failed.

Actually, your account is four years old.
And the merit system is younger than that.

another good point, d_eddie.. and naim027 ONLY has 109 posts... and of course, there are a decent number of us who are disinclined to grant credibility or even benefit of the doubt when a user shows his lil selfie inclined towards the exaggeration of facts (unless there is an obvious joke attempted therein, which is not the case with what naim027 seems to had been striving to achieve with those representations).

[shahzadafzal]

Whatever they say… I trust WO more…

Will we close Nov. at or above Plan B's posited minimum of $98K?

Yes   - 36 (40.4%)
No   - 53 (59.6%)
Total Voters: 89

Although I don’t like it but it’s decided.

[goldkingcoiner]

James Webb telescope on track for launch 18 Dec next month.

Webb will have significantly larger field of view than the NICMOS camera on Hubble and better spatial resolution than is available with the infrared Spitzer telescope.

JWST will see light that's nearly 13.7 billion years old, thats when the earliest stars and planets were born. So we will be able to look 13.7 b years into our past to see celestial objects that have by now fizzled out and died billions of years ago. For reference our universe is 13.8 billion years old. So we will see light that has been travelling from almost the edge of the universe, for 13.7 billion years, until it finally reached our tiny corner of space.

[Sayeds56]

(singing) Get Your Kicks...



Btw, Corn is over 60000 for 2 weeks straight now. No dips.

You are absolutely right. Bitcoin is moving around its Pivot point since 2 weeks and now it should move upwards.



www.investing.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[HI-TEC99]

Meanwhile in Clown World...


https://twitter.com/dougboneparth/status/1460734447293280260

He's wasting his time. The Peel P50 from Peel Engineering Ltd is going dominate the electric car industry for years to come.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peel_P50

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[vapourminer]

[this post intentionally left blank]

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[lightfoot]

James Webb telescope on track for launch 18 Dec next month.

Webb will have significantly larger field of view than the NICMOS camera on Hubble and better spatial resolution than is available with the infrared Spitzer telescope.

Indeed, I remember when they got NICMOS fixed, it was a true repair job. Then they went and turned the thing off, you never reboot stuff that works (Viking Lander had the same problem, damn thing is probably still sitting there with "Please insert floppy in drive A:" message).

I would like them to keep Hubble running forever. Robot servicing missions should not be hard, at least they could easily boost it to a higher altitude. We'll see.