Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 17778. (Read 26607949 times)

What will be the mechanism by which BTC move in and out of the ETF into the real bitcoin world and vice versa?
I'm assuming there will be some, and it won't effectively be a finite amount of BTC locked in the ETF, all of which happen to belong to the Winklevii. But I have my doubts as to whether that mechanism will be easy to use or arb, somehow.
Also, I hope their security is really, really good, because I don't want to die just yet, even if it is from laughing.

I've never had much concern or interest in the shennanigans surrounding the bitcoin ETF quasi-pyramid schemes because they are inherently un-bitcoin ... introducing a new third party where none is needed (at least in the future when the tools for the techdoofi get built up to mil. spec. standards). Also I've seen the crazy amount of manipulation that was introduced by gold and commodity ETF's by Wall St. into the markets for real raw goods and nothing good has come from those particular shit-shows except for massive profits for the grifters and parasites on Wall St.

Reading this latest kite-flying article from the WSJ gives me the uneasy feeling that an ETF is on its way. The WSJ is the propaganda rag for all the crap the banksters want peddled around and the fact this article is even in there is a big red flag something is up ... the content is even more making the spidy senses tingle ...


The reason for press lockdown precautions is so no-one can be accused of insider-trading, front-running, or etc after the fact ... what we can take from this is someone knows something. I sense they are getting it ready for a huge run up, and then probably a savage dump to make all the unsophisticated noobs who buy a ticket for a crazy BTC ETF ride crap themselves and swear off bitcoin for life ... don't think for one minute they are tooling up to help bitcoin, if an ETF is approved they will be well-prepped to rip it around for their best advantage. This WSJ article smells a lot like a fishy heads up ...

Translation for the deaf   

^BITCOIN leets Gavin and Co. prolly run it to BRK.A price when this happens!!

Earwig. Low.

Give me $1000 and the 4 digits a little longer and I will probably agree. When $1000 can clearly be called the new bottom the show will begin. So looking forward to that.
For the time being that's all I care about 

$1000 is holding, that is a very bullish signal.

   

there is no fork



bend your mind to the illusion of crises behind governance power grabs

^"BTCitcoin The movie™ " forking actors? :-D  haaa

O.k.  those strategies can be reasonable - depending on proportions and regarding alts not risking too much when alts can be manipulated even more easily than bitcoin which can work to your advantage, but also work against you too. 

There can also be some liquidation issues with some of the alts, that may not always be apparent until after you are in them.... bitcoin is not free from liquidation issues, but does seem to have quite a few more liquidation avenues - that can also vary considerably based on geographical location.

Yeah so far so good. But there is the history of xt and classic threats and their impact in price.


Exactly. At that point BTC is as good as dead, for setting a precedent that allows anyone to fork it for whatever bullshit reason. And some people are trying very hard to do it.


They shouldn't because it's a technical and game theory issue. Even at 1 gb blocks, there could be a guy setting up a script that makes sure to fill 3 gb txs in 10 mins and claim the network is clogged and needs upgrading. It's doable because Bitcoin does not have any proper measure to protect itself from this kind of abuse, other than the blocksize limit satoshi implemented. An alternative would be a relatively big fixed fee for the minimum tx to act as a disincentive. The bottom line is that broadcasting txs doesn't cost anything, and the tx won't cost anything if it doesn't get processed (by putting it at a fee level lower than the bulk of other txs) - so you can always claim that there is a shortage of space and clogging.

Wallet software is where the game is at, rather than traders, because that's what affects usability. If the user doesn't understand that they have to put X fee to get their tx in by Y blocks, then you have complaints that they are waiting too long. Plus an option to bump one's fee up -in case one issued a tx with a low fee- should be implemented in the user interface.

Hodling mostly, some for short term trading.
Trying to make more btc from alts. Looking for promising alts.
All said.

They might not be successful, but I would not write off several of them trying and also engaging in various kinds of divide and conquer tactics in order to oppress their citizens in various ways in respect to bitcoin and its usage.

i've yet to see any fork talk affect the price. it's a long term and ongoing cancer, not like a china ban or gox death that's instant. the only time there will be an effect is if it's clear there is going to be contentious fork after which there might not a be a price at all.

and traders don't seem to care about a clogged network either.

What has been your BTC strategy, slap?   When did you start buying?  Do you sell too or short, or just buy and HODL?

By hiring "forking" actors. Forks and threats of forks are traditionally bad for price. And just when price is starting to go well, just like clockwork, the forking drama is reignited. These people are cancer. We are just lucky that demand is so heavy that it exceeds the possible short-term problems created by the drama.

O.k.. it appears that we agree that seg wit is going to be beneficial to some of the scaling matters as long as it passes at some point in the near future.

Don't get me wrong.  I am not proclaiming that the future does not matter; however, there are frequently lots of suggestions that bitcoin has to be made in such a way that is future proof.. blah blah blah.. but that is really a silly ass argument.

It is likely that scaling is going to be an issue for bitcoin for a long time into its future, so yeah, the question will have to be revisited from time to time, unless for some reason seg wit solves all the scaling issues.. which does not seem to be too likely... but anyhow, sometimes, there is a need to verify how one application and stage plays out before taking any actions or planning specifics for future actions (even while at the same time preparing that there may be various scenarios that play out and various kinds of plans that can tentatively be made in order to prepare for the future).  At the same time, it does not seem prudent to plan and or prepare for specifics of a future when some of the material factors might not be currently known... so yeah, there can be a framework in place to prepare for the future, but maybe the framework may even need to be tweaked, if some future events play out a bit differently than what had been anticipated in earlier days.   

In other words, one step at a time... before getting all hot and bothered about the next step before the previous step has even played out.

^Chinaman exchanges are short bitcoin!! Pure and simple...fraud on exchanges :-D