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

[Gachapin]

I just did a little math and looked over the MSTR NASDAQ inclusion data. I was a bit shocked at my conclusion. I think that Bitcoin will peak the week before MSTR is included in the S&P 500. This will likely be the week before the Q3 rebalancing that occurs on September 19th (it will be announced on September 5th kicking off the mother of all FOMO).

What shocked me about this was that it aligns perfectly with my prior prediction that the price of Bitcoin will peak on September 16th based on the 4 year cycle.

I think we could be seeing another perfect storm with Trump continuously mentioning August as a timeline to fix the tax code. Maybe we see the US government buy 200,000 BTC at the same time the S&P 500 funds are acquiring Bitcoin?

September 16th. Watch for it.

there is some chance that the cycles as we know them won't occur anymore... we might go up constantly over the next 2-3 years or so

[Gachapin]

The Global M2 Money Supply vs BTC correlation (with a lag) is running perfectly still. $150,000+ by mid July?

I can definitely live with that.

....

I might even buy 2-3 chickens so I can have egg in my ramen every single day! ......what time to be alive!

 That reminds me, we couldn't even find let alone afford eggs to dye for Easter this year, so we used small potatoes instead.

pretty sure the kids appreciated it....

[El duderino_]

Let us weekend pump

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[hisslyness]

Let us weekend pump

Where is the dude?

[Satofan44]

The Global M2 Money Supply vs BTC correlation (with a lag) is running perfectly still. $150,000+ by mid July?

I can definitely live with that.


@ColinTCrypto
Global M2 Money Supply vs BTC

It's happening.
https://x.com/ColinTCrypto/status/1916845759799927214

https://x.com/colintcrypto/status/1917939162076074303

Is there a website that tracks this colleration in real time that is not a tradingview script? Accessing X without an account is horrible these days. Got something to look forward to

[philipma1957]

Let us weekend pump

I miss six digits so I am on board with 102k this weekend

[OROBTC]

...

Phil, Dude

I'm with you guys, let 'er rip.  

"Now is better than when"

[Hueristic]

Here is a link to a video that lays out something that's happening in the Core GitHub right now, which is a little bit annoying to say the least.

Is it just me or his Peter Todd always rustling up these kinds of problems?

I think Kratters conclusion, which is these things are complicated, but when you start to see conversations being shut down, it's a red flag is pretty on point.

Sadly, this has the potential to turn into a fork. I kind of hate that it's happening right now for sure, and it sort of seems like this is why we can't have nice things.

I also can't believe that I'm seriously considering switching to Knots. Considering the goofy number of nodes that I run, it's going to be a pain in the ass.

Forgive me if this has already been posted or is being discussed.

https://youtu.be/o7kCqwR9x24

Just finished this, Valid Points.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15biQH1H140

Added both videos to my "Watch Later" list. Very interesting, and (somewhat) worrying, I must say.

The thing is, Bitcoin is a human creation, and as such, it is subject to human errors and even a complete collapse if something goes terribly wrong. This is a fundamental difference between Bitcoin and naturally-created, naturally-immutable elements, such as precious metals (gold, silver), and this is the reason why I'm skeptical when changes to the Bitcoin code are proposed and implemented. To counteract this inherent disadvantage, Bitcoin has mechanisms in place, like consensus, forking, and decentralization, so that any side effects in code changes can be quickly and effectively mitigated. There have been numerous code updates over the 16+ years of Bitcoin's history, and Bitcoin is still going strong and better than ever, which shows that this system is extremely robust and failure-resistant. Still, Bitcoin Core consists of human beings, and human beings often fuck things up for various reasons.

Having said that, the ability to update the code is a major (if not the major) advantage of Bitcoin, because it allows progress, innovation, and the mitigation of future issues (think Quantum Computing attacks or other advances in cryptography).

Perhaps I should have posted this after watching the videos, but this is my initial, uninformed take on the issue. In 2017 I was totally against the block size increase (heated arguments with jbreher and all). Code disputes, conversations shutting down, potential forks, etc., just worry me. Maybe I'm just being paranoid (I do that often), or it's because I generally tend to favor a conservative ("if it ain't broke, don't fix it") approach to critical code changes. I guess Bitcoin has grown so big, that it simply cannot be allowed to collapse. Will see what the future brings. Only good things, I hope.

I personally still think it was a PsyOp as all arguments of a dynamic size adjustment based on the median with an exponential cost increase was never even considered and Monero has proven beyond a doubt its validity,

[Hueristic]

The Global M2 Money Supply vs BTC correlation (with a lag) is running perfectly still. $150,000+ by mid July?

I can definitely live with that.


@ColinTCrypto
Global M2 Money Supply vs BTC

It's happening.
https://x.com/ColinTCrypto/status/1916845759799927214

https://x.com/colintcrypto/status/1917939162076074303

Is there a website that tracks this colleration in real time that is not a tradingview script? Accessing X without an account is horrible these days. Got something to look forward to

Just add cancel to the url, there a plugin for changing urls as well.

like this
https://xcancel.com/colintcrypto/status/1917939162076074303

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[JayJuanGee]

Regarding the Arizona bill, Governor Hobbs is known to veto most of the bills, let's not get our hopes up there.

Nvidia is new to me, do you have any sources?

The US selling gold to buy bitcoin -- I believe it when I see it.

Hobbs is an incompetent idiot, but she won’t alienate Bitcoiners by vetoing this bill. It’ll pass automatically on Monday. That’s what I’m expecting.

The Nvidia rumor is all over X. If there is no truth to it, they got a lot of folks to repeat it.

The rumor I’m reading is that the United States will revalue their gold to current prices giving them a $900 billion dollar increase on their books, which they will use to sell off $100 billion and invest in Bitcoin. I think the old multiple of an investment’s effect on market cap is 15? If so, this sends us to $170K this year by itself. Add in $10 billion in short covering, $50 billion in buying from Strategy, potentially $100 billion from other large companies, billions from other governments, retail, banks… You can see the path to $444K beginning to materialize. You crazy bastards are going to get rich!

4x to 5x from here is not that outrageous, yet i suppose that we probably would have to count the top from somewhere around our jumping off point, which I would like to suggest to be $27k from October 2023 for this particular cycle.. so then $444k would be right around 16.5x.. which may well be the same (or similar) to our 2021 run if we count $69k as our top, and $4,200 from April 1, 2019 as our jumping off point.

These kinds of patterns are difficult to rely upon as a predictor, and they seem a bit incredible to set forth such scenarios prior to their happening.   I have recently had conversations in the real world with no coiners (bitcoin skeptics) about bitcoin reaching $1 million anywhere between 1 year and 8 years, and they look at me like I am crazy, and frequently I will proclaim that they hardly have any credibility or knowledge on the matter, and I may have had even been talking with them about bitcoin for a couple of cycles (or more) already, and they still have not taken much if any actions to establish a reasonable bitcoin allocation... and even if they had taken some kind of a reasonable bitcoin position 8 years previously, they would be in a much better position to have insurance against quite a bit of the current dollar debasement that we are ongoignly witnessing.  

Sure we also have supply chain issues in recent times, yet even supply chain issues can end up having quite a bit of reflection in price, even though sometimes there could be some availability issues too that go along with the various ways that governments are creating problems (potentially purposefully creating such problems) for regular people.

                 

Do not be premature in you hope for 100k.

We are so close, though.

You think that we might have a fake out?. and then what?  Go back to lower $90ks or lower than that?

We could have a quickie, up to $99k, and then back to $91k or even into the upper $80ks, and that would not be any kind of surprise.  It might be a bit frustrating if we get back into the lower $80ks again... especially with so many BIG players supposedly getting into bitcoin (or are the new BIGGER players buying fake bitcoin that is held on third party services?).

Need a meeting about $97k now.

Your joke makes no sense.  The third guy is supposed to say something different from the first two.. That's why he get's thrown out.  And the question that you pose in the meme is ambiguous too.

Ready the copter me thinks 

We still need $110k for the chopper...
Still some way to go, but getting closer.

Should happen in May.

Sounds bettable.  I am not going to take the other side of that bet, but still?  "Should happen" seems to assign greater than 50% odds for such a happening.  

I think that there are some folks who are still convinced that a new ATH will NOT happen this year and perhaps not even happen before October for some of them.  Philip?  At the same time, I still don't see any bets coming out of the contrasting viewpoints.

Here is a link to a video that lays out something that's happening in the Core GitHub right now, which is a little bit annoying to say the least.

Is it just me or his Peter Todd always rustling up these kinds of problems?

I think Kratters conclusion, which is these things are complicated, but when you start to see conversations being shut down, it's a red flag is pretty on point.

Sadly, this has the potential to turn into a fork. I kind of hate that it's happening right now for sure, and it sort of seems like this is why we can't have nice things.

I also can't believe that I'm seriously considering switching to Knots. Considering the goofy number of nodes that I run, it's going to be a pain in the ass.

Forgive me if this has already been posted or is being discussed.
https://youtu.be/o7kCqwR9x24

Just finished this, Valid Points.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15biQH1H140

Added both videos to my "Watch Later" list. Very interesting, and (somewhat) worrying, I must say.

The thing is, Bitcoin is a human creation, and as such, it is subject to human errors and even a complete collapse if something goes terribly wrong. This is a fundamental difference between Bitcoin and naturally-created, naturally-immutable elements, such as precious metals (gold, silver), and this is the reason why I'm skeptical when changes to the Bitcoin code are proposed and implemented. To counteract this inherent disadvantage, Bitcoin has mechanisms in place, like consensus, forking, and decentralization, so that any side effects in code changes can be quickly and effectively mitigated. There have been numerous code updates over the 16+ years of Bitcoin's history, and Bitcoin is still going strong and better than ever, which shows that this system is extremely robust and failure-resistant. Still, Bitcoin Core consists of human beings, and human beings often fuck things up for various reasons.

Having said that, the ability to update the code is a major (if not the major) advantage of Bitcoin, because it allows progress, innovation, and the mitigation of future issues (think Quantum Computing attacks or other advances in cryptography).

Perhaps I should have posted this after watching the videos, but this is my initial, uninformed take on the issue. In 2017 I was totally against the block size increase (heated arguments with jbreher and all). Code disputes, conversations shutting down, potential forks, etc., just worry me. Maybe I'm just being paranoid (I do that often), or it's because I generally tend to favor a conservative ("if it ain't broke, don't fix it") approach to critical code changes. I guess Bitcoin has grown so big, that it simply cannot be allowed to collapse. Will see what the future brings. Only good things, I hope.

Bitcoin Mechanic is quite convincing.

[El duderino_]

Let us weekend pump

Where is the dude?

Not to far from his backyard

In may 2 locations will follow though

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[d_eddie]

The Global M2 Money Supply vs BTC correlation (with a lag) is running perfectly still. $150,000+ by mid July?

I can definitely live with that.

....

I might even buy 2-3 chickens so I can have egg in my ramen every single day! ......what time to be alive!

 That reminds me, we couldn't even find let alone afford eggs to dye for Easter this year, so we used small potatoes instead.

Thrifty bitcoiners rule.

[Hueristic]

Here is a link to a video that lays out something that's happening in the Core GitHub right now, which is a little bit annoying to say the least.

Is it just me or his Peter Todd always rustling up these kinds of problems?

I think Kratters conclusion, which is these things are complicated, but when you start to see conversations being shut down, it's a red flag is pretty on point.

Sadly, this has the potential to turn into a fork. I kind of hate that it's happening right now for sure, and it sort of seems like this is why we can't have nice things.

I also can't believe that I'm seriously considering switching to Knots. Considering the goofy number of nodes that I run, it's going to be a pain in the ass.

Forgive me if this has already been posted or is being discussed.
https://youtu.be/o7kCqwR9x24

Just finished this, Valid Points.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15biQH1H140

Added both videos to my "Watch Later" list. Very interesting, and (somewhat) worrying, I must say.

The thing is, Bitcoin is a human creation, and as such, it is subject to human errors and even a complete collapse if something goes terribly wrong. This is a fundamental difference between Bitcoin and naturally-created, naturally-immutable elements, such as precious metals (gold, silver), and this is the reason why I'm skeptical when changes to the Bitcoin code are proposed and implemented. To counteract this inherent disadvantage, Bitcoin has mechanisms in place, like consensus, forking, and decentralization, so that any side effects in code changes can be quickly and effectively mitigated. There have been numerous code updates over the 16+ years of Bitcoin's history, and Bitcoin is still going strong and better than ever, which shows that this system is extremely robust and failure-resistant. Still, Bitcoin Core consists of human beings, and human beings often fuck things up for various reasons.

Having said that, the ability to update the code is a major (if not the major) advantage of Bitcoin, because it allows progress, innovation, and the mitigation of future issues (think Quantum Computing attacks or other advances in cryptography).

Perhaps I should have posted this after watching the videos, but this is my initial, uninformed take on the issue. In 2017 I was totally against the block size increase (heated arguments with jbreher and all). Code disputes, conversations shutting down, potential forks, etc., just worry me. Maybe I'm just being paranoid (I do that often), or it's because I generally tend to favor a conservative ("if it ain't broke, don't fix it") approach to critical code changes. I guess Bitcoin has grown so big, that it simply cannot be allowed to collapse. Will see what the future brings. Only good things, I hope.

Bitcoin Mechanic is quite convincing.

The dude knows his shit, I'm surprised I couldn't find him here.

[Hueristic]

Its going to be fun when AI is running the world.

is a uart connector a jtag?
.
Assist

No, a UART connector and a JTAG connector are different. UART (Universal Asynchronous Receiver-Transmitter) is used for serial communication, while JTAG (Joint Test Action Group) is primarily used for debugging and testing electronic devices.
Relevant Sources

    Using Debugging Interfaces: UART, JTAG, and SWD De...runtimerec.com
    ADALM-UARTJTAG [Analog Devices Wiki]wiki.analog.com

JTAG is not serial, what?
.
Llama 3.3 70B

JTAG is actually a parallel interface, not a serial one. It uses a separate wire for each signal, such as TCK (clock), TMS (mode select), TDI (data in), TDO (data out), and others, to control and access the internal state of a device. This parallel interface allows for faster and more efficient testing and debugging.

usb has a seperate data transmit and recieve doesnt it?
.
Llama 3.3 70B

USB (Universal Serial Bus) has separate wires for data transmission and reception, but it's still considered a serial interface. This is because USB uses a single signal wire for both transmit and receive, but it uses a technique called differential signaling, where the signal is transmitted over two wires (D+ and D-). The difference between the voltages on these two wires represents the signal. Additionally, USB uses a half-duplex mode, where the device can either transmit or receive data at a given time, but not both simultaneously.

guess i'm too dumb to see te differance. i thought parralel has to be a word width
.
Llama 3.3 70B

You're not dumb at all. The terms "serial" and "parallel" can be confusing, especially when it comes to interfaces like USB.

In the context of digital interfaces, "serial" and "parallel" refer to how data is transmitted:

    Serial interfaces transmit data one bit at a time, over a single communication channel. Examples include UART, SPI, and USB.
    Parallel interfaces transmit data multiple bits at a time, over multiple communication channels. Examples include parallel ports, PCI buses, and some types of computer memory interfaces.

The key point is that parallel interfaces typically have a fixed word width, such as 8, 16, or 32 bits, and transmit all the bits of a word simultaneously over separate wires. This allows for faster data transfer rates, but also increases the complexity and cost of the interface.

In contrast, serial interfaces transmit data one bit at a time, but can often achieve high data transfer rates through the use of high-speed clocks and advanced signaling techniques.

So, while USB does have separate wires for transmit and receive, it's still considered a serial interface because it transmits data one bit at a time, rather than transmitting multiple bits simultaneously over separate wires.

so a jtag transfers how many bits simultaniousley?
.
Llama 3.3 70B

A JTAG interface typically transfers data 1 bit at a time, just like a serial interface. However, it has a parallel-like aspect in that it has multiple signals that are transmitted simultaneously:

    TCK (clock): 1 bit
    TMS (mode select): 1 bit
    TDI (data in): 1 bit
    TDO (data out): 1 bit

So, while JTAG is often referred to as a parallel interface, it's more accurate to say that it's a multi-wire serial interface, where multiple signals are transmitted simultaneously, but each signal is still only 1 bit wide.

It's worth noting that some JTAG variants, such as JTAG with a scan chain, can transfer data in parallel across multiple devices, but this is still done 1 bit at a time, with each device in the chain shifting the data in or out on each clock cycle.

if it transfers 1 bit at a time then that by definition must make it a serial connector?
.
Llama 3.3 70B

If a JTAG interface transfers data 1 bit at a time, then it meets the definition of a serial interface. The fact that it has multiple wires for different signals (TCK, TMS, TDI, TDO) doesn't change the fact that it's transferring data serially, one bit at a time.

So, to correct my earlier statement, JTAG is indeed a serial interface, not a parallel interface. Thank you for pointing out the inconsistency and helping to clarify the definition!

[OutOfMemory]

Yeah, i recognized that at the time "AI" is not even capable to sum up referenced results correctly.
So, google AI is giving false, sometimes dangerous advice, which isn't even backed by the linked sources.
Real AI is still vapor. It always was. Hollywood fiction.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Merit.s]

Regarding the Arizona bill, Governor Hobbs is known to veto most of the bills, let's not get our hopes up there.

Nvidia is new to me, do you have any sources?

The US selling gold to buy bitcoin -- I believe it when I see it.

Hobbs is an incompetent idiot, but she won’t alienate Bitcoiners by vetoing this bill. It’ll pass automatically on Monday. That’s what I’m expecting.

The Nvidia rumor is all over X. If there is no truth to it, they got a lot of folks to repeat it.

The rumor I’m reading is that the United States will revalue their gold to current prices giving them a $900 billion dollar increase on their books, which they will use to sell off $100 billion and invest in Bitcoin. I think the old multiple of an investment’s effect on market cap is 15? If so, this sends us to $170K this year by itself. Add in $10 billion in short covering, $50 billion in buying from Strategy, potentially $100 billion from other large companies, billions from other governments, retail, banks… You can see the path to $444K beginning to materialize. You crazy bastards are going to get rich!

4x to 5x from here is not that outrageous, yet i suppose that we probably would have to count the top from somewhere around our jumping off point, which I would like to suggest to be $27k from October 2023 for this particular cycle.. so then $444k would be right around 16.5x.. which may well be the same (or similar) to our 2021 run if we count $69k as our top, and $4,200 from April 1, 2019 as our jumping off point.

These kinds of patterns are difficult to rely upon as a predictor, and they seem a bit incredible to set forth such scenarios prior to their happening.   I have recently had conversations in the real world with no coiners (bitcoin skeptics) about bitcoin reaching $1 million anywhere between 1 year and 8 years, and they look at me like I am crazy, and frequently I will proclaim that they hardly have any credibility or knowledge on the matter, and I may have had even been talking with them about bitcoin for a couple of cycles (or more) already, and they still have not taken much if any actions to establish a reasonable bitcoin allocation... and even if they had taken some kind of a reasonable bitcoin position 8 years previously, they would be in a much better position to have insurance against quite a bit of the current dollar debasement that we are ongoignly witnessing.  

I don't know why some people are so skeptical to understand that bitcoin is an asset to throw some value into for the future. I feel they don't see bitcoin from your own perspective and they also don't want to accept the fact that the price of bitcoin will increase overtime. It is these same people that will say that you are lucky to invest in bitcoin if bitcoin price reaches $1 million because they failed to take advantage of your knowledge in bitcoin and invest with as little as $10 using DCA overtime due to the lack of confidence in bitcoin.