Author

Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 13462. (Read 26719972 times)

legendary
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1217
6800



I don't think there are too many people up to celebrate with you right now but I will. Cheers.
legendary
Activity: 3962
Merit: 11519
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
Are you assuming that we need "one last BIG correction"? 
I'm not assuming that much, but that's what my gut tells me through... well, that's advanced SOMA stuff  Tongue

Fair enough, and really in sum it sounds as if you have quite a bit stronger view about the probability of down than I do, but in the end, on a personal preparation level (financially and psychologically) I don't really care that much about whether we have additional down.  Sure, I profit more with UPwards price movements, but like we discussed several times, we have to attempt to figure out ways to set our orders in such a way that we can get some advantage(s) from any price movement that happens.


I'm glad I followed my gut by shorting. I managed to stash some away and with this little climb I'm still well in the green even with the play money I left on the table.

I agree that it is a good thing for you, and it is a good thing that you found a plan that you were able to tailor to your own comfort level....  For myself, I have some curiousity about how shorting plays out for others, but I have no compelling reason to change my own practice because what I do feels really good for me.  I did go out and buy a couple of nice things in the past few weeks, so my bitcoin strategy is not taking away from my treating of myself.  By the way, I recall that you took a sufficiently modest short that was an attempt to prepare for price movements in either direction, which is a good thing to do.   Perhaps on reflection you want to tell yourself to play bigger on the next short that you take in similar circumstances (and that could end up playing out in a different way... A lot of shorters do get reckt, so hopefully there are ways to act in moderation in order to not wipe out your profits with any future shorts that you might take - and more likely to be true if you continue to play them in moderation rather than getting greedy.

My final point, however, was the admission that for all we know, the badger might well not give a single fuck what we or anybody else thinks or feels.

I do not engage in these kinds of discussions in order to find out how people feel, but instead to brainstorm differing perspectives.  Yes, largely I have developed plans for myself that play out no matter the price direction and no matter what other people think or feel, but in the end on the margins, we can still learn by sharing ideas with other peeps... and some other peeps are going to profit from our sharing of knowledge (and experiences) too.  Don't get me wrong, I am largely in agreement with you... which is that I doubt that my input or the input of others in this thread causes BTC price action(s), but we still have the ability to profit from participating in such thread discussions, even if seemingly repetitive.


full member
Activity: 770
Merit: 156
legendary
Activity: 3962
Merit: 11519
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
[edited out]

yeah, I agree, just in this instance..just seeing the old ETF supposed, maybe happening, and then does not happen...usual reversal

what is the reason it pops up NOW, besides my 'paranoia'?  Not seeing much, but the 'supposed' ETF angle

than again, wtf do I know...just saying, what came to mind on the current pump

O.k.  Let's attempt to isolate reasons and to play a hypothetical. 

Let's hypothetically say that the ETF is having some kind of effect on the BTC price currently, if so, we could still have a buy on the rumor and sell on the news situation.  Sometimes just the idea of something bullish happening could cause a pump  in a time period that is quite a bit before the official announcement, and then when the thing actually hits, whether yes or no, then the opposite effect could happen (a dump, even with positive news, although positive news would likely cause a longer term financialization and therefore pump upon the BTC price).

On the other hand, the hypothetical is all wrong - because a large amount of the time, there are several factors that affect the price, including supply and demand issues across 100s of liquidation mechanisms, including dynamics with alts.  We also have momentum and manipulation, too.... So, sure we can play with hypotheticals that attempt to narrow down the reasons for a pump or a dump and maybe even we can list out five things that are going on that have an effect on the price in one direction or another, yet I still maintain my position that we do not necessarily benefit from putting too much effort on attempting be conclusive about the direction one way or another, because as soon as we do, then we are likely to get surprised in the other direction.   

Take margin positions for example, and I have seen a post from today saying that everything is lining up for long, including long positions, but as soon as a bunch of longs line up with margin, there will be some whale(s) who believe its to their advantage to force them to close (by pushing the price down)


I would rather this just be a coincidence and part of the general fatigue and pump back to what I think are reasonable above 10k prices

but if wishes were fishes...we'd all take a swim...

(wanders off mumbling to self..have a hard enough time with 'current' reality....add magical internet money on top of that mess and I'm

more than a bit befuddled...) Sad

I do agree with you that if you can pinpoint the reason(s), then you can figure out a little bit what you are going to do, and what kind of tentative timeline to give your plan.   On the other hand, you can still make a plan for what the price actually does rather than needing some kind of reason(s) for it.  So in that regard, if the price goes up, then you make play x, and if prices go down you make plan y.. also you could have a plan to cash out.. certain percentage(s) of your stash for every certain amount of time period (that is also not dependent upon reasons).  So if your overall plan was to cash out 3% per year, then instead you might choose to cash out .25% per month (which is 1/12) of 3%.. or some variation that does not depend on any explanation for why BTC prices are doing A, B or C.
legendary
Activity: 3808
Merit: 7912
As times change, your methods may need to change, too.

  I think we ate at the same restaurant today!

legendary
Activity: 3080
Merit: 1688
lose: unfind ... loose: untight
And if that each person wanted to make just 32 transactions to different people bcash would need 30yrs to process that. Think about that!

I have thought about that. Today, that is indeed the case. Or even maybe longer - as 32MB is the currently supported max, which is subject to miners' decisions to create blocks smaller than max.

Which is, of course, why there has been discussion within the BCH development community -- for as long as there has been a BCH -- on other orthogonal approaches to scaling.

So while true today, it will be false for some value of 'tomorrow'.

In the meantime, BCH is not suiciding itself for the sake of some illusory benefit of 'decentralization' along some axis that is entirely irrelevant.

Orthogonal?

Yes. Do you understand the term? In this case, meaning scaling in a manner unrelated to the max block size.

Quote
You mean like side chains!

Sidechainy things are within the universe of things being discussed, though certainly not exclusively, nor even leadingly.

Quote
WTF that wasn't in Satoshi's white paper!!!

Point?

Quote
Wait so you're saying that different solutions might come in the future so time and resources are better spent on near term issues

In a manner of speaking, yes. Time tested engineering principles focus on the bang-for-the-buck solutions. Always.

However, it is not 'might come'. We know of several scaling solutions orthogonal to increasing the max block size. The discussions underway are focused upon cost/benefit analysis. Or alternately risk/benefit analysis. You know - the essence of engineering.
newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
As times change, your methods may need to change, too.
legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 5146
Note the unconventional cAPITALIZATION!
^unrelatedly: Have fun while making those private keys secure!

https://www.etsy.com/listing/614770978/d20-twerk-o-matic-booty-dice-butt-plug (via @shinohai)

Oh lord.  You are gonna have Bob dressed up as a wizard with a dungeons and dragons campaign going with that kind of post...

Jesus man. What is wrong with you?

Top problem at the moment?  Or the top 10 list?
legendary
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1217
^unrelatedly: Have fun while making those private keys secure!

https://www.etsy.com/listing/614770978/d20-twerk-o-matic-booty-dice-butt-plug (via @shinohai)

Oh lord.  You are gonna have Bob dressed up as a wizard with a dungeons and dragons campaign going with that kind of post...

Jesus man. What is wrong with you?
legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 5146
Note the unconventional cAPITALIZATION!
^unrelatedly: Have fun while making those private keys secure!



https://www.etsy.com/listing/614770978/d20-twerk-o-matic-booty-dice-butt-plug (via @shinohai)

Oh lord.  You are gonna have Bob dressed up as a wizard with a dungeons and dragons campaign going with that kind of post...
legendary
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1217
This guy must be 100% sure that BTC will surpass $280K in 2023 to bet $6.3 mil.  Grin
https://www.etftrends.com/crypto-trader-big-on-bitcoin-exceeds-warren-buffett-berkshire-price

Not a bad bet I think. But that counterparty risk Shocked. Trusting someone to actually pay out 1.2 billion, that's more trust than I have in anyone.
full member
Activity: 434
Merit: 168
Hold on! bear months is more exciting
legendary
Activity: 1891
Merit: 3096
All good things to those who wait
member
Activity: 684
Merit: 19
The next bull cycle is coming?



I am quite sure this is the signal we have been waiting for...

BTC To the moon!
legendary
Activity: 3836
Merit: 4969
Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it
Yes whenever you use a wallet you may have multi-inputs and multiple signatures, you just don’t necessarily realize it.  

Besides, Schnorr is just a stepping stone to coinjoin.  

Linky?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14644650


Here's a good repost re CoinJoin
http://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/building-on-bitcoin/2018/coinjoinxt/


Nothing on Schnorr tho


Thanks Guys, I think this is it.

Quote
Then he suggested just using Schnorr multi-signature instead of the BLS signatures. The idea is that if you have inputs with pubkeys P and P2  you can combine them and to form a P+P2 pubkey and sign with that to prove authorization with both keys.  When this had previously been discussed the fact that someone malicious could set their P2 to P3-P and then sign the aggregate with just P3 seemed to kill it.

But actually a few months ago Pieter Wuille solved this as a side effect of his key tree multi-signature work,  He suggested instead that to combine P and P2, you use P*H(P) + P2*H(P2); this doesn't inhibit signing, but it makes it impossible to create a pubkey as a linear combination of other pre-existing pubkeys. Pieter has an implementation of this as part of the Libsecp256k1 multi-signature work: https://github.com/bitcoin/secp256k1/pull/322

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14011669
member
Activity: 332
Merit: 12
The next bull cycle is coming?

legendary
Activity: 1442
Merit: 2282
Degenerate bull hatter & Bitcoin monotheist
Yes whenever you use a wallet you may have multi-inputs and multiple signatures, you just don’t necessarily realize it. 

Besides, Schnorr is just a stepping stone to coinjoin. 

Linky?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14644650
legendary
Activity: 2833
Merit: 1851
In order to dump coins one must have coins
And if that each person wanted to make just 32 transactions to different people bcash would need 30yrs to process that. Think about that!

I have thought about that. Today, that is indeed the case. Or even maybe longer - as 32MB is the currently supported max, which is subject to miners' decisions to create blocks smaller than max.

Which is, of course, why there has been discussion within the BCH development community -- for as long as there has been a BCH -- on other orthogonal approaches to scaling.

So while true today, it will be false for some value of 'tomorrow'.

In the meantime, BCH is not suiciding itself for the sake of some illusory benefit of 'decentralization' along some axis that is entirely irrelevant.

Orthogonal? You mean like side chains! WTF that wasn't in Satoshi's white paper!!!
Wait so you're saying that different solutions might come in the future so time and resources are better spent on near term issues rather than arbitrary usages cases for the whole population! You're so cute with your flawed logic, i bet your tears will taste sweet
sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 254
Yes whenever you use a wallet you may have multi-inputs and multiple signatures, you just don’t necessarily realize it. 

Besides, Schnorr is just a stepping stone to coinjoin. 

Linky?

Here's a good repost re CoinJoin
http://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/building-on-bitcoin/2018/coinjoinxt/


Nothing on Schnorr tho
legendary
Activity: 3836
Merit: 4969
Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it
Yes whenever you use a wallet you may have multi-inputs and multiple signatures, you just don’t necessarily realize it. 

Besides, Schnorr is just a stepping stone to coinjoin. 

Linky?
Jump to: