Bitcoin Forum
September 17, 2024, 04:51:19 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: When will BTC get back above $70K:
7/14 - 0 (0%)
7/21 - 1 (1%)
7/28 - 11 (10.8%)
8/4 - 16 (15.7%)
8/11 - 7 (6.9%)
8/18 - 5 (4.9%)
8/25 - 7 (6.9%)
After August - 55 (53.9%)
Total Voters: 102

Pages: « 1 ... 32183 32184 32185 32186 32187 32188 32189 32190 32191 32192 32193 32194 32195 32196 32197 32198 32199 32200 32201 32202 32203 32204 32205 32206 32207 32208 32209 32210 32211 32212 32213 32214 32215 32216 32217 32218 32219 32220 32221 32222 32223 32224 32225 32226 32227 32228 32229 32230 32231 32232 [32233] 32234 32235 32236 32237 32238 32239 32240 32241 32242 32243 32244 32245 32246 32247 32248 32249 32250 32251 32252 32253 32254 32255 32256 32257 32258 32259 32260 32261 32262 32263 32264 32265 32266 32267 32268 32269 32270 32271 32272 32273 32274 32275 32276 32277 32278 32279 32280 32281 32282 32283 ... 33738 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion  (Read 26459604 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. (174 posts by 3 users with 9 merit deleted.)
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296
Merit: 1801


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
June 22, 2023, 11:03:26 AM


Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com
eXPHorizon
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302
Merit: 132


Precision Beats Power and Timing Beats Speed.


View Profile
June 22, 2023, 11:26:49 AM

I found this story fascinating:

Apparently, there was a 'bug" (or rather technically undefined area) in the original bitcoin code that would produce ANOTHER 21 mil btc starting in the year 256 from the get-go.
The "bug" was eradicated in BIP-42, which was done post-Satoshi.
Without BIP-42, rewards of 50BTC would restart in 256 years, then halvings would continue again (from 50btc/reward to down).

A bit of 'conspiracy' theory on my side, but how do we know that this was not the Satoshi's intent?
I keep reading about 4 mil 'lost" already in just 14 years.
What if Satoshi surmised that this loss in 256 years (with issuance stopping by year 2140) would bring available bitcoin numbers too low and actually designed the "bug" to revitalize bitcoin about a century after. Interesting, but would not affect things in our lifespan, perhaps.

See the discussion of BIP-42 here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4r878s/in_case_you_missed_it_two_years_ago_bip_42_is/

You have a relatively creative imagination, yet what you are describing could not have been Satoshi's intent.

It does not make any sense to start the issuing of blockrewards over again at 50 coins per ever 10 minutes... that would really fuck up incentives and overall value... so that's a bug.. not a "hidden - true intention" of satoshi.

Perhaps it was not his intent, albeit we would never know, I assume, but, then, how to deal with bitcoin "evaporation"?
We, as a humanity, seem to have lost about 20% of ALL bitcoins that would ever be in a short 14 years.
I know that people dismiss it and say that the rest are just getting more valuable. True, but only in a short time.
However, think about it long term: a complete loss is inevitable within relatively short historical time frames.
So far, we were losing btc at a 1.36% 0.286% (of the total supply) a year.
With the same rate of loss going forward, it would be 59.5 350 years until all btc is lost.
If the loss would decrease by a factor of 10, then it is 595 3500 years.

I find it amusing that the original code of Satoshi had in it a "revitalization" of bitcoin by a new issuance cycle after 256 years.
As 256 is < than 350 (my original number), but > than 59.5 there might would still be some non-zero btc remain when the new "cycle' would supposedly start, according to the original code, therefore, bitcoin never 'evaporates' fully and instead, revitalizes. If the rate of loss remains at 1.36% a year, all bitcoin evaporates before even the original Satoshi's solution (or omission/caveat) can work.

There could be another solution (but I like Satoshi's better):
1. Change to the address system so everybody has to send their btc every, say, 50 100 years.
2. From that, surmise the actual "losses" and make a small random seepage of new btc, so total number never exceeds 21 mil. Not sure how to do it in code.

TL;DR All bitcoin will eventually "evaporate" according to the current code and historical human behavior. BIP-42 might have been detrimental to the future (hundreds of years from now).

EDIT: the math is even worse: 1.36% loss a year, see correction. We would need to know the average loss per year pretty soon, maybe in the next couple of decades.


Be reminded of this quote:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=198.msg1647#msg1647

Your solution to a problem, that very well may or may not happen, will be more of a detriment to the Bitcoin ecosystem.

Forcing people to act a certain way in order to keep participating?.. where to next?

Changing the rules mid game is the reason why we are in this situation. Dollar back by faith not gold, money printer go brrr! de-valuation of your money and time, etc etc.

I have to strongly disagree with you that bitcoin will eventually "evaporate". If we humans are so dumb to "lose access" to every single bitcoin, every single sat, then we have bigger issues to worry about.

Historical human behavior, relatively short in the grand scheme of things, has shown, we are exceptionally good at doing what humans do, and that is survive!


Considering how often humanity changes what it believes to be 'money' then I think something would have been put in place by then to mitigate this problem. Also I don't believe that we would continue to lose BTC at the rate described as we understand how valuable it really is. Perhaps a unit smaller than a sat might eventually exist?
Who knows.
I certainly don't lose any sleep over it considering the immediate hurdles bitcoin faces. I am feeling pretty smug right now though knowing that adoption is inevitable.




Last part of the Picture is when Bljatcoin comes in with its com. Catastrophic
BitcoinBunny
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1540
Merit: 2766


Far, Far, Far Right Thug


View Profile
June 22, 2023, 11:27:27 AM

UK interest rates up by 0.50 basis points to 5%

I can see them going to 7% easily.
Who is John Galt?
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 286



View Profile
June 22, 2023, 11:30:08 AM

30k is nice Smiley

300k will be even better! Wink
Learn Bitcoin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 982


Vires in numeris


View Profile WWW
June 22, 2023, 11:46:35 AM

30k is nice Smiley

300k will be even better! Wink

That will be a dream. BTC
_Hiloveua_
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 235
Merit: 106


View Profile WWW
June 22, 2023, 11:56:11 AM


That's not dream, 300k Hit Halving 2024.

50k end of June.
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296
Merit: 1801


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
June 22, 2023, 12:01:22 PM


Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com
BobLawblaw
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1861
Merit: 5670


Neighborhood Shenanigans Dispenser


View Profile
June 22, 2023, 12:19:21 PM
Merited by JayJuanGee (1), jojo69 (1)

El duderino_
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2632
Merit: 12887


BTC + Crossfit, living life.


View Profile
June 22, 2023, 12:41:15 PM
Merited by Hueristic (1), JayJuanGee (1)

https://twitter.com/neiljacobs/status/1671832763467542537?s=46&t=1pkPzC1FtXIsCLMoTb1G1Q
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296
Merit: 1801


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
June 22, 2023, 01:03:26 PM


Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com
xhomerx10
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3962
Merit: 8613



View Profile
June 22, 2023, 01:08:41 PM
Merited by JayJuanGee (1)


 Honey badger DGAF; especially when it comes to talking heads.
Hueristic
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3934
Merit: 5290


Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it


View Profile
June 22, 2023, 01:30:28 PM
Last edit: June 22, 2023, 10:17:16 PM by Hueristic
Merited by Gachapin (1)


Quote
All 500 of Ethereum's Co Founders

That bit's pretty funny LOL
ivomm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1881
Merit: 3057


All good things to those who wait


View Profile
June 22, 2023, 01:37:14 PM

30k is nice Smiley

https://twitter.com/i/status/1671544201081937920
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 3836
Merit: 10843


Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"


View Profile
June 22, 2023, 01:42:19 PM
Merited by Hueristic (2), vapourminer (1)

...I don't claim to know...
If you ever do the math it would be an interesting read. Smiley

Are you trying to cause me to do work?

 Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked


I will probably go through it a bit more thoroughly at some point  --- I am still kind of shocked that it happened.. and still making little adjustments here and there to account for having that extra money (windfall).. ..


Ok... I cannot resist doing a little something right now.. .so here's another ballpark quickie assessment:

If the totality of the amount of my BTC that I had on that exchange was ONLY in the 2%-ish territory of my BTC portfolio, there is ONLY so much that I could have had profited from even crazy-ass price moves, yet those sell orders filled all the way up the line from $29.5k-ish to $129.5k-ish (in varying increments..and even varying amounts) to then end causing almost all of the BTC that I had on that exchange to sell (that's because I had already decided awhile back to mostly remove from exchanges the excessive BTC that I was not putting into sell orders or at least contemplating that I would put such BTC into a sell order in the near future).

Therefore, when the BTC price went shooting up to $138k on that I exchange I ended up selling almost all (minus some slivers of coin) of the coin that I then had on that exchange, and so when I bought back around $28.8k-ish, I more than doubled the coins (something like a 1.5x increase in the value that I held on that exchange, but I did not use all the money yet to buy back BTC with it..

So far, I just bought back the BTC that I had sold plus an additional 30%-ish).  Still since the total amount that I held there was ONLY 2%-ish of my total BTC stash.. so it seems to me that I profited by increasing the value in that account by something in the ballpark of 3%.. which would be a 1.5x increase of the stash on that account.. so it moved from around 2% of my total BTC stash to maybe in the ballpark of 5% of my total stash..

Of course, some of it is still in play because so far it did not get converted to BTC, and even though currently we see a lot  of seeming FOMO going on right now, I have no reason to FOMO because I have plenty of BTC, and I had plenty of BTC prior to this incident - yet who is going to refuse receiving some freebies?

Ok.. you tricked me into saying most of what I might be able to say right now.. even though I do sometimes create charts for myself regarding various statuses of where my BTC/fiat holdings (or even other investments) might stand (especially if decently sized changes have occurred in recent times), so sometimes when I create those new assessment charts, I will thereafter become motivated to tweak aspects of my investment portfolio or even my investment or my consumption strategies... not everything needs to be investment, to the extent that hookers, lambos and blow might be considered as investments rather than arguably maniacal consumption.
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296
Merit: 1801


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
June 22, 2023, 02:04:52 PM


Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com
xhomerx10
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3962
Merit: 8613



View Profile
June 22, 2023, 02:16:56 PM
Merited by vapourminer (1), Hueristic (1), bitebits (1)

I have it on fairly good authority that this is JimboToronto.

philipma1957
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4242
Merit: 8519


'The right to privacy matters'


View Profile WWW
June 22, 2023, 02:21:49 PM

...I don't claim to know...
If you ever do the math it would be an interesting read. Smiley

Are you trying to cause me to do work?

 Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked


I will probably go through it a bit more thoroughly at some point  --- I am still kind of shocked that it happened.. and still making little adjustments here and there to account for having that extra money (windfall).. ..


Ok... I cannot resist doing a little something right now.. .so here's another ballpark quickie assessment:

If the totality of the amount of my BTC that I had on that exchange was ONLY in the 2%-ish territory of my BTC portfolio, there is ONLY so much that I could have had profited from even crazy-ass price moves, yet those sell orders filled all the way up the line from $29.5k-ish to $129.5k-ish (in varying increments..and even varying amounts) to then end causing almost all of the BTC that I had on that exchange to sell (that's because I had already decided awhile back to mostly remove from exchanges the excessive BTC that I was not putting into sell orders or at least contemplating that I would put such BTC into a sell order in the near future).

Therefore, when the BTC price went shooting up to $138k on that I exchange I ended up selling almost all (minus some slivers of coin) of the coin that I then had on that exchange, and so when I bought back around $28.8k-ish, I more than doubled the coins (something like a 1.5x increase in the value that I held on that exchange, but I did not use all the money yet to buy back BTC with it..

So far, I just bought back the BTC that I had sold plus an additional 30%-ish).  Still since the total amount that I held there was ONLY 2%-ish of my total BTC stash.. so it seems to me that I profited by increasing the value in that account by something in the ballpark of 3%.. which would be a 1.5x increase of the stash on that account.. so it moved from around 2% of my total BTC stash to maybe in the ballpark of 5% of my total stash..

Of course, some of it is still in play because so far it did not get converted to BTC, and even though currently we see a lot  of seeming FOMO going on right now, I have no reason to FOMO because I have plenty of BTC, and I had plenty of BTC prior to this incident - yet who is going to refuse receiving some freebies?

Ok.. you tricked me into saying most of what I might be able to say right now.. even though I do sometimes create charts for myself regarding various statuses of where my BTC/fiat holdings (or even other investments) might stand (especially if decently sized changes have occurred in recent times), so sometimes when I create those new assessment charts, I will thereafter become motivated to tweak aspects of my investment portfolio or even my investment or my consumption strategies... not everything needs to be investment, to the extent that hookers, lambos and blow might be considered as investments rather than arguably maniacal consumption.

So you failed to properly prepare for uppity.

only 2% on the exchange vs 5% sad so sad.

I have 6% of my btc on coinbase set in ladder sales.

live and learn JJG  Wink
nlovric
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 140



View Profile
June 22, 2023, 02:45:29 PM

Fed Chair Powell Says Crypto “Appears to Have Staying Power”

In his testimony before the House Financial Services Committee Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell acknowledged the resilience of cryptocurrencies as an asset class. Additionally he acknowledged stablecoins as a kind of money and stressed the importance of strict federal control. Powell brought up current Fed conversations about regulating digital assets and emphasised that creating a CBDC is still a long term project. In general the statements show that the Fed accepts digital assets and intends to use them in its future decisions.
ChartBuddy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296
Merit: 1801


1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ


View Profile
June 22, 2023, 03:01:22 PM


Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com
JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 3836
Merit: 10843


Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"


View Profile
June 22, 2023, 03:04:43 PM
Last edit: June 22, 2023, 03:17:20 PM by JayJuanGee
Merited by Gachapin (2), AlcoHoDL (1)

I found this story fascinating:

Apparently, there was a 'bug" (or rather technically undefined area) in the original bitcoin code that would produce ANOTHER 21 mil btc starting in the year 256 from the get-go.
The "bug" was eradicated in BIP-42, which was done post-Satoshi.
Without BIP-42, rewards of 50BTC would restart in 256 years, then halvings would continue again (from 50btc/reward to down).

A bit of 'conspiracy' theory on my side, but how do we know that this was not the Satoshi's intent?
I keep reading about 4 mil 'lost" already in just 14 years.
What if Satoshi surmised that this loss in 256 years (with issuance stopping by year 2140) would bring available bitcoin numbers too low and actually designed the "bug" to revitalize bitcoin about a century after. Interesting, but would not affect things in our lifespan, perhaps.

See the discussion of BIP-42 here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4r878s/in_case_you_missed_it_two_years_ago_bip_42_is/
You have a relatively creative imagination, yet what you are describing could not have been Satoshi's intent.

It does not make any sense to start the issuing of blockrewards over again at 50 coins per ever 10 minutes... that would really fuck up incentives and overall value... so that's a bug.. not a "hidden - true intention" of satoshi.
Perhaps it was not his intent, albeit we would never know, I assume, but, then, how to deal with bitcoin "evaporation"?
We, as a humanity, seem to have lost about 20% of ALL bitcoins that would ever be in a short 14 years.
I know that people dismiss it and say that the rest are just getting more valuable. True, but only in a short time.
However, think about it long term: a complete loss is inevitable within relatively short historical time frames.
So far, we were losing btc at a 1.36% 0.286% (of the total supply) a year.
With the same rate of loss going forward, it would be 59.5 350 years until all btc is lost.
If the loss would decrease by a factor of 10, then it is 595 3500 years.

I don't have any problem with yor starting out by saying that maybe 20% of the Bitcoin have been lost or that maybe the loss rate is more than 1% per year, but even if we go by that math, losing 1% per year does not mean that the bitcoin supply is going to zero.

you must not know maths.

You can continue to lose 1% per year and the number will never go to zero.. it just gets smaller and smaller and smaller, but it does not go to zero... even if we were to assume 1.5% instead of 1% per year.

In other words, the whole world economy could run on 1 BTC. or 1 Satoshi. .. just divide the units in order to allow it to be more liquid (able to be spread out).. yes we might have to go to sub-satoshis, so what does that mean?  Sucks to be a hodler?  I think not.

Bitcoin is not broken due to its fixed and even shrinking supply... so there is no reason to fix it, and there would have been no reason for satoshi to put in such a dumb, illogical and inconsistent fix that started to issue more bitcoin supply, even though no coiners and low coiners frequently whine about such issues - partly based on their having had not sufficiently/adequately stacked up sats at earlier dates (and lower prices).

I find it amusing that the original code of Satoshi had in it a "revitalization" of bitcoin by a new issuance cycle after 256 years.
As 256 is < than 350 (my original number), but > than 59.5 there might would still be some non-zero btc remain when the new "cycle' would supposedly start, according to the original code, therefore, bitcoin never 'evaporates' fully and instead, revitalizes. If the rate of loss remains at 1.36% a year, all bitcoin evaporates before even the original Satoshi's solution (or omission/caveat) can work.

This is so dumb that I am not even going to talk about it.

 Embarrassed Embarrassed Embarrassed Embarrassed

There could be another solution (but I like Satoshi's better):
1. Change to the address system so everybody has to send their btc every, say, 50 100 years.
2. From that, surmise the actual "losses" and make a small random seepage of new btc, so total number never exceeds 21 mil. Not sure how to do it in code.

Still presuming that bitcoin's fix supply - and shrinking supply is a problem.


TL;DR All bitcoin will eventually "evaporate" according to the current code and historical human behavior.

Not true.  You have bad maths... perhaps bad sciences, too?

BIP-42 might have been detrimental to the future (hundreds of years from now).

What an imagination you have (a good thing?)



EDIT: the math is even worse: 1.36% loss a year, see correction. We would need to know the average loss per year pretty soon, maybe in the next couple of decades.

Not as urgent of a problem as you are making it out to be.

Maybe you and Philip need to team up?  Remember that Philip thinks that the mining reward crises is coming within the next few decades, too... perhaps in the 2056 time frame.. so surely bitcoin is broken, right?

Whatever solutions I wrote in-I don't care about them, just a small suggestion, it could be something else, but the eventual "evaporation" problem is real and cannot be dismissed easily, and even mathematically as long as the loss is material and there is no add-ons after 2140.

Wow!!!!! Shocked Shocked Shocked

You are really going to town in terms of describing this matter as "urgent."  There must be some merit to your claims, no?  #askingforafriend
Pages: « 1 ... 32183 32184 32185 32186 32187 32188 32189 32190 32191 32192 32193 32194 32195 32196 32197 32198 32199 32200 32201 32202 32203 32204 32205 32206 32207 32208 32209 32210 32211 32212 32213 32214 32215 32216 32217 32218 32219 32220 32221 32222 32223 32224 32225 32226 32227 32228 32229 32230 32231 32232 [32233] 32234 32235 32236 32237 32238 32239 32240 32241 32242 32243 32244 32245 32246 32247 32248 32249 32250 32251 32252 32253 32254 32255 32256 32257 32258 32259 32260 32261 32262 32263 32264 32265 32266 32267 32268 32269 32270 32271 32272 32273 32274 32275 32276 32277 32278 32279 32280 32281 32282 32283 ... 33738 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!