Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 13635. (Read 26715512 times)
June 18, 2018, 04:34:32 PM
What is this strange color that looks like blue and yellow had a baby?
June 18, 2018, 04:25:30 PM
I will not feel right until the price is over $10k. For some reason when it is over I am calm. This low price makes me sad. 
Same here. Even if I don't have any intention to sell for years, over $10K makes me feel fine... this prices makes me depressed.
I don't need it to raise much over $10K at this time because I don't plan to sell. If it went straight to $50K or $100K I would be forced to part some Bitcoins, and I don't want to.
I am still having some difficulties relating to some of you other bitcoin bulls.
Sure, I consider myself a bitcoin bull. What else could I be? Especially, similar to several of you in this thread (even those with whom I have vigorous disagreements), I continue to appreciate that bitcoin remains the ONLY real crypto that provides decentralized sound money, and the various solutions that develop along the way, through bitcoin, continue to strengthen it's foundation rather than getting distracted into serving as some kind of scam... and for those kinds of reasons, bitcoin remains a threat to traditional financial institutions that are going to have to join rather than to fight - largely based on Gresham's law in which good money is going to flow into the good assets, and so far, the strongest such asset remains bitcoin.
Yet, my price perspective remains o.k., even with these current prices in the $6k to $7,500 arena, and the seeming ongoing tests of price support in the lower ends of the range.
In the end, I am thinking that I would still be o.k. with BTC prices above $2k, but of course the lower the BTC price goes, then there are needs to reassess the situation, and to consider that the bear market is stronger and longer than what was expected. Actually on the way down from $19,666, I continued to believe that the blow off top bull run was not over; however, the longer that this current correction lasts, the more I become resigned to the possibility that this current correction is going to last longer and the more I become resigned to the possibility that it is going to take more energy, steam and buying power to get the trend to go back up and for the bull run to continue.
Sure, going down in price causes me to recognize that I am NOT as rich as I would have been with higher BTC prices, and I "could have" taken more BTC off the table on the way up.. but int he end, it remains water under the bridge and a BIG SO FUCKING WHAT? because in the end, an investment strategy of buying on the way down and selling on the way up remains a sound strategy that does not need to be changed, just continued considerations about how much to shave off of the top on the way up in order to continue to increase BTC holdings (measuring wealth in BTC holdings rather than measuring in that asset that we refer to as "value losing fiat").
In other words, I believe that I continue to be in a similar position to most of us who were in the BTC scene before 2017, and even if we made mistakes, largely our average cost per BTC remain in the 3 digits (below $1k), and surelty there are some longer term holders/traders who have accomplished trading methods that either put them in the two digits (below $100) or even quite low in the 3 digits.
Another possibility, for several of us, could be to engage in a kind of trickery in accounting and to cash out of BTC the amount that we invested, and in that regard, we are playing with house money, which is that we do not have any costs associated with the BTC that we hold. Personally, I don't feel any kind of compelling reason to employ such a harsh strategy or cashing out in order to "play with house money" because 1) that would be valuing my wealth in fiat rather than bitcoin, 2) there are no real fundamental threats to bitcoin, even if the price may perhaps go down to below $3k.. perhaps? Perhaps? and 3) Even if I am playing with both principle and interest, such practice gives me way more money to "play" with and it is like borrowing from myself to continue to use such value to invest in bitcoin (remembering one important principle that it takes money to make money and the rich get richer, which happens to be applicable to myself and to other BTC hodlers, especially referring to those who have been largely invested into BTC before 2017)
June 18, 2018, 04:08:11 PM
Or this one!
June 18, 2018, 04:05:16 PM
June 18, 2018, 04:00:28 PM
Good memories!
June 18, 2018, 03:44:47 PM
Curious, are dollars (USD) fungible? Are physical dollar bills and dollars which only exist in a bank ledger separate asset classes? What about dollar bills that have been marked in some way?
they can certainly become non fungible
like when they called in the silver certificates
June 18, 2018, 03:33:44 PM
As I posted between there and here, Segwit creates three classes of Bitcoins. Each with distinctly different exposure to security vulnerabilities.
1) Those that are completely free of any Segwit taint all the way back to their constituent coinbase transactions;
2) Those that are not currently output from a Segwit transaction, but have Segwit taint between here and their constituent coinbase transactions; and
3) Those that are the output of a Segwit transaction.
1) Those that are completely free of any Segwit taint all the way back to their constituent coinbase transactions;
2) Those that are not currently output from a Segwit transaction, but have Segwit taint between here and their constituent coinbase transactions; and
3) Those that are the output of a Segwit transaction.
now trying to pervert the concept of fungibility.
Just because a coin is being used in a specific way that does not make such coin more or less fungible than if such coin is used in another way.
Geeze, JJG - you need to look up the definition of 'fungible'.
Geez jbreher... I see no reason for me to look up anything related to fungibility. You are trying to make some kind of assertion that lack of fungibility is an issue, and seems that you are just making shit up.
Absolutely false. I am merely saying that Segwit creates a triple-classed asset. And that this is by definition a lack of fungibility. You said that I am "now trying to pervert the concept of fungibility". You were 100% wrong. Own it.
That is definitively a lack of fungibility. A lack of fungibility is in no way limited to some sort of centralized blacklisting.
O.k. Fungibility issues would exist if some coins were easier to spend then others or if I could not get my coins sent because of some issue with them being tainted in some kind of way. Again, where is the evidence of this seemingly fabricated issue (and if it is not completely fabricated it is surely greatly exaggerated)?
The evidence is already given. Segwit creates a triple-classed asset. And that this is by definition a lack of fungibility.
Quote
Sure some BIG BLOCKER nutjobs are going to continue to exaggerate negative speculation, like you seem to be doing, and to spread disinformation about supposed catastrophes of lightning network in order to pump their stupid-ass and largely non-substantiated negative talking points.
If you want to argue the facts of the matter, step up. I made some assertions of fact.
Assertions of facts do not make facts,
true
Pony up some counter-arguments. If what I said is 'disinformation', then it should be a simple matter for you to put forth proof that they are false.
I have no burden to put forth facts to rebut your bare assertions, because I have not seen anything rising to the level of meaningful facts (beyond assertions about what could happen ... not something that is actually happening)
Facts about what could happen. Exactly.
Curious, are dollars (USD) fungible? Are physical dollar bills and dollars which only exist in a bank ledger separate asset classes? What about dollar bills that have been marked in some way?
June 18, 2018, 03:26:36 PM
Well, thank you for the cheap coins. 2018 bottom confirmed. Up we go!
it would be nice if this would be the real bottom hope youre right
let there be some new long term hodlers be to join the community , few friends of me also got in on this DIP or bought a little more so whatever i am happy for the LONG term believers that got a nice oppertunity of increasing there amount of BTC's
June 18, 2018, 03:05:15 PM
Well, thank you for the cheap coins. 2018 bottom confirmed. Up we go!
June 18, 2018, 03:00:54 PM
Nothing stirs up a debate quite like talking about women. Better to ignore them. That's what they want, right? 
MGIOW is the answer. Bitcoin = MGIOW: Money Going It's Own Way.
MGIOW is the answer. Bitcoin = MGIOW: Money Going It's Own Way.
June 18, 2018, 02:41:48 PM
' Bitcoin is not centralised so per definition not stable'
I love stuff like this.Define centralised. Define stable. Explain how one follows the other by definition. What's that shitcake? You can't? Well then fuck you.
Also shitcake is now a word, spellchecker.
Here is a download link link to the primary source PDF on that BIS hit piece from the other day
https://www.bis.org/publ/arpdf/ar2018e5.htm
https://www.bis.org/publ/arpdf/ar2018e5.htm
Jojo69 made a link to a 24 page report. Go read it just like i dit.
To lazy to click you idiot?
June 18, 2018, 02:41:29 PM
June 18, 2018, 02:40:24 PM
' Bitcoin is not centralised so per definition not stable'
I love stuff like this.Define centralised. Define stable. Explain how one follows the other by definition. What's that shitcake? You can't? Well then fuck you.
Also shitcake is now a word, spellchecker.
Here is a download link link to the primary source PDF on that BIS hit piece from the other day
https://www.bis.org/publ/arpdf/ar2018e5.htm
https://www.bis.org/publ/arpdf/ar2018e5.htm
Jojo69 made a link to a 24 page report. Go read it just like i did.
To lazy to click you idiot?
June 18, 2018, 02:34:22 PM
Haha. D^4, you have all the arguing skills of a precocious seven year old.
kampai!
kampai!
Straight from the Bcash handbook: accuse your opponent of what you are doing.
Nice try Jonald Fyookball.
June 18, 2018, 02:16:43 PM
This discussion is lame. I have ALL of what you are suggesting men can’t have. I’ve had it all.
Virgins, models, women richer than me, women poorer than me, marriage, beautiful long term monogamous relationships, threesomes, and variations of the above. Out of over 100 women exactly 2 broke up with me and only 1 because she was trying to climb some stability ladder.
You guys that don’t get this, you need more charisma, confidence, self knowledge and personal responsibility.
I'm not seeing a stable life on your list.Virgins, models, women richer than me, women poorer than me, marriage, beautiful long term monogamous relationships, threesomes, and variations of the above. Out of over 100 women exactly 2 broke up with me and only 1 because she was trying to climb some stability ladder.
You guys that don’t get this, you need more charisma, confidence, self knowledge and personal responsibility.
What the fuck is a stable life?
I’ve lived a full rich meaningful life full of love. And I’m not even half way through with it. Stable? I don’t even know what that’s supposed to mean.
What the fuck is your problem? The point I was trying to make that was completely LOST on you, is stop complaining about your life and lack of female resources available to you and stop making excuses blaming women or blaming the internet or blaming whatever and MAN THE FUCK UP. Thats why I love decentralized crypto. It forces people to take responsibility for themselves. To be totally self accountable.
Its the same with every other aspect of life. When you stop seeing yourself as a VICTIM and start realizing that you are responsible for 99.9% of the shit that happens to you, then you make the first step to actually having the life you want.
My fiancee is due literally any day now.
I thought that you were a player?
Now you have a pregnant fiancee?
Can there be both? You must have to dump the fiancee, when? soontm, right?
June 18, 2018, 02:02:00 PM
Bitmex is a bucketshop you noobs. It does not matter who gets liquidated or longs or shorts there. Bitmex positions don't drive the market; people would manipulate the real market to blow up Bitmex positions, not vice versa. But what type of serious money would actually trade on a fucking bucketshop scam site in the first place? If people were manipulating the real bitcoin market solely to try and sway positions on some tiny bucket shop nobody sane would actually trade on, it means the bitcoin market is far more pitiful than anyone could imagine.
June 18, 2018, 01:55:29 PM
' Bitcoin is not centralised so per definition not stable'
I love stuff like this.Define centralised. Define stable. Explain how one follows the other by definition. What's that shitcake? You can't? Well then fuck you.
Also shitcake is now a word, spellchecker.
June 18, 2018, 01:48:56 PM
-edited-
Might have some relevance.
Might have some relevance.
Speaking of relevance little bear..
Is this really about bitcoin and bitcoin cash fighting it out? or is this about a community that stands together against the status quo of fiat and centralized banking? Seems to me there is much effort wasted in this dialogue worrying about "future problems" when we are surrounded on all sides.
Agreed.
One might note that I am playing defense here.
That is bullshit. You are not playing defense unless you actually present non-speculative facts. If there is some innocent claim here, then I will be open to hear it. Your framing the matter as if you are "playing defense" is to attempt to assert that you have already presented valid facts and logic and I doubt that is the case, unless I am missing something.
Not only are you missing something, you are conflating two distinctly different discussions within a single thread.
Flail away, JJG - flail away.
June 18, 2018, 01:47:12 PM
As I posted between there and here, Segwit creates three classes of Bitcoins. Each with distinctly different exposure to security vulnerabilities.
1) Those that are completely free of any Segwit taint all the way back to their constituent coinbase transactions;
2) Those that are not currently output from a Segwit transaction, but have Segwit taint between here and their constituent coinbase transactions; and
3) Those that are the output of a Segwit transaction.
1) Those that are completely free of any Segwit taint all the way back to their constituent coinbase transactions;
2) Those that are not currently output from a Segwit transaction, but have Segwit taint between here and their constituent coinbase transactions; and
3) Those that are the output of a Segwit transaction.
now trying to pervert the concept of fungibility.
Just because a coin is being used in a specific way that does not make such coin more or less fungible than if such coin is used in another way.
Geeze, JJG - you need to look up the definition of 'fungible'.
Geez jbreher... I see no reason for me to look up anything related to fungibility. You are trying to make some kind of assertion that lack of fungibility is an issue, and seems that you are just making shit up.
Absolutely false. I am merely saying that Segwit creates a triple-classed asset. And that this is by definition a lack of fungibility. You said that I am "now trying to pervert the concept of fungibility". You were 100% wrong. Own it.
That is definitively a lack of fungibility. A lack of fungibility is in no way limited to some sort of centralized blacklisting.
O.k. Fungibility issues would exist if some coins were easier to spend then others or if I could not get my coins sent because of some issue with them being tainted in some kind of way. Again, where is the evidence of this seemingly fabricated issue (and if it is not completely fabricated it is surely greatly exaggerated)?
The evidence is already given. Segwit creates a triple-classed asset. And that this is by definition a lack of fungibility.
Quote
Sure some BIG BLOCKER nutjobs are going to continue to exaggerate negative speculation, like you seem to be doing, and to spread disinformation about supposed catastrophes of lightning network in order to pump their stupid-ass and largely non-substantiated negative talking points.
If you want to argue the facts of the matter, step up. I made some assertions of fact.
Assertions of facts do not make facts,
true
Pony up some counter-arguments. If what I said is 'disinformation', then it should be a simple matter for you to put forth proof that they are false.
I have no burden to put forth facts to rebut your bare assertions, because I have not seen anything rising to the level of meaningful facts (beyond assertions about what could happen ... not something that is actually happening)
Facts about what could happen. Exactly.
