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

[shmadz]

I'm afraid to ask, but, what happens in wave #6?

[SheHadMANHands]

Don't those charts just look like they're hurtin for a squartin?

[adamstgBit]

I'm afraid to ask, but, what happens in wave #6?

TERA contemplates covering his short
I buy
U HODL!!!!!!!!!

[windjc]

Just asking - seriously - does it not concern anyone that the markets are following an exchange whose CEO recently said in an interview they are looking at options either to move offshore and/or separate themselves COMPLETELY from receiving fiat deposits?  A CEO that has apparently stopped leveraged trading and will impose restrictions and fees on HFT in response to a banking system that we know is slowly but surely tightening it noose around all deposit options?

THIS ^^^ is what we are hanging this new "bull market" on?

Look, I want BTC to be worth 10K+ as much as anyone here, but how in the world are the current state of affairs bullish?

[chessnut]

that is a primary wave, not very bearish. even in a bearish case, it must be followed by an impulsive C wave.

however, the third wave of that count is an abc. not valid. a better count is an inpulsive leading diagonal, it has all the characteristic features. it also implies that we have begun the first wave of III or C towards 470 at least.

[shmadz]

I'm afraid to ask, but, what happens in wave #6?

TERA contemplates covering his short
I buy
U HODL!!!!!!!!!

I fear the vertical move. I feel it is coming, but I don't know when.

I get the feeling that when this downtrend breaks to the upside, it might be a violent move.

[adamstgBit]

Just asking - seriously - does it not concern anyone that the markets are following an exchange whose CEO recently said in an interview they are looking at options either to move offshore and/or separate themselves COMPLETELY from receiving fiat deposits?  A CEO that has apparently stopped leveraged trading and will impose restrictions and fees on HFT in response to a banking system that we know is slowly but surely tightening it noose around all deposit options?

THIS ^^^ is what we are hanging this new "bull market" on?

Look, I want BTC to be worth 10K+ as much as anyone here, but how in the world are the current state of affairs bullish?

imagine what price gonna do when current state of affairs really is bullish

kicking bitcoin while its down is not wise....bitcoin is hot shit!

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[shmadz]

<snip>

Just asking - seriously - does it not concern anyone that the markets are following an exchange whose CEO recently said in an interview they are looking at options either to move offshore and/or separate themselves COMPLETELY from receiving fiat deposits?  A CEO that has apparently stopped leveraged trading and will impose restrictions and fees on HFT in response to a banking system that we know is slowly but surely tightening it noose around all deposit options?

THIS ^^^ is what we are hanging this new "bull market" on?

Look, I want BTC to be worth 10K+ as much as anyone here, but how in the world are the current state of affairs bullish?

the actions of off-shore exchanges is a little-bit concerning, but for some countries, they have established bitcoin exchange for almost 3 years now, not many countries, but still... at least in Canada they have an exchange that is actively able to deposit and debit your bank account directly to and from the exchange and then into or out of whatever currency you like from there.

the limitations for virtex are that you limit your transactions to CAD-only, and that you transact with only Canadian residents.

it limits the chance for fraud greatly, as this method greatly limits the anonymity of  the perpetrators of deceit.

(*until it is revealed that virtex has been running a fractional reserve system all these years, in which case, we're screwed.*)

**edit** I think the truly trustless systems are at least 2 years into the future.

[adamstgBit]

see you guys monday.

[TERA]

see you guys monday.

... to the sun?

[JorgeStolfi]

Chinese Slumber Method prediction for Saturday May 10

Prediction valid for: Saturday 2014-05-10, 19:00--19:59 UTC (not before, not after)
Huobi's predicted price: 2739 CNY
Bitstamp's predicted price: 441 USD





[ Plot legend ]

The data point for today May/09 was very bad (S = 0.0134, W = 0.028) and again way off the assumed trend (straight line defined by two previous points).  The Method then says to use a weighted least squares straight-line fit of the last three points (with very low weight for the third one) rather than the straight line of the last two points.  Namely, A + B*(d-d0), where (d-d0) is the number of days since May/07, A = 2752.99, B = -6.05.

The Bitstamp prediction, as usual, is the Huobi prediction divided by the currency conversion factor R, taken to be 6.21 CNY/USD.  Its value was 6.21 today (May/09) and yesterday, and 6.16, 6.23, 6.18 on the previous good sample times.
 
Checking the previous prediction

Prediction was posted on: Friday 2014-05-09, 00:43 UTC
Prediction was valid for: Friday 2014-05-09, 19:00--19:59 UTC (~18 hours later)

Foiled again by the treacherous Chinese:

Huobi's predicted price: 2731 CNY
Huobi's actual price (L+H)/2: 2802 CNY
Error: 71 CNY (~11 USD)

Bitstamp's predicted price: 440 USD
Bitstamp's actual price (L+H)/2: 451 USD
Error: 11 USD
 
NOTE: "Vision is the art of seeing things invisible." -- Jonathan Swift.

[aminorex]

... to the sun?

But, soft! what light through yonder window breaks?
It is the east, and Bitcoin is the sun.
Arise, fair sun, and kill the envious moon,
Who is already sick and pale with grief,
That thou her maid art far more fair than she:
Be not her maid, since she is envious;
Her fiat livery is but sick and green
And none but fools do wear it; cast it off.

[Searing]

... to the sun?

But, soft! what light through yonder window breaks?
It is the east, and Bitcoin is the sun.
Arise, fair sun, and kill the envious moon,
Who is already sick and pale with grief,
That thou her maid art far more fair than she:
Be not her maid, since she is envious;
Her fiat livery is but sick and green
And none but fools do wear it; cast it off.

ROFLMAO

[shmadz]

... to the sun?

But, soft! what light through yonder window breaks?
It is the east, and Bitcoin is the sun.
Arise, fair sun, and kill the envious moon,
Who is already sick and pale with grief,
That thou her maid art far more fair than she:
Be not her maid, since she is envious;
Her fiat livery is but sick and green
And none but fools do wear it; cast it off.

alright, it's official. dogecoin can go to the moon, litecoin too, but bitcoin is going to the sun!

I actually like the metaphor (not sure that's the right term) of bitcoin = sun.

bitcoin = sun = light = out in the open = no secrets done under cover of darkness

*paraphrasing*
"for the world is generally opposed to secret societies which can only do their business under cover of darkness"
 - *I think i remember some guy saying something like that once upon a time.*

bitcoin is the eternal sun shining upon any and all transactions that the transactors wish to be made public.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[JorgeStolfi]

If you don't want public funds embezzled, require that all government spending be on-chain.  Anyone who actually wants democratic accountability should be all over that.  If your political opponent objects, well then, prima facie, he is corrupt.

If you want elected officials to be accountable for the source of their financial support, require that political donations be on-chain.

If you want assurance that taxes are paid, require that all taxable transactions occur on-chain, and all tax payments be made on-chain.

The Department of Defense [sic] would not have been unable to account for those 2.3 trillion USD reported mislaid on 10 Sept 2001, if those transactions had been on-chain, and events which ensued as a consequence would not have derived.

That is terribly naive, @aminorex.

In many democratic countries, the law already requires that all government spending be properly accounted and made available to the public.  Even in my own.  But embezzling of public funds is never so trivial as a public officer writing a check to himself.  The most common and efficient method is overbudgeting some large project and then having the contractor deposit a kickback in some offshore account.  (Last year the 3 past Governors of the State of São Paulo, all of the same opposition party, were found to have received several hundred million dollars in kickbacks from Alstom and Siemens, from contracts for the São Paulo metro.  Then, to counteract that bad news, the opposition found that an executive in the oil company Petrobrás, controlled by the federal government, bought a refinery in Pasadena that was good only for scrap, and apparently got a fat kickback on that.  And those are only two of literally thousands of similar cases, at all levels of government.)   There other methods too (like, internet gawkers found last year that an apartment in Miami was sold for US$ 10 to a Brazilian Supreme Court judge), but all are of course designed to not show up in the public spending records.

Ditto for political donations, taxable transactions, etc.. The law requires that they be declared, but of course people who violate donation and tax laws violate the reporting laws too.  The same would happen if the law required all such transactions to be made in bitcoin -- those willing to make illegal payments would not use bitcoin, or would use accounts that cannot be connected to them.

As for the military/CIA/NSA/FBI/etc., they would surely get exemptions from a "blockchain law" for national security reasons, with broad public support -- just as they now get exemptions from FOIA and external supervision.

It is a mistake that tech people make time and time again: to believe that a social/political problem can be solved by technology alone.  Without a social/political change, a technological "solution" will always be blocked, or co-opted and turned into part of the problem.  Bitcoin will not stop the banks from running the world; only an energic and lasting political effort could do that.

[shmadz]

If you don't want public funds embezzled, require that all government spending be on-chain.  Anyone who actually wants democratic accountability should be all over that.  If your political opponent objects, well then, prima facie, he is corrupt.

If you want elected officials to be accountable for the source of their financial support, require that political donations be on-chain.

If you want assurance that taxes are paid, require that all taxable transactions occur on-chain, and all tax payments be made on-chain.

The Department of Defense [sic] would not have been unable to account for those 2.3 trillion USD reported mislaid on 10 Sept 2001, if those transactions had been on-chain, and events which ensued as a consequence would not have derived.

That is terribly naive, @aminorex.

In many democratic countries, the law already requires that all government spending be properly accounted and made available to the public.  Even in my own.  But embezzling of public funds is never so trivial as a public officer writing a check to himself.  The most common and efficient method is overbudgeting some large project and then having the contractor deposit a kickback in some offshore account.  (Last year the 3 past Governors of the State of São Paulo, all of the same opposition party, were found to have received several hundred million dollars in kickbacks from Alstom and Siemens, from contracts for the São Paulo metro.  Then, to counteract that bad news, the opposition found that an executive in the oil company Petrobrás, controlled by the federal government, bought a refinery in Pasadena that was good only for scrap, and apparently got a fat kickback on that.  And those are only two of literally thousands of similar cases, at all levels of government.)   There other methods too (like, internet gawkers found last year that an apartment in Miami was sold for US$ 10 to a Brazilian Supreme Court judge), but all are of course designed to not show up in the public spending records.

Ditto for political donations, taxable transactions, etc.. The law requires that they be declared, but of course people who violate donation and tax laws violate the reporting laws too.  The same would happen if the law required all such transactions to be made in bitcoin -- those willing to make illegal payments would not use bitcoin, or would use accounts that cannot be connected to them.

As for the military/CIA/NSA/FBI/etc., they would surely get exemptions from a "blockchain law" for national security reasons, with broad public support -- just as they now get exemptions from FOIA and external supervision.

It is a mistake that tech people make time and time again: to believe that a social/political problem can be solved by technology alone.  Without a social/political change, a technological "solution" will always be blocked, or co-opted and turned into part of the problem.  Bitcoin will not stop the banks from running the world; only an energic and lasting political effort could do that.

dude, when the RFC's (request for contract up here in canuckistan) and the bid proposals for public projects are made in transparent terms, then at least we can only blame ourselves.

I think that's all we're really asking for.

*edit to address this part - "Bitcoin will not stop the banks from running the world; only an energic and lasting political effort could do that."

Bitcoin may indeed be the catalyst for the energetic and lasting political effort that I think we would all like to see.

[Equus]

alright, it's official. dogecoin can go to the moon, litecoin too, but bitcoin is going to the sun!

I am strapping on new wax wings as we speak.     Unfortunately they keep melting every time bitcoin flies too high.

[shmadz]

alright, it's official. dogecoin can go to the moon, litecoin too, but bitcoin is going to the sun!

I am strapping on new wax wings as we speak.     Unfortunately they keep melting every time bitcoin flies too high.

just because the wax melts, do you throw away the design of the wing?