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

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[El duderino_]

A one twelve morning.
Drone shows all over the world.
It's the Bitcoin way.

[Odohu]

Saylor predicts that Bitcoin can make it to 21$ million in next 21 years while BitMine Chairman Tom Lee said that in long run Bitcoin can rise to 1.6 - 2 million USD. 

Now it's up to us, how we plan our future Bitcoin journey. There are people who says that time to get massive gain from Bitcoin is gone but Saylor and Tom Lee are predicting that it's still the right time to accumulate Bitcoins.
 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bitcoin-2m-tom-lee-michael-140215916.html

Michael Sailor is highly optimistic about Bitcoin and I love him for that because he matches his words with action. He has been one man that have never nurtured any form of fear for Bitcoin and have continued to even buy when others are contemplating selling. If he predicts Bitcoin to be $21 million in 21 years, I will believe him even though it is looking too good to be true.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

I do agree that I learned the lesson after losing 30$. The reason why I agree on placing the bet is because I made a claim and I don't like backing from that claim.

If you think you can win on that new offer then accept that offer since you will get 0.001 btc this time which is almost 100$. Just remember, in gambling winner is the one who knows when to stop.

We already finalize the bet, and yes, I understand that gambling is not a good habit.

I do not consider myself much of a gambler, and I feel that I am not really playing for amounts that cause me much concerns either way.. and I already largely have enough bitcoin to cover the bet... Even you consider that my costs per BTC might have had been $10k, then a 0.001 BTC bet had ONLY cost me $10 to accumulate such BTC, and sure it is possible that I could lose them for around 10x (or more) higher than I had paid for them.. but I am already O.K. with it, and I was more than willing to enter such bet with LFC without too many concerns whether I win or lose the bet, even though I still believe that the odds are against LFC from winning the bet, yet if he does end up winning the bet, then  that outcome would be acceptable with me, too.

I personally do not have a decision on the fact that long term developers say that pre core 30 spam is a hack
and that core 30 is not a hack.

This is one of the reasons why I am choosing to post everything that I've learned. 

I do find it interesting, though, that what I have posted so far, which honestly isn't that controversial, it has stirred up so much ire.
I will say this, pay attention to the tone of the people arguing as well as contradictory or very thin reasoning.  A lot of the tactics that I see being used are very common in political arguments.

I will get around to the interesting political angles that have come into play mostly on Twitter.

Personally I have far less to lose if it expodes crashes and burns then most of the people here on the wo.

But I still think BTC will prevail in any court battles.

Is the devastating court battle in the room with you right now?

It seems to me BTC will face legal challenges which will get solved one way or another.

Unlikely.

Who will sue whom?
Can I sue electricity because it powered some people's nasty habits?

I am going to sue the internet and the wheel, and perhaps even fire, itself.  I might sue math and gravity as well, especially certain formulas that I don't like the results and I also don't like how much force is pulled upon me under certain conditions.  I might sue water, especially after I had an incident a while back with water, and it was not good for me and it was water's fault.

This story about pictures and files was already circulated few years ago...nothing happened.

A 5 or 20 dollar bill is presumed "innocent" regardless of what substances are on it.
Same here..if need to be, the protocol would be declared as existing beyond what people do with it.

EDIT: It seems that people focus too much on what could happen instead of what would likely happen. My opinion (based on the block universe theory) is that everything already happened, but if bitcoin didn't get smothered at the very beginning, the probability that it would continue for a while vastly exceeds the probability of it's sudden demise.

There are a lot of people afraid to invest in bitcoin based on what could happen, and they have been pretty much continuing to lose in their failure/refusal to get on board.

if you are going to say that the larger image protocol is not going to cause a courtroom battle you are entitled to your opinions .

If I am going to say that the increased and eased ability to store large images will cause a courtroom battle or 2 or more I am entitled to my opinion.
We will find out since it is passed. The stage is set all we need is some time to;

A find out if there are legal battles over this.
B find out if BTC is a winner a loser or a push if A happens.

to me being an old school 2p2 users and not an old school hodler
I welcome it as this issue and controversy will suppress price for a while. This is to my benefit.

You come up with all kinds of fantasies to rationalize why not to accumulate and hold bitcoin.  You have had this problem for somewhere in the neighborhood of 14 years.  Too bad for you since there have been so many points along the way that you could have had overcome some of these mental obstacles and invested more financially and even commitment wise into bitcoin, but instead you have been ONLY seeing bitcoin as a trade to get you more dollars and that has not even worked out so well since you have been constantly selling bitcoin rather than allowing its value to compound upon itself through committing to it and HODLing it. 

We see actual evidence that it tends to be difficult to teach an old dog a new trick, especially a stubborn-ass old dog who worships the dollar so much, like ur lil selfie.

Sucks to be uie-pooie.

 

 

A one twelve morning.
Drone shows all over the world.
It's the Bitcoin way.

Yep.

It was the 21st that we did the quickie rise to $114,088, which some folks characterized as something close to a Bart..

But sure, it was ONLY around 5 days ago.. so are we going to "be so back?" or not?

I don't find it dull, even though sure, who wouldn't mind a wee bit more UPpity out of this bad boy?

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Dictator69]

Smart, though Govts probably have deep water subs digging for the owners of that treasure lost in all those boating accidents!

Governments don't explore deep sea anymore, they are interested in space, like the moon, mars and the Sun maybe.

Saylor predicts that Bitcoin can make it to 21$ million in next 21 years while BitMine Chairman Tom Lee said that in long run Bitcoin can rise to 1.6 - 2 million USD.

Saylor said one bitcoin will be equal to $21 million. It can be possible, but I have a lot of questions but for starters, there is not that much money in the whole world like what is the current M2 or M3 figure, or global money.

Saylor is predicting a long trajectory that maybe he won't live to see due to the age factor, but I like his optimism.

[Satofan44]

How do you guys plan to decide who is right/wrong over this "issue"?

I mean... the difference will probably be subtle in its impact...

It's not that it opens new ways to spam the blockchain but it certainly makes it a bit more direct (no need for out-of-band "tricks") and also probably a bit cheaper because of the increased mining pool competition for those over-the-previous-soft-limit tx's. Also probably some overall increase in the "standard" mempool size as now those tx's will propagate over all (assuming no tinkering with datacarriersize) core30 nodes.

We are talking about, maybe, a 5-25% (max) impact in those metrics... which is not directly distinguishable from previous "volatility" and/or other external events that happen "naturally" over time.

So, again... how do you guys plan to evaluate who was right? Based on which metrics and what amount of "acceptable deviation"... against which "previous baseline"?

If this were a bet I would find extremely hard how to declare a "winner".

The positions are mostly extremely opposite. Those that argue against it are saying that something really bad will happen, whether from the legal side or from spam. Those that argue in favor of it are saying nothing has changed and nothing will change. A subtle increase in spam would be "nothing happening". A major non-frivolous lawsuit or attempt to go after Bitcoin for this kind of data would be something big happening, or perhaps some unforeseen issues technical issues from a lot of OP_RETURN (doubtful).

You are devolving even worse. Are you trying to be purposeful in your denigration in order to derail the subject matter?  I am having difficulties seeing the point of being purposefully denigrating, even if you might have had identified some areas that cAPSLOCK is wrong, I doubt that they rise to the level of purposefully uninformative.. .

Actually I saw this in one of your posts, you agree that people should be called stupid if they are being stupid in regards Bitcoin. Something in those lines. Don't make me look for it, you have too many posts but it is fairly recent. Rules for others but not for us?  I hope this is not another feature of independent thinking.

**Note:I see that Hueristic already responded and used the word hypocrite, and maybe that is a bit more accurate, even if it does come off as a bit strong, even though he (Hueristic) did seem to explain what he meant by the use of such stronger language.

His response is wrong. I've already explained it. Policy rules are magic developer numbers, they can put whatever they want and they should not need to justify these decisions to the wider community. Furthermore:
1) Nobody can force a change on you, you can run the old client.
2) Nobody can force a change on you, you can run the new client and patch the rule yourself if you want.

There is no reason to be hyperbolic, and whenever some user engages in the discussion like that it makes the developer wants to listen even less to them. Why should they listen? Whether you believe truly that you are correct or whether you are exaggerating on purpose does not matter -- it is not worth their time.

By the way, there are quite a few guys on this forum that tend to trust your judgement on various matters, yet there could be cases where we might consider that maybe you are wrong in regards to the extent to which some change, such as version 30, might have had gotten through by influences of bad actors and/or that the changes that were made were either not justified or they were rushed and put into bitcoin when they were not needed.  I am not claiming that I would know, even though surely some guys (including yours truly) become skeptical when we get senses that changes might be being made and/or rushed through.. so then some of us might get the sense that if the changes are not really urgent, then why is there an appearance that they are being rushed through.  

Furthermore, gmaxwell has nothing to do with this. He doesn't really contribute code to Core which is something that you guys should know? I'm sure that everyone involved has thought more than twice about this because a lot of time was lost over nothing. If they decided still to go ahead after so many discussions, does that not tell you the answer?

Whether historical bitcoiners are technically correct or not in regards to the changes that are being made, there still can be anxiety in regards to whether the changes were justified and if the process for their getting adopted and accepted was sufficiently open and/or justifiable as being more necessary than not.. or whatever might be the standard for making such changes, when there seems to be so much vocal opposition and concerns about the changes being made and the justifications (if suffiicient?) for making them.

For consensus rules, forks, and major changes to how Bitcoin works definitely, but not for this. You don't get to provide input on any specific thing that you feel like you should. They have no duty to listen to you, and you can't make them either. All people can do is make things worse for everyone because they can't accept this fact.   Should LN developers ask for your input in regards to specific mitigations that they are deploying for certain type of attacks that not even 1% of users here know exist (let alone understand)? Really? THIS is the argument that you would make?

Anyway, by supporting Knots you are supporting the establishment of a transaction review committee that will review transaction data for CSAM. Totally not creepy or suspicious at all.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Ivystar5]

Sunday drones rise
bitcoin boom, never dull
morning light ascend

#haikuattempt

[wachtwoord]

Probably everyone here is well aware of this but the new 100000 byte limit of OP_RETURN seems silly with the entire pubscriptkey (of which it is a subpart) has a  10000 (ten times smaller) limit.

Of course this still implies an increase from 80 bytes to 10000 bytes (or 9995 bytes to be exact) but that's still a lot less than 100000.

[d_eddie]

There is no disputing this in any way or form, there is nothing subjective about it.

Here we go. Dogmaboy.

Filterboys are repeating the same thing that Roger Ver did. They think the same way that he did. He thought he knew better than the people who live and breathe protocols while he can't even write 1 line of code using AI.  

If there's anyone here who sounds like Roger Ver, it's not cAPSLOCK or OOM. More accurately, you sound like a cross between Ver and Faketoshi, without the latter's ignorance.

[Satofan44]

There is no disputing this in any way or form, there is nothing subjective about it.

Here we go. Dogmaboy.

Filterboys are repeating the same thing that Roger Ver did. They think the same way that he did. He thought he knew better than the people who live and breathe protocols while he can't even write 1 line of code using AI.  

If there's anyone here who sounds like Roger Ver, it's not cAPSLOCK or OOM. More accurately, you sound like a cross between Ver and Faketoshi, without the latter's ignorance.

Another dishonest retard. Include where that part is from rather than quoting out of context.

Should the quantum physicists ask your grandma for advice in regards to the development of quantum computers?

You are repeating the same thing that Roger Ver did. You are talking about things that you don't understand and you want engineers to consult you on it. Meanwhile your biggest life achievement is writing a college essay about gender. Surely you'd fly around in a plane that is engineered by the local village clown, hypocrite.  

Probably everyone here is well aware of this but the new 100000 byte limit of OP_RETURN seems silly with the entire pubscriptkey (of which it is a subpart) has a  10000 (ten times smaller) limit.

Of course this still implies an increase from 80 bytes to 10000 bytes (or 9995 bytes to be exact) but that's still a lot less than 100000.

That one will also be lifted later, don't worry about it. Just give it some more time. However, being a consensus limit it will be harder but it will happen eventually I assume. For the normies here that are clueless about Bitcoin, the line he is referring to is here. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/script/script.h#L40C1-L41C1

[d_eddie]

There is no disputing this in any way or form, there is nothing subjective about it.

Here we go. Dogmaboy.

Filterboys are repeating the same thing that Roger Ver did. They think the same way that he did. He thought he knew better than the people who live and breathe protocols while he can't even write 1 line of code using AI.  

If there's anyone here who sounds like Roger Ver, it's not cAPSLOCK or OOM. More accurately, you sound like a cross between Ver and Faketoshi, without the latter's ignorance.

Another dishonest retard. Include where that part is from rather than quoting out of context.

The name calling requires little context, does it?

Should the quantum physicists ask your grandma for advice in regards to the development of quantum computers?

Of course not, but they should ask her about forcing a little quantum computer in the washing machine she uses, if there's a doubt it could send some of her laundry in a Schroedinger state where it could vanish, after she already bought the washing machine without any quantum hardware.

Now, the physicists involved in the debate have mixed opinions about that, because the theory's not laid out yet, and there have been no experiments yet. Then some of the physicists start arguing by calling each other names: Here's the cat in a box again! I smell cat shit, but the cat is gone ahaha! You're a Podolsky fanboi! Back to Bohr, is that where we are? Go back to your Newton worship! ... and so on.

[Satofan44]

The name calling requires little context, does it?

There is no need to actively remove context in any case. Filterboys is a great name. I have already explained that this problem is not solvable, and as you see mr. luke-jr wants to set up a committee to review transactions for CSAM content. Do you want to join him? When that turns out that it doesn't work (which it doesn't), then the next step is mandatory KYC before being able to send any transactions. Just let us do this one more thing, that will stop all the spam and CSAM!   Where is that political expert dressed in an independent-thinker clown costume, why did he fail to recognize this tactic? 

Of course not, but they should ask her about forcing a little quantum computer in the washing machine she uses, if there's a doubt it could send some of her laundry in a Schroedinger state where it could vanish, after she already bought the washing machine without any quantum hardware.

Without internet and social media grandma wouldn't be any wiser, and she would be better off for it. Now you are just making grandma worried and sad over nothing, no wonder she falls for misinformation so easily.

Now, the physicists involved in the debate have mixed opinions about that, because the theory's not laid out yet, and there have been no experiments yet. Then some of the physicists start arguing by calling each other names: Here's the cat in a box again! I smell cat shit, but the cat is gone ahaha! You're a Podolsky fanboi! Back to Bohr, is that where we are? Go back to your Newton worship! ... and so on.

At least they have solid knowledge about their field, that makes it more entertaining.   What we have with the OP_RETURN thing is just stupid. Not even 1% of the people commenting on it have even cared about of OP_RETURN before, they barely heard of it occasionally in passing. Most certainly not WO people, otherwise they would not be spreading basic misinformation.  

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[philipma1957]

ahh the smell of wo in the morning.

I need some coffee to read the fights.

Satofan44 has freshened up the thread a bit.

hey guys speaking of dogma anyone a fan of triumph the insult comic dog ?


and back to wo topic 113 k is hopefull maybe we go up some more before the 29th

[AlcoHoDL]

A sunny Sunday.
Perfect for my daily walk.
But not before this.

Bitcoiners are fine.
Even when they lose, they win.
Just ask LFC!

Bitcoin is crypto,
But calling Bitcoin crypto,
Means you are clueless!

WTF dude? Eww!
That's mouse necrophilia.
Fuck-You status reached!

The mouse may be dead,
But the cat is still alive,
And ready to bounce!

OP_RETURN drama.
Fear not, my young Padawans.
It will self-correct!

Drone roller coaster.
Boom, gloom, back to boom again.
You can bet on it!

#7wodigestsundayhaikus

[Satofan44]

ahh the smell of wo in the morning.

I need some coffee to read the fights.

Satofan44 has freshened up the thread a bit.

It's better to fight than to be surrounded with that lame and depressive energy that I found on the few pages before the OP_RETURN posts. Oh no, Bitcoin is down a little bit from the ATH it is time to panic and consider a complete recession.

[philipma1957]

R.I.P. June Lockhart.

I GREW up watching her on Lassie and Lost in Space.


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