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

[Gachapin]

Hey Bros, i'm in a hurry, so here's that promised photo from NGC7000 (North America Nebula). Seond try, because my lens fogged in the humid air of the night.
Details: 200mm lens on a H-Alpha modified DSLR, 100x25 sec frames for the stars, 20x60 sec frames for the nebula.

W O W

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[death_wish]

If you were Satoshi, what would be the benefit of claiming that in public (think it through at least twice before replying)? When someone gives a reasonable answer to that question it might be worth at least put their claims to test, which is pretty simple, just move Satoshi's stash of BTC, end of story.

If by “Satoshi’s stash of BTC”, you mean some huge amount, then you are referring to the so-called “Patoshi” coins.  Nobody knows if those are Satoshi’s; I tend to think not.  (Why would Satoshi himself use mining software that behaved differently than the Bitcoin software he published?)  It can’t be proved either way, unless Satoshi or Patoshi steps forward.

The threshold test for anyone who claims to be Satoshi is authentication with a digital signature from one of Satoshi’s known keys:  His PGP key, or the key for one of the Bitcoin addresses definitively known to be Satoshi’s.  Not moving coins that may or may not be Satoshi’s, and that may coincidentally move while some random scammer claims they did it.

By “authentication”, I mean signing a message with substance similar to this:

Code:

2022-06-26: I, [name of claimant], am Satoshi Nakamoto.

I don’t ask someone’s motives before demanding that.  If the claimant refuses (as Craig Wright has), then his motives are obvious:  He is an imposter.


To illustrate the dangers of relying on faulty assumptions about the ownership of early coins:

[...] under oath Craig wright provided a list of the bitcoin holdings he claims he mined as satoshi... thousands of early addresses. ... and as soon as the list was published the owner(s) of 145 of the addresses, controlling 7250 BTC, signed a message saying those addresses didn't belong to Wright and that Wright was a fraud.

IIRC, those coins have not been moved.  Their owner(s) evidently follow the news, and still have the keys.

The content of the signed message, which you should verify for yourself (see above link):

"Craig Steven Wright is a liar and a fraud. He doesn't have the keys used to sign this message.

The Lightning Network is a significant achievement. However, we need to continue work on improving on-chain capacity.

Unfortunately, the solution is not to just change a constant in the code or to allow powerful participants to force out others.

We are all Satoshi"

https://www.blockchain.com/it/btc/address/1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa

For a signature, or to “move his stash” as you said?  The Genesis coinbase itself can’t be moved; it is not sent to that address, but rather, in P2PK to a public key that people convert to that P2PKH address as an anachronism.

I would be very interested in seeing a signature.  The public key for the sender/change in this P2PK tx is another good candidate, IMO:
https://blockstream.info/tx/f4184fc596403b9d638783cf57adfe4c75c605f6356fbc91338530e9831e9e16?expand

As a general note, I would suggest that Satoshi should avoid revealing the public keys of any of his early P2PKH addresses for which the public keys have not been revealed.  If he wants to claim his identity, then I suggest that he should sign with keys that are already revealed—so that he can prove in zero knowledge that he can sign with keys that have never been revealed.  As a precaution, this permanently preserves his ability to authenticate his identity after a potential Quantum Computing Apocalypse.  (Off the top of my head, I don’t know of any strongly-evidenced Satoshi P2PKH addresses for which public keys have never been revealed.)

The smart thing to do, the thing that every well-informed cypherpunk would expect from the real Satoshi, is for Satoshi to re-introduce himself in a message signed with this key:

https://bitcointalk.org/Satoshi_Nakamoto.asc

Code:

pub   dsa1024/0x18C09E865EC948A1 2008-10-30 [SC]
      Key fingerprint = DE4E FCA3 E1AB 9E41 CE96  CECB 18C0 9E86 5EC9 48A1
uid                   [  full  ] Satoshi Nakamoto <satoshin@gmx.com>
sub   elg2048/0xCF1857E6D6AAA69F 2008-10-30 [E]

DSA1024 is weak by today’s standards—not “breakable”, but it lacks security margin.  Those who are extremely cautious may perhaps worry about what alphabet-soup agencies may be able to do with it.  Nonetheless, I am talking about a threshold question.  If you can sign with this key, then I take you seriously—I start to think that you are probably Satoshi.

If you don’t present upfront a message signed with Satoshi’s PGP key and/or known wallet keys, then bugger off.  I have no time to waste on liars.

[Paashaas]

https://twitter.com/BTC_Archive/status/1541485816932974592

[goldkingcoiner]

Hey Bros, i'm in a hurry, so here's that promised photo from NGC7000 (North America Nebula). Seond try, because my lens fogged in the humid air of the night.
Details: 200mm lens on a H-Alpha modified DSLR, 100x25 sec frames for the stars, 20x60 sec frames for the nebula.

You could zoom into the most microscopic, darkest spot on this picture and you would still find more stars than you can see in this picture with your bare eyes. Man, the universe is sexy. Thanks for sharing the pic!

Reminder: We're days away from seeing James Webb's first images (non-calibration/non-test ones). Exciting times ahead! We are going to see the beginning of the universe, literally.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[JayJuanGee]

In the end, I am not even sure about a fair poll question, except maybe something like:

Has your BTC stash increased, decreased or stayed the same from our drop from $35k (around May 6th / May 7th) to present?  That would be ONLY 3 possible answers, no?  

AlcoHoDL beat me to this, as I was beginning to write something (with overly long analysis) about how the same poll should then be held again, whenever we get back to $35k.  At that point, the “decreased” option will logically mean only two things:  Either you were crazy to leverage your BTC, or you were stupid to mindrust it.  “Sell the dip!” seems to be a popular approach to retail investing, the flipside of FOMO.

I think that some of my various overall attempts at making points was to indicate that very BIG BTC price moves can provide opportunities to assess how well your own actions are reflecting your goals in terms of where you are at, and for sure, there can be more opportunities for luck and also mistakes to show themselves during such BIG BTC price move periods.

Sometimes it is very clear which stage we are in accumulation, maintenance, liquidation, yet if our BTC holdings have increased - and of course some other aspects of our individual circumstances may well have substantially and materially changed, then  the overlap regarding where we consider ourselves to be - may well create some ambiguities regarding how to match what we are doing to our finances and psychology.

I am thinking about another example too, and that is if we establish a somewhat strict practice regarding what we do and to follow some guidelines, principles and hunches regarding when we might be able to deviate from such preferred practices, then there might be some times in which our deviation puts us into different circumstances - which will thereafter motivate us in some ways that might cause us to consider whether or how much we might deviate from our ideas of best practices.... so for example, the decision to cash out a bunch of BTC (let's say $500k - just for some concreteness.. which is going to be 50% of the target amount to have by July/August to close the deal) at $40k-ish in order to put down a deposit and to prepare for having cash for the whole purchase.  When the BTC price shoots down by 50%, there's a bit of a dilemma about whether to continue to cash out and continue with the deal.  

If we decide to cancel the deal because we do not want to have to sell another $500k in BTC at a 50% discount (which both below the 200-week moving average but surely is not even clear about where is the BTC bottom exactly), there is also another dilemma about whether to use the amount that we already cashed out in order to buy more BTC or to just sit on the cash in order to really feel comfortable with what to do with that cash - and part of my point is that quite a bit of the dilemma came from the mere fact of having had cashed out a bunch of BTC at $40k.. but the circumstances changed in such a way that our options have changed.. and put us in a position that was different from our usual practices, but we can still use our logic, risk management and just probability calculations to figure out how to proceed forward - in spite of the changed circumstances.

Needless to say, few if any people in that category will give an honest answer.

There could be some value in terms of any poll that is created to inspire participation, provoke thought and to attempt to motivate accurate answers.. Sure, there are always going to be liars, but why is it going to matter?  Because I would postulate that the most important consideration is attempting to use such poll exercise to think about our own situations and whether we might need to tweak anything in our own practices in terms of whether we are matching our behaviors with what we believe that we are trying to achieve.  

We can take a snapshot and already know right now, whether we have more BTC at this time as compared to what we had on May 6/7.. so that should be a relatively easy answer.  Surely, there might be some guys who still have not closed any position that that they might have taken, so they might be holding onto cash (let's say $68k - that was based on 2 BTC that they cashed out at $34k) and considering that cash could have a BTC value of 3.3 BTC at current prices ($20.6k-ish), but they have not executed the buy because they are also considering that the $68k could represent 4 BTC if they wait for the BTC price to drop to $17k, which may or may not end up happening, but still causing them some dilemma in terms of calculating whether they currently have more BTC than they had on May 6/7 or not.  

As you already, acknowledged, no matter how we end up formulating our calculation of present BTC quantity and compare that to May 6/7, there is a certain amount of locking in that we can do, even if there might also be various ways to calculate - even if we might be holding some dollars in a kind of "waiting to deploy" status.

And yeah, you have also identified way more concreteness that is going to exist to compare how many BTC that we had on May 6/7 when BTC crossed below $35k as compared with how much BTC we will have at the snapshot time in which BTC prices cross back above $35k (presuming that they do at some point, a little reference to proudhon's lil stick).  No one should be wedded to any presumption that there still might be some unresolved orders in existence at $35k.  

Let's say that a hypothetical someone (let's refer to him as MLPS - My Lil Precious Seeker) feels an overwhelming compulsion to attain 1 BTC and to be able to HODL onto that BTC forever and ever in a kind of cold storage of my lil precious, yet at the same time MLPS has a lot of fucked-upped-ness in his financial circumstances - for reasons.  I am not encouraging gambling, but just attempting to suggest that sometimes there could be rational circumstances that also involve luck, and MLPS ends up  running into some luck based on some of his past work/interactions with peeps in which he had not burnt all his bridges, so accordingly, he receives a solid contractual offer to perform x, y and z work over the next year and he will receive $64k to carry out such work but payments are mostly going to come at the back end... .but in any event, MLPS is able to get a loan to front load his investment in BTC that results in $32k that he can used to buy BTC, and so therefore, he concludes that he is going to buy 1.5 BTC at $21k, and that he is going to reach his goal to always have 1 BTC no matter what, and at the same time, he knows his own situation, that he is going to have to shave off that additional 0.5 BTC at various points in time in order to just to manage his finances, so when the BTC price ends up going up to $35k (whenever that is), MLPS knows for sure that he has 1 BTC no matter what, but he also has to sell some parts of the 0.5 BTC that was a kind of "over investment", and perhaps by the time BTC prices get to $35k, he had already shaved off 0.1 or 0.2 of that overinvested BTC.

The above examples/descriptions are intended to outline some of the dilemmas that some of us (including but not limited to yours truly) can experience when we are attempting to figure out our BTC valuations, so I can look at my BTC valuations and that is relatively easy, and I can also look at my projection of what my BTC valuations will be at $35k and even give you a number right now regarding what they are projected to be, if the BTC price goes straight up and I do not get any opportunities to change my sell orders on the way up.  At the same time, we can appreciate that it is NOT too often that the BTC price goes straight up, so when I project how many BTC I anticipate having at $35k, I can proclaim with pretty decently strong conviction that my estimate for $35k is a wee bit less than what I expect it to actually be because the downs and ups along the way is going to cause me to sell and buy back along the way, and by the time we get to $35k BTC I have more than my original projection but surely less than the amount that I had at $21k (it's built in)

I will answer the various polls early for my lil selfie.. which is that even though right now I have more BTC than I had at $35k (by about something like 1.5%), my current projections show that I am likely to have about 0.5% less BTC at $35k as compared to when we were last there on May 6/May 7th-ish.  

If I were clearly in a pure BTC accumulation mode (like I was in almost all of 2014), then for sure I would have quite a bit more BTC on the second time around to $35k.  In 2015, 2016 and even early 2017, I was in a hybrid BTC accumulation/maintenance mode that leaned towards BTC accumulation.. which likely would have ended up contributing to similar results as the accumulation mode, but just not as strong as a pure accumulation mode stage.

Probably since about early 2019 - on a personal level, I have been having more leanings towards being in some kind of a BTC liquidation mode.. and I had even considered that so long as BTC prices were above $5k, I am not going to be so concerned about if I am not accumulating BTC.. and just let the chips fall where there will in terms of my BTC being able to fund itself for ever.. using withdrawal limits of 1% per quarter...

Anyhow, I talk about BTC accumulation as a kind of target place that people need to attempt to achieve, because it is very difficult to get to maintenance and/or liquidation stages of an investor's/HODLer's BTC journey without going though a decent period of BTC accumulation first.   And, don't get me wrong.. I still do accumulate from time to time.. beyond just using money already in the system.. and I have revealed some of my instances of getting into that kind of mode for anyone who might have noticed how I framed some of my strategies and/or changes in strategies (called tweaks, no?)

I suppose also a part of my point is that there can be quite a bit of curiosity in regards to how the various projections might end up differing from the snapshots, and even I can go back and look at my old snapshots that contained projections, even using $20k as a reference point.  Where was my BTC/investment portfolio at the various times that BTC touched upon $20k (starting in late 2017 of course).. how has my place changed?  how have my projections changed?  Have I put more value in versus taking it out?  

I have heard some seemingly sophisticated BTC investing folks saying that no matter what they believe that their BTC holdings should be going up during time, and personally, I doubt that as being a kind of realistic goal that I want to achieve, but surely I see how it may well be a prudent/practical goal for some other folks.  For example, I can project what if BTC prices go out to $1 million, $5 million or $10 million, and why the fuck would I need more BTC in those circumstances?  I am just not at that stage in my life or even wanting to have aspirations that go in that direction  If you consider the matter..

Let's create another hypothetical person.. Maybe we can call him AE (Already established) AE already reached way more than double entry-level fuck you status, and currently AE has 200 BTC (I am not proclaiming to have that amount nor am I proclaiming to have anything more than 0.63 BTC).. but anyhow.. let's go with the example a wee bit...   If AE already reached double fuck you status, and the BTC price is currently $21k, then why the fuck does AE need to have more BTC (and to continue build his quantity of BTC)?   Let's describe an extreme in order that the directionality of the point might be better understood, and let's say that the BTC price were to go to $10 million?  If AE merely maintains his same quantity of BTC at 200, then AE is going to have $2 billion in BTC, so why the fuck does he need more BTC in those circumstances- especially when AE had already established $2million to have had been his entry level fuck you status.  Sure AE is free to increase his standard of living and change some of his goals, but is there any need, practicality or prudence that AE has to up his monetary aspirations by 1,000x when he already established his fuck you status as being $2 million.. fuck that nonsense.. maybe he can update to 10x.. such as $20 million, but why does he feel that he needs to be greedy and never get enough?  why 1,000x?  In some cases, more is not always more.. and it may not even be reasonable, prudent or practical from a personal aspirational level, and in the end makes little to no sense to me that a realistic, prudent and/or practical goal would be to continue to increase BTC no matter what, especially since we already know and appreciate BTC as a very asymmetric bet to the upside. and very volatile as well...

yeah some people want to aspire to be the richest person in the world or other obsessions of power.. and sure, they can do that if they wish, even though I doubt that it is even close or necessary for the vast majority of peeps to get into that kind of "dominate the world" childish ego-driven mentality

If the BTC price goes to $10 million, then AE could have 1/200th the amount that he has currently (presuming holding 200 BTC, which would be 1 BTC), and AE would still end up having 5x entry-level fuck you status.  So even if AE retains, 1/20th the amount of his current 200 BTC (which would be 10 BTC) at $10 million, then that is still $100 million and 50x his entry-level fuck you status.  

Accordingly, even though AE shaves BTC off of his holdings all the way from now up to $10 million, he ends up having way fewer BTC than his current 200 BTC stash, but if he still has 10 BTC by the time BTC reaches $10 million, he still has 50x his entry-level fuck you status, so I suppose part of my point is that I have difficulties understanding why on a personal level AE should feel any kind of compelling need to continue to increase his BTC stash while BTC prices are likely to continue to go up exponentially into the future.. when his needs continue to get met and exceeded with a much more modest, prudent and practical approach to his BTC wealth management, even if he continues to shave off decent amounts of BTC all the way up the price growth projections into the future.... and even accounting for nothing being guaranteed, either.

(You had a good point yourself, but I think you missed my point.  I wasn’t talking about people who lost their coins.  I was talking about die-hard nocoiners—nevercoiners.)

 Well maybe they exist, but why do we need to have very many concerns about them?  Sure there are a lot of folks who will die without ever getting any BTC.. and sucks to be them.. and surely any of us who know about BTC are better off than those folks, even if we fuck up a whole hell of a lot, so in several regards, even if some BTC HODLers/Accumulators fuck up a lot, they are still going to do much better than the no coiners, at least in terms of improving their own conditions..

So the no coiner/never coiner guy with $10million and who earns around $400k per year on his passive income from his $10 million believes that he is not really going to care that much of his $400k per year is worth only $100k per year in real terms after 10 years, but at some point, such no coiner may well start to notice that the BTC HODLer is catching up, even if the BTC HODLer might never catch up to the no coiner.

Nonetheless, the BTC HODLer/accumulator is likely better off on his own terms, even if he never catches up to the nocoiner, and the impoverished BTC HODLer who buys BTC at $10 per week or $5,200 per year might be able to reach a pretty decently high income level in 10 to 20 years, and one of the advantages that the BTC HODLer/Accumulator has is that his passive income is growing from his placement of the value into BTC...

[AlcoHoDL]

Awesome shot.

To put things in perspective, the number of Bitcoin private keys that can ever exist is approximately 10⁵³ times the number of stars in the known universe. In other words, if each star in the universe corresponded to one Bitcoin private key, then the entire universe would only be able to contain...

0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001%
of all possible Bitcoin private keys.

Put in another way, it would take...

100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
universes to fit all possible Bitcoin private keys.

As you can see, OOM, your post is totally on-topic! 

[Biodom]

https://twitter.com/BTC_Archive/status/1541485816932974592

wouldn't that be nice?
However, unless there would be a hookup between some exchange and SEC/CFTC in the next 7 days, I doubt that it would happen.
In the other hand, can SEC afford yet another major lawsuit?

[JayJuanGee]

@JJG : just to be sure, what's a low coiner ?

Dear bitcoin please stay in 20s for 4-5 days more. I want to top-up on my next salary.

Yes, #metoo. Buy some and add some more steps to my ladder.

I try not to be too judgmental in terms of people making choices for themselves and even assessing their own personal finances to figure out how much to get into BTC ad to figure out their target BTC allocation level.

The best that I feel that I can do is to attempt to give some guidelines, such as:

1) get the fuck off zero or

2) consider a beginner level allocation into bitcoin to be anywhere between 1% and 25% depending on your assessment of the matter and how aggressive that you want to be

3) consider beginning with figuring out your various finances and psychology and starting with something like $100 per week investing into BTC, but of coursed, if you live in a location in which you only earn less than $2k per month, then you might not be able to afford $100 per week, and maybe $10 per week or less will have to do.   You gotta be careful in terms of not overinvesting after considering your own cashflow, which includes considering your expenses and having an emergency fund.

A low coiner is someone who is way underinvested into BTC based on his own various circumstances and could be anyone who accounts for the 3 above categories, but still underinvests. .even though able to invest way more based on his own circumstances.. .so it is difficult to categorize exactly what is a low coiner but just that s/he fits into a category of way underinvested, and not just merely whimpy but really whimpy.. overly whmpy.

Maybe if you describe me a hypothetical person, then I can attempt to judge at what level s/he would be a low coiner - even though no matter what it is difficult to get into the heads of any person...

For example, if someone makes $100k per year, and has an investment portfolio of $100k, even though I do not really know the other circumstances of such person, I would consider $1k investment into BTC to be a low coiner status, even though it does meet a kind of minimum threshold of 1% allocation of the investment portfolio.
Convince me otherwise.   

I want to believe this is a good start for the week as the price begin to surge high,

It seems to be a bit of a stretch of logical credulence to proclaim that we have been "surging" in recent times.

now that it giving a signal to rise this may be a little or the type on a large scale, but nevertheless we can quickly take a very good advantage of this week into day trading before the week runs out, i want to believe seeing bitcoin getting to around $22k to $23k before the close of the day with all indications been equal, we can still make it through while this places more opportunities for us in bitcoin to utilize.

You must be new here...


wait..


I doubt that there are too many regulars in these here parts that really feel much if any confidence to be "trading" in this price range, but surely whenever there is some stabilizing of BTC prices, sometimes enough time comes in order to re-establish the various order books.. and sure that can include both buy and sell orders.

I would think that anyone in BTC accumulation stages, should be buying regularly with BTC prices below the 200-week moving average.. Part of the problem that some newbies and BTC accumulators have is cashflow, but it does not seem very productive at all to be consider selling as a means to generate cashflow.. so buying seems to be the deal under the 200-week moving average and even within 10-20% of the 200-week moving average, it should be a no brainer.. maybe even anywhere between the 100-week moving average, still a no brainer, as long as the person is in BTC accumulation stages.

Where stage are you in 348Judah?  Are you accumulating BTC?  Are you trying to trade to accumulate BTC?  hard to know why you would consider trading to be valuable, unless we might get some better ideas about from where you are coming, because it surely is not obvious that trading is good in these prices unless you really know what the fuck you are doing and maybe that you acquired a decently high percentage of your BTC stash prior to 2021.

[nanobtc]

Code:

~/Documents$ wc -w ./jjg2.txt 
2789 ./jjg1.txt

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[empowering]

The Gentleperson's Guide To Forum Spies

https://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm



(Reminder)

[Biodom]

@JJG...regarding holdings going up or down.

Current users is an unknown number because many have just coinbase, binance, etc accounts.
let's assume it is 100-300 mil or take an average of 200 mil.
It is much less than humans on earth by a factor of about 40X.

Therefore, it is inevitable that current holders would have to sell some btc to accommodate new users. Of course, it would occur not by edict, but naturally.

How much each current user "has" to sell (on average)?
My approximation: 21mil-2mil (still to mine, so we don't need to worry about those coins, newcomers can theoretically get all of them)=19mil coins already distributed.
19mil/7.84bil=0.0024 BTC
0.0024X40=0.097 btc

Therefore, I suggest that if you already bought or mined bitcoin and then sold at least roughly 0.1btc, it means that you already distributed enough btc for 40 users at the steady-state level (all that is needed for 40 accounts on average). Of course people could do extra, but selling 0.1btc (on average per current owner and over the last 13 years and probably the next 5-10) would do the trick of "pollination" of the newbies accounts.

This does not preclude periodically buying or mining more, of course.

The fun part is to take how much you sold already and then divide by 0.0024btc. That would equal the number of future average bitcoin accounts (of newbs) you have potentially seeded.

EDIT: Laslo "seeded" 4mil 167thou future average accounts by his 10K btc pizza buy. Such generosity!

[Hueristic]

Hey Bros, i'm in a hurry, so here's that promised photo from NGC7000 (North America Nebula). Seond try, because my lens fogged in the humid air of the night.
Details: 200mm lens on a H-Alpha modified DSLR, 100x25 sec frames for the stars, 20x60 sec frames for the nebula.

Hmm, yours fogged and you just had to try again and mine fogged and I ate a telephone pole. Maybe I should change hobbies.

[JayJuanGee]

I don't believe the Craig S Wrong guy for one second.

No one who spends years "studying" a hoax (religion) could ever invent something as useful as Bitcoin.

Seems he has made a career out of scams.

I bet the telephone scam asshole cunts in India have photos of Craig S Wrong on the wall and pray to him every day.

I don't like to study those dweebs too much - so in that regard, I don't know your reference to Craig studying a hoax (religion).  What's the referent in regards to this point?  Maybe I have heard it before, but forgot?  

Sometimes specifics are helpful, just so folks who are not part of the "in" crowd get some senses of what is (are) the discussion point(s).

Code:

~/Documents$ wc -w ./jjg2.txt 
2789 ./jjg1.txt

I have seen these kinds of references before.  Anyone care to explain?   I have missed some really basic things in the past, so I know that sometimes there are references.. like an over the head joke that are just outside of my lil world...   It seems to be a comparison of JJG1 and JJG2, no?

I will concede that (from time to time.. maybe once or twice) I am not the most likable person in the world, and sure maybe you don't want me to know the secret .. hahahahaha.. and sure it is not really that big of a deal to me.. even though it has been making me a wee tiny bit curious.. since i have seen it a few times (and it has some variations of my name contained therein), and I am pretty sure that I am not the only one who doesn't know what it means.  Am I supposed to know?  Am I not supposed to know?

I kind of feel like this:


It would be MOAR worser, if I were wearing speedos out there in the cold.

Usual WO game.
Where I am: level easy.
Where am I headed to?

You be called AWOL.

Get the fuck back, and keep up with your threads!!!!!

No more funzies for uie-pooie!!!!



I am serious.

 































Hope that my feigning of seriousness did not scare you too badly, fillippone (as fillippone rushes back home to his computer to update all of his outstanding threads)










 



I have been wanting to post in the thread:
Micheal Salyor decalogue for a 10x Bitcoin Appreciation

However, I have been waiting for someone else to post in order that a proper thread update notice will go out.. which will not happen if I edit my post.. I suppose I could break forum rules and just post two posts in row. .and suffer from having them merged?

More or less what I was going to say is that sometimes I consider Max Keiser to be too much of a joker (showman), but he made quite a few pretty good responses (criticisms ) of Saylor's 10 points.  He went over them one by one with Pomp.

The Pomp Podcast: #1017 Max Keiser On Helping A Nation Build On The Bitcoin Standard

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[death_wish]

“Get Rich Quick” with “the Bitcoin Ponzi scheme!”

Obviously the meltdown of all the DeFi nonsense is going to take a while to be resolved.  [...]

The one thing that I see good in all this smouldering garbage is even the average person is going to begin to see that there is a difference between Bitcoin and everything else.

2010: Bitcoin is magical internet money that geeks play with and it's a ponzi.

The strawman that you dismiss is actually correct.  For example, in 2011, theymos, this forum’s administrator, was overtly advertising a Ponzi in his signature:

Signature:
Did you miss the Bitcoin gold rush? Is Bitcoin not the money machine you'd hoped? You can still Get Rich Quick with fxnet, the Bitcoin Ponzi scheme!

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD

I have archives of the old fxnet thread.  It is quite a read.  I’ll keep this brief for now.  I don’t blame theymos too much, because he was literally a teenager—not revealing dox here; he chose to reveal his own age on his forum profile page, as seen in the above-linked archive.  Youthful foolishness, no doubt.  Although I have never promoted anything scammy like that, I myself did some very foolish things when I was a teenager; I am lucky that they are not available in the Internet’s permanent memory.

But it is significant:  The adventuresome kids and the greedy retards in early Bitcoin were openly doing a Ponzi, which they openly called a “Bitcoin Ponzi scheme”.  Quote-unquote.

That same year, in that same cultural atmosphere, amidst numerous giant scams much worse than that kids’-game toy-money Ponzi, pirateat40 got started with the single most enormous scam that Bitcoinland has ever seen within its notional borders.

Celsius is Pirate 2.0

[...long post; read it carefully, if you know what’s good for you...]

Smells like a classical HYIP scam.

I apologize to defi for comparing it to pirateat40.  Celsius Network is the proper comparison to pirateat40.  The worst shitcoin Ponzis in defi look innocent by comparison.

In Bitcoin, the adults in the room stepped up and built companies like Blockstream.  This is yet another reason for my respect for Blockstream.  If mature, serious-minded people had not been building legitimate, respectable businesses, then Bitcoin would have remained a garbage heap of Ponzis and HYIP scams.  The garbage heap that it was—worse than defi today!  Blockstream was founded by OG cypherpunks who also understand legitimate business—an important combination.  There were many others good ones, of course; but I think that Blockstream is symbolic of “how grown-ups do Bitcoin”.


According to your 2011 account registration date, cAPSLOCK, you should know all of this from your own memory.  Why do you try to cover up the past?  So that you can take a holier-than-thou attitude towards concepts that are now in their practical infancy, just as Bitcoin was still in its infancy in 2011?  To try to protect your own investments by hurling broad-brush insults at anything you may perceive as competition?  Why do that, instead of letting Bitcoin stand on its merits?

You should know better, personally.  By the time that JayJuanGee (sorry, Jay, you have said when you got in)—or for that matter, by the time that conceited, Coinbase-defending n00b Torque discovered Bitcoin, most of the worst Ponzis and other high-yield investment scams had either condignly imploded into bankruptcy, or been forcibly cleaned up, or been relegated to the criminal underworld where they properly belong.  Though they both suffered at least the immediate fallout of Gox stupidity to all Bitcoinland, regardless of whether any particular individual got Goxed.

Of course, by then, the price of BTC had risen by 10x–100x–1000x or more, depending on where you draw your points of comparison.  BTC was dirt cheap, when when it was being used as toy money and/or an instrument for open, overt, brazen scams.  If you invested then, you took the extremely high risk that that may never change.

2012: Bitcoin went up!  I bought in for A dollar and sold for  $50!  I am a genius to have cashed out of that ponzi.

Your snark shows your doublethink and selective memory about even such an infamous meltdown as pirateat40.  Never mind the obscure chicanery that I quoted above.  Bitcoin was still riddled with Ponzis and High Yield Investment scams in 2012.  Only a visionary with extreme risk tolerance would have taken any significant financial risk on it then.

2020: DeFi!  THIS is the future... We all knew smart contracts would be useful!  Maybe this is how?

I see some great concepts in defi.  Permissionless no-KYC exchanges!  Decentralized quasi-banking!  Decentralized, trustless derivatives—perps, options, maybe someday dated futures!  This list could be continued at length...  All with Tether as a less-painful proxy for when it’s lamentably necessary to deal with dollars!

In defi, I have access to an anonymous, permissionless, no-shotgun-risk exchange with much of the functionality of Binance—already most of the basic functionality, catching up and improving day by day.  (Not talking about Uniswap idiocy here.  The latest and greatest stuff.)  If, instead, you want me to kneel, ask permission, and submit KYC to a CEX, then I will tell you point-blank to fork off and go to hell with your hypocrisy.  I came to Bitcoin to Be My Own Bank, NOT to jump through hoops like a trained animal for an uninsured, more or less scammy quasi-bank that has the worst of all worlds.

Needless to say, defi needs a cleanup.  The “Yield Farming” nonsense and moonboy Ponzi shitcoins are trash—but not as trashy as pirateat40, as I noted in the above quote.

2021: NFTs!  ICOs with even LESS utility!  (also possibly the worlds most complex troll)

NFTs are a good technology being abused for >99% trash, instead of the use cases where they would make sense.^*  Not unlike early Bitcoin.  Notice the refrain?

^* For one illustrative example, merely to establish the threshold credibility of the idea:  I think that NFTs will someday revolutionize the recording of real property deeds and chains of title.  Real-world real property, not low-grade cartoons of bored apes.  Anyone who has real-life experience with homeownership or other real estate will see the benefit of taking the public records out of the current inefficient systems, and cryptographically authenticating them on a blockchain.


By the way, cAPSLOCK:  When Richy_T civilly disagreed with me based on his outdated information about Blockstream Satellite, and I corrected him, he kinda-sorta acknowledged his mistake; and he continued with a constructive discussion.  Why do you dodge the factual correction of your very rude misinformation?

ZCASH is a fucking trusted setup

Your are ill-informed.  The trusted setup is dead.  Gone with Halo2.  Zcash’s Orchard shielded value pool, activated on mainnet in May 2022, has no trusted setup!

That is one of several major reasons why I declare the technology now “mature”:  No more trusted setup.  I put up with the trusted setup in Zcash myself, from its beginning until 2022; but I disliked it.  I would not want to bring it to Bitcoin.  The Zcash team also disliked it—actually, they hated it!  Therefore, they spent years working on improved cryptography to get rid of it forever.

You also have not answered my point about a “dev tax”.  cAPSLOCK, you hate the idea of a “dev tax”; and you insult altcoins that have a “dev tax”.  So, over all these years that you have enjoyed Bitcoin, have you donated any nontrivial amounts to support Bitcoin Core development?  Developers need to be paid somehow.  I know that some big BTC HODLers are very good about this; they tend not to be the ones who sneer at little altcoins for having a “dev tax”, for they understand that developers need to be paid somehow.

[JayJuanGee]

That innocent loking LUNA man will get destroyed now. He is enjoying a comfortable life, still,  as shit coin owner this will be the first time a hacker group destroys his life, money and Bitcoin holdings. I am loving it. 

Link or it didn't happen.

 

Don't you think that I know??

No I don't. You do now.

It is essential and important to often use specific out of place and out of order words to trigger people.  Like you.    

SHirley UIEpoop-ster is a wannabe a pro-wanna at artzie ^fart of goobbLedy_-ggoo.

[Hueristic]

By the way, cAPSLOCK:  When Richy_T civilly disagreed with me based on his outdated information about Blockstream Satellite, and I corrected him, he kinda-sorta acknowledged his mistake; and he continued with a constructive discussion.  Why do you dodge the factual correction of your very rude misinformation?

ZCASH is a fucking trusted setup

Your are ill-informed.  The trusted setup is dead.  Gone with Halo2.  Zcash’s Orchard shielded value pool, activated on mainnet in May 2022, has no trusted setup!

That is one of several major reasons why I declare the technology now “mature”:  No more trusted setup.  I put up with the trusted setup in Zcash myself, from its beginning until 2022; but I disliked it.  I would not want to bring it to Bitcoin.  The Zcash team also disliked it—actually, they hated it!  Therefore, they spent years working on improved cryptography to get rid of it forever.

You also have not answered my point about a “dev tax”.  cAPSLOCK, you hate the idea of a “dev tax”; and you insult altcoins that have a “dev tax”.  So, over all these years that you have enjoyed Bitcoin, have you donated any nontrivial amounts to support Bitcoin Core development?  Developers need to be paid somehow.  I know that some big BTC HODLers are very good about this; they tend not to be the ones who sneer at little altcoins for having a “dev tax”, for they understand that developers need to be paid somehow.

There are many reasons Zcrap is not discussed here, not the least of which is respect for the WO.

If you want to shill it them start a thread in the appropriate section.

Who knows maybe you will make a convert or two if you do it appropriately.

I haven't even bothered to read your arguments about it as it is about as OFF TOPIC as it gets in the thread and is a complete SCAM in my view.