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

[JayJuanGee]

It seems that I have almost as much cash as is worth my whole BTC portfolio [...]

Wut?!
(I think you have to explain your little selfie here a bit further.)

Woops.  Thanks for catching that. 

I started to write my 'splaining, then I started to think that maybe it is good to remain a bit ambiguous, amorphous and even potentially internally contradicting on this point.

Largely, what I was attempting to say was that I think that I have as much cash as is worth the whole amount that I had invested in bitcoin.... at least within 20%.. ..

It's like one of those kinds of claims that should maybe stay a little bit vague and perhaps even unbelievable, but it is a kind of claim to assert that with the passage of time in terms of being in the bitcoin market, the various ups and downs of the BTC market, there may well end up being more and more cash in reserves to deal with the volatility and also a kind of sense that the amount of BTC that are held become nearly like a kind of house money... even though I proclaim to have around a $1k cost basis for any of the BTC that I hold. 

I know that mileage may well vary in terms of how BTC accumulators/holders might deal with their BTC after they are mostly in a kind of maintenance stage rather than an accumulation stage.. which that is where I perceive myself to be, and i also appreciate that some folks might want to assert that anyone who has a lot of cash at this time when we are fairly low in the BTC price (like within 20%-ish of the 200-week moving average) is not bullish enough to be holding so much cash, and it kind of seems to me that just the longer that we are in bitcoin, we end up having more than enough or we get some senses regarding how much we feel that we need to make sure that we continue to have at various price points, and that seems to be where I am at... still way too many BTC, even though some people proclaim that you never can have enough BTC, and I am no Michael Saylor in terms of how I perceive him  to be overly allocating... I feel that I am overallocated to BTC, but not in the same ways that Saylor (and his company) seem to be... and yes, I can hear you (and perhaps others) proclaiming that there is no way that a person could be overallocated if he is proclaiming to have nearly as much cash on hand as he had invested into bitcoin.. which is more or less the thing that I had meant to proclaim.

And generally speaking I never really claim to be holding a lot of cash.. I think that I had made some representations that my cash was around 2.5% or something like that of my BTC holdings... and gosh I had not done the calculations recently.. and my shitcoins tend to be less than 0.5%, even though sometimes prices will fluctuate, so I might have to do a tally.. maybe at the end of the month...

Surely we might realize that the BTC prices having had gone up more than 2.2x since it's November 2022 bottom should be helpful in these kinds of matters and also that I had "suffered" from a bit of a Binance US fat thumb mistake in June 2023.. which I probably still have around 25% to 35% more cash than I would usually have had partially due to that situation... and don't get me wrong wrong, I already bought back more than 50% more than I had sold in the process of the mistake in which outstanding BTC sales orders were executed from $31k to $140k-ish, even though I think that the highest sell order that I had executed upon me was around $130k, since around that time due to some technical limitations, Binance US had not allowed BTC sell orders to get set higher than the price that mine were, even though when I reset them, they did allow me to go up to $150k.. which was the place that I had all my sell orders on other exchanges that I had been using at that time.  Is it now more clear, bitebits?  Sorry (but not sorry) for the error in my earlier word choices.

We want BTC at 40k within a week! Go BTC no-one can stop you!

Is this "we" that you speak of in the room with you right now?

Nice question and I have an answer for that. The "we" that I used was not to show that I have someone else with me in the room but I was referring to the members of the forum with same thinking.

Your explanation does not really help.

Most BTC holders want to have it at $40k and that's why I said we want it to reach 40k within a week.

That's a suckie approach too, since it comes off as a kind of white knighting that might cause some folks to puke.  You know what is "white knighting?"

Everyone who wants BTC to reach $40k range faster is included in that "we" which I used.

Could be true, but it seems cleaner not to presume too much about what "we" might want.. but sure, use whatever words you like, when it would probably be better to express what you mean differently, to the extent that it might be a point that is worth making.

"we sure would like to get $40k by no later than November 1 - give or take 2 days."  It is not necessarily a bad point.. especially since this thread is about price movements regarding what has happened, what is happening and what might happened... so sure, I will admit that maybe, perhaps or that it could be that I am acting with too much pettiness.  As you were solder...   wwwwwwwwwwwwwweeeeeeeeeeeeeeee away as much as you likie.

[Biodom]

Nobody truly owns any bitcoins..because the ownership is only established when you are able to apply a correct private key in a "send" tx (via hardware device or something else), albeit validation of the private key (at some other point in time) is possible. Before that, it is all allegedly. This is in principle, of course.

[JayJuanGee]

Nobody truly owns any bitcoins..because the ownership is only established when you are able to apply a correct private key in a "send" tx (via hardware device or something else), albeit validation of the private key is possible.
Before that, it is all allegedly. This is in principle, of course.

Even though you may well be correct, isn't that still a bit philosophical and abstract... and maybe it is a point worth emphasizing for some purposes.

If we might assert that the private keys are inside of a hardware wallet, and the bitcoins are not inside of such hardware wallets, the bitcoins are in the cloud.. and  ONLY the cloud that is part of the bitcoin cloud.. no other cloud... but then anyone might argue that the bitcoins do not exist in any one place at any one time because it takes a bunch of nodes to say what is bitcoin and which bitcoins are which.. . all of the nodes may well have copies of which bitcoin are supposed to be which, but aren't some of the nodes going to sometimes get out of synch.. or maybe not be running exactly the right software to recognize what other nodes might be recognizing.  

I better stop before I even get further out of my depths. and just say, uncle... hahahaha

[Biodom]

Nobody truly owns any bitcoins..because the ownership is only established when you are able to apply a correct private key in a "send" tx (via hardware device or something else), albeit validation of the private key is possible.
Before that, it is all allegedly. This is in principle, of course.

Even though you may well be correct, isn't that still a bit philosophical and abstract... and maybe it is a point worth emphasizing for some purposes.

If we might assert that the private keys are inside of a hardware wallet, and the bitcoins are not inside of such hardware wallets, the bitcoins are in the cloud.. and  ONLY the cloud that is part of the bitcoin cloud.. no other cloud... but then anyone might argue that the bitcoins do not exist in any one place at any one time because it takes a bunch of nodes to say what is bitcoin and which bitcoins are which.. . all of the nodes may well have copies of which bitcoin are supposed to be which, but aren't some of the nodes going to sometimes get out of synch.. or maybe not be running exactly the right software to recognize what other nodes might be recognizing.  

I better stop before I even get further out of my depths. and just say, uncle... hahahaha

your bitcoin=Schrodinger cat, which is both alive and dead ( or there and not there) or, according to the many worlds theory, there is one universe where the cat is alive (your bitcoins private key turned out to be correct) and another where the cat is dead (many Universes where you don't happen to have a correct key).
In fact, every time I send a tx, is still feels like a small miracle of the code being right and it "happening".
Albeit, I always have a fear of the code/key degradation or outright loss.
Nothing is guaranteed, but bitcoin "mechanics" is probably one of the closest approximations to that ideal.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[JimboToronto]

Nobody truly owns any bitcoins..because the ownership is only established when you are able to apply a correct private key in a "send" tx (via hardware device or something else), albeit validation of the private key (at some other point in time) is possible. Before that, it is all allegedly. This is in principle, of course.

Nonsense. Of course you own your bitcoins as long as you and you alone possess the private keys to your Bitcoin addresses. Nothing else is required.

No hardware devices are required other than mnemonic devices. It's the corollary to NYKNYC... your keys, your coins. No one can take them away from you, no banks, no governments.

Contrast that to less finite asset ownership such as fiat currencies, "precious" metals, real estate, art, antiques, etc.

The only assets as valuable as Bitcoin are the relationships you establish with people.

[Biodom]

Nobody truly owns any bitcoins..because the ownership is only established when you are able to apply a correct private key in a "send" tx (via hardware device or something else), albeit validation of the private key (at some other point in time) is possible. Before that, it is all allegedly. This is in principle, of course.

Nonsense. Of course you own your bitcoins as long as you and you alone possess the private keys to your Bitcoin addresses. Nothing else is required.

No hardware devices are required other than mnemonic devices. It's the corollary to NYKNYC... your keys, your coins. No one can take them away from you, no banks, no governments.

Contrast that to less finite asset ownership such as fiat currencies, "precious" metals, real estate, art, antiques, etc.

The only assets as valuable as Bitcoin are the relationships you establish with people.

This is not what I posted, really.
Something else in that context clearly referred to something like a paper wallet or "etched" wallet, which people fondly showed few years back.

Define possess...little pieces of printed paper, for example..house burns or is blown away by the hurricane, cleaning lady throws them away, wife/girlfriend doing a major cleanup, or somebody stealing them.
So many contingencies...it is a freaking bearer asset and asserting ownership could theoretically become perilous (in some easy to imagine situations).

I was not saying that bitcoin is worse than other assets you mentioned, it's just that your ownership of this asset is established ONLY when you send it and you can't say "well, i had a private key, but i now i don't, but this bitcoin is still mine". In fact, I expect major lawsuits in the future dealing with this.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Who is John Galt?]

Nobody truly owns any bitcoins..because the ownership is only established when you are able to apply a correct private key in a "send" tx (via hardware device or something else), albeit validation of the private key (at some other point in time) is possible. Before that, it is all allegedly. This is in principle, of course.

Nonsense. Of course you own your bitcoins as long as you and you alone possess the private keys to your Bitcoin addresses. Nothing else is required.

No hardware devices are required other than mnemonic devices. It's the corollary to NYKNYC... your keys, your coins. No one can take them away from you, no banks, no governments.

Contrast that to less finite asset ownership such as fiat currencies, "precious" metals, real estate, art, antiques, etc.

The only assets as valuable as Bitcoin are the relationships you establish with people.

That's right, as long as the keys are yours and only yours, the bitcoins remain yours as well. But, in addition to the options for losing keys mentioned by Biodom, there is always an unexpected hacking option. We can recall the story that happened a few months ago with Libbitcoin, where key generation was carried out with insufficient entropy, as a result of which the keys generated in this way were especially vulnerable to hackers. This way, you can be confident in the safety of your keys and still face the loss of your bitcoins. The probability of this is almost zero, but still not zero.

https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/08/14/disappearance-of-900k-puts-focus-on-vintage-bitcoin-project-libbitcoin/

Even if other assets look less attractive, this does not make Bitcoin ownership absolute. Biodom beautifully said, "Nothing is guaranteed, but bitcoin "mechanics" is probably one of the closest approximations to that ideal." Very close to ideal, but not absolutely.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[philipma1957]

buddy lets not slack off now please pick up pace.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Pingrapole]

Nobody truly owns any bitcoins..because the ownership is only established when you are able to apply a correct private key in a "send" tx (via hardware device or something else), albeit validation of the private key (at some other point in time) is possible. Before that, it is all allegedly. This is in principle, of course.

Nonsense. Of course you own your bitcoins as long as you and you alone possess the private keys to your Bitcoin addresses. Nothing else is required.

No hardware devices are required other than mnemonic devices. It's the corollary to NYKNYC... your keys, your coins. No one can take them away from you, no banks, no governments.

Contrast that to less finite asset ownership such as fiat currencies, "precious" metals, real estate, art, antiques, etc.

The only assets as valuable as Bitcoin are the relationships you establish with people.

That's right, as long as the keys are yours and only yours, the bitcoins remain yours as well. But, in addition to the options for losing keys mentioned by Biodom, there is always an unexpected hacking option. We can recall the story that happened a few months ago with Libbitcoin, where key generation was carried out with insufficient entropy, as a result of which the keys generated in this way were especially vulnerable to hackers. This way, you can be confident in the safety of your keys and still face the loss of your bitcoins. The probability of this is almost zero, but still not zero.

https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/08/14/disappearance-of-900k-puts-focus-on-vintage-bitcoin-project-libbitcoin/

Even if other assets look less attractive, this does not make Bitcoin ownership absolute. Biodom beautifully said, "Nothing is guaranteed, but bitcoin "mechanics" is probably one of the closest approximations to that ideal." Very close to ideal, but not absolutely.

I agree with you that once you have the key and if you can maintain the key properly then you own the asset in Bitcoin so as long as you have the key you own Bitcoin If the owner of the property cannot properly protect the keys then your property will be considered as someone else's creates your keys in such a way that hackers cannot succeed even after thousands of attempts.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Antisthenes]

Apparently the greekman Cryptotourist bro has awakened from his slumber. Oh joy.  (trigger post)

I was actually wondering when you’re going to appear, before I saw your post dude.
Yeah, it’s going to be a great joy … I guess.

Speaking of which, have a joyful read about bad actors in general - much like yourself - not.a.sir.azimuth:

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/evil-walks-among-us-monsters-human-faces-wreak-havoc-our-freedoms

1) Males
2) Females 
3) Hermaphrodites

Well, I did request you should not get involved, which part of the quote below you do not understand:

There are only two sex, male and female, and … something in the middle - which does not apply to the vast majority of LGBTQ woke ideologists.

Put on your rainbow glasses if you must, then read again.

I actually forgot not to argue with him (because pointlessness) and forgot about his alter ego account.

Liar.
If you’re going to lie, do it properly, and I don’t care what your username indicates.

I was also more referring to the psychological gender stereotype, not the biological sexes.

Exactly, genders is just a woke ideology, whereas biological sex is the only solid definition.

But as usual, CT aka Antisthenes didn't get it, ~

No my little liying bitch, it is you who doesn’t get it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Expos%C3%A9

The Exposé (formerly known as The Daily Exposé)[3] is a British conspiracist and fake news website created in 2020 by Jonathan Allen-Walker.[1][2] It is known for publishing COVID-19 and anti-vaccine misinformation.[7]

The website became known internationally after Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro cited one of its articles in a speech falsely claiming that COVID-19 vaccines could cause AIDS,[3][2] and after Chinese state media outlets republished one of its articles which falsely claimed that COVID-19 was created by Moderna.[2][6]

Nooo you didn’t!!!
Here, have another one:

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

If you think that I share wikipedia’s point of view on these description(s), you better have your head examined.

Knock yourself out:

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/some-call-it-conspiracy-theory-part-1
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/some-call-it-conspiracy-theory-part-2

There are certain assumptions that are applied to anyone labelled a “conspiracy theorist”—and all of them are fallacies. Indeed, the term “conspiracy theory” is nothing more than a propaganda construct designed to silence debate and censor opinion on a range of subjects. Most particularly, it is used as a pejorative to marginalise and discredit whoever challenges the pronouncements and edicts of the State and of the Establishment—that is, the public and private entities that control the State and that profit from the State.

Why do you feel that you have to bring me into your little game?

Because:

a) I can.
b) You’re my favourite AI across the whole internet.
c) I want to expose your silicon ass, as much as possible.

You dare to post a wikipedia source?

Hahahaha, I see what you’re doing here.

Don't you know it is a misinformation site based on lies to obfuscate the existence of the reptilian people, who rule over us human servants, while hidden inside the hollow earth? I know, because some dude my friend knows on telegram told me  

Attempt to discredit no1.

EDIT: Seems like EXPhorizon and Antisthenes are ready for their first date.

Attempt to discredit no2.

Are you done? Because I’m not.

Research shows that people will believe anything if you add the words research shows at the start of the sentence.

People will believe anything when in fear.
Remember that.

Fun fact: In my mother language, people are commonly using the same term for "research" and "science".

Sounds good, science *is* researching.
I know you claim that you don’t watch TV, but unfortunately most people’s research is confined to the MSM and google.
That’s why the world is in a mess, yo.

We're not a very educated bunch of folks over here, but what makes it even worse is the fact that over 25% of them are superstitious (confirmed by research).
Not joking.

Superstition indicates the lack of education, and when I say “education” I don’t refer to the mainstream academia.

Is conspiracy theory a form of superstition? 

Was mask wearing political or not?

In the mean time, lets wait for goldkingcoiner to tell us that he welcomes our overlords.

[AlcoHoDL]

Nobody truly owns any bitcoins..because the ownership is only established when you are able to apply a correct private key in a "send" tx (via hardware device or something else), albeit validation of the private key (at some other point in time) is possible. Before that, it is all allegedly. This is in principle, of course.

This is like saying that your house is not truly yours, until you put the key in the lock and open the door...

While I can see the philosophical side of your argument, I don't think it serves a purpose, really... My keys give me guaranteed access to my BTC, period. It has never failed me and never will, because it is guaranteed by code, math & science. Should a technical glitch occur (a bug in the code, perhaps, or a mempool overload), that prevents me from accessing my coins, this will likely be a global thing affecting a wide range of key owners, and should be fixable. To the best of my knowledge, throughout Bitcoin's history, there has never been a case of someone's keys not working.

Losing your keys is not relevant to the discussion. In the same manner, the possibility that you could cross a road and be killed by a passing car means that you're not really alive right now. I can see this turning religious fairly quickly...

[xzy887]

I'm going to open the door and see my future.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Biodom]

Nobody truly owns any bitcoins..because the ownership is only established when you are able to apply a correct private key in a "send" tx (via hardware device or something else), albeit validation of the private key (at some other point in time) is possible. Before that, it is all allegedly. This is in principle, of course.

This is like saying that your house is not truly yours, until you put the key in the lock and open the door...

While I can see the philosophical side of your argument, I don't think it serves a purpose, really... My keys give me guaranteed access to my BTC, period. It has never failed me and never will, because it is guaranteed by code, math & science. Should a technical glitch occur (a bug in the code, perhaps, or a mempool overload), that prevents me from accessing my coins, this will likely be a global thing affecting a wide range of key owners, and should be fixable. To the best of my knowledge, throughout Bitcoin's history, there has never been a case of someone's keys not working.

Losing your keys is not relevant to the discussion. In the same manner, the possibility that you could cross a road and be killed by a passing car means that you're not really alive right now. I can see this turning religious fairly quickly...

My argument was purely philosophical, true, but it makes perfect sense from a point of view of a wealth tax, for example.
Regarding the house-also true..what exactly do you own considering that you have to pay the RE tax on it? You own maybe current equity, but i don't think you truly own the house unencumbered even if you had paid mortgage in full. Try not to pay taxes on a property you "own" for a few years and see what happens.

Thinking this way makes me free of worrying about bitcoin price fluctuations as I mentally detach from it and kind of observe it from a distance.
I don't want to spend it, so it became kind of a "thing" by itself in my mind.