Advice: Just think of XT as a security valve. If the core deadlock continues, the miners will opt out 
And leave Bitcoin in the hands of "benevolent" dictator Mike Hearn and his blacklists? Sure...
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 20986. (Read 26611268 times)
August 20, 2015, 11:21:58 AM
And leave Bitcoin in the hands of "benevolent" dictator Mike Hearn and his blacklists? Sure...
August 20, 2015, 11:19:05 AM
Advice: Just think of XT as a security valve. If the core deadlock continues, the miners will opt out
And leave Bitcoin in the hands of "benevolent" dictator Mike Hearn and his blacklists? Sure...
... there is no reason why the core devs can't update the fork when the dust settles.
August 20, 2015, 11:07:03 AM
Advice: Just think of XT as a security valve. If the core deadlock continues, the miners will opt out
And leave Bitcoin in the hands of "benevolent" dictator Mike Hearn and his blacklists? Sure...
August 20, 2015, 11:04:27 AM
Advice: Just think of XT as a security valve. If the core deadlock continues, the miners will opt out
And leave Bitcoin in the hands of "benevolent" dictator Mike Hearn and his blacklists? Sure...
August 20, 2015, 11:02:29 AM
August 20, 2015, 10:57:50 AM
Bitcoin allready has a fee structure to deal with spam, and the wallets are implementing dynamic fees as we speak. A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. If you think 7 tps is enough for the future of bitcoin, why don't you just say so?
An increase of TPS is already being discussed by core-devs, and they are trying to find the optimal way to implement it.
With a very large percentage of BTC txs being dust, they have plenty of time to figure it out.
What we don't have the luxury to do, is to start rogue forks that create friction in the dev community. But then again, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger.
As for spam, fees and block sizes: Altcoin Monero has a dynamic sized block. Let's say that, dynamically, the size can enlarge significantly. When it was spam-attacked last year (hint: the bloat created by anonymous coins is multiple size that of bitcoin), do you think people were like "oh, it's ok we have big blocks and we are ok"? No. They had to quickly implement high fees to stop the attack as it would bloat it to unusable levels. It was the fees that stopped the attack, not the self-adapting increasing blocksize.
LTC also used a patch, in the past, to prevent some spam techniques that were used against it. BTC might need to integrate it too.
A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. I can't help you, if you don't understand this.
We ?
Who is we?
Cause the more I look the more I can't find any significant support for XT from anyone that actually matters in the ecosystem. Just a bunch of reddit trolls, forum posters and general foot soldiers of the "Free Shit Army"
If there is so little significant support for XT, what are you afraid of?
Afraid?
I'm just trying to show you the light
The light is built into the system. If a group of developers fail to deliver, WE replace them
The "we" you're referring to is the crowd. The "we" you represent doesn't have a say in this issue
The chinese mining pools are not happy with status quo and push for 8 mb limit. Will be exiting to see what they choose in january. At that time, I guess Wladimir has been pushed to come up with a core solution. (No, not the "wait for lightning"-solution, he he).
Solution will come in due time. Unlike what Gavinco would like you to believe there is no rush.
If there is consensus right now amongst relevant actors, it's that XT is not that solution.
See you weren't so wrong. The proper "we" will take action and the ones left in the dust will be Mike & Gavin.
August 20, 2015, 10:53:40 AM
Bitcoin allready has a fee structure to deal with spam, and the wallets are implementing dynamic fees as we speak. A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. If you think 7 tps is enough for the future of bitcoin, why don't you just say so?
An increase of TPS is already being discussed by core-devs, and they are trying to find the optimal way to implement it.
With a very large percentage of BTC txs being dust, they have plenty of time to figure it out.
What we don't have the luxury to do, is to start rogue forks that create friction in the dev community. But then again, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger.
As for spam, fees and block sizes: Altcoin Monero has a dynamic sized block. Let's say that, dynamically, the size can enlarge significantly. When it was spam-attacked last year (hint: the bloat created by anonymous coins is multiple size that of bitcoin), do you think people were like "oh, it's ok we have big blocks and we are ok"? No. They had to quickly implement high fees to stop the attack as it would bloat it to unusable levels. It was the fees that stopped the attack, not the self-adapting increasing blocksize.
LTC also used a patch, in the past, to prevent some spam techniques that were used against it. BTC might need to integrate it too.
A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. I can't help you, if you don't understand this.
We ?
Who is we?
Cause the more I look the more I can't find any significant support for XT from anyone that actually matters in the ecosystem. Just a bunch of reddit trolls, forum posters and general foot soldiers of the "Free Shit Army"
If there is so little significant support for XT, what are you afraid of?
Afraid?
I'm just trying to show you the light
The light is built into the system. If a group of developers fail to deliver, WE replace them
The "we" you're referring to is the crowd. The "we" you represent doesn't have a say in this issue
The chinese mining pools are not happy with status quo and push for 8 mb limit. Will be exiting to see what they choose in january. At that time, I guess Wladimir has been pushed to come up with a core solution. (No, not the "wait for lightning"-solution, he he).
Solution will come in due time. Unlike what Gavinco would like you to believe there is no rush.
If there is consensus right now amongst relevant actors, it's that XT is not that solution.
See you weren't so wrong. The proper "we" will take action and the ones left in the dust will be Mike & Gavin.
August 20, 2015, 10:51:34 AM
Good morning gentlemen! I went to bed last night with the price crashing to 223. Glad to wake up & see that we didn't go any lower. I was worried I'd wake up to sub 200. I've lost confidence, I didn't even know what to expect. Anybody have an opinion on what's going to happen next? Serious responses only please.
My dream last night was that the BTC price was crashing up to around $3,000, and i kept trying to sell a few BTC at a time, as the price was continuing to crash up, in order to lock in profits and to buy again when the price came back down...
however, my sell transactions kept failing to go through.
August 20, 2015, 10:44:02 AM
Bitcoin allready has a fee structure to deal with spam, and the wallets are implementing dynamic fees as we speak. A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. If you think 7 tps is enough for the future of bitcoin, why don't you just say so?
An increase of TPS is already being discussed by core-devs, and they are trying to find the optimal way to implement it.
With a very large percentage of BTC txs being dust, they have plenty of time to figure it out.
What we don't have the luxury to do, is to start rogue forks that create friction in the dev community. But then again, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger.
As for spam, fees and block sizes: Altcoin Monero has a dynamic sized block. Let's say that, dynamically, the size can enlarge significantly. When it was spam-attacked last year (hint: the bloat created by anonymous coins is multiple size that of bitcoin), do you think people were like "oh, it's ok we have big blocks and we are ok"? No. They had to quickly implement high fees to stop the attack as it would bloat it to unusable levels. It was the fees that stopped the attack, not the self-adapting increasing blocksize.
LTC also used a patch, in the past, to prevent some spam techniques that were used against it. BTC might need to integrate it too.
A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. I can't help you, if you don't understand this.
We ?
Who is we?
Cause the more I look the more I can't find any significant support for XT from anyone that actually matters in the ecosystem. Just a bunch of reddit trolls, forum posters and general foot soldiers of the "Free Shit Army"
If there is so little significant support for XT, what are you afraid of?
Afraid?
I'm just trying to show you the light
The light is built into the system. If a group of developers fail to deliver, WE replace them
The "we" you're referring to is the crowd. The "we" you represent doesn't have a say in this issue
The chinese mining pools are not happy with status quo and push for 8 mb limit. Will be exiting to see what they choose in january. At that time, I guess Wladimir has been pushed to come up with a core solution. (No, not the "wait for lightning"-solution, he he).
August 20, 2015, 10:36:46 AM
Bitcoin allready has a fee structure to deal with spam, and the wallets are implementing dynamic fees as we speak. A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. If you think 7 tps is enough for the future of bitcoin, why don't you just say so?
An increase of TPS is already being discussed by core-devs, and they are trying to find the optimal way to implement it.
With a very large percentage of BTC txs being dust, they have plenty of time to figure it out.
What we don't have the luxury to do, is to start rogue forks that create friction in the dev community. But then again, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger.
As for spam, fees and block sizes: Altcoin Monero has a dynamic sized block. Let's say that, dynamically, the size can enlarge significantly. When it was spam-attacked last year (hint: the bloat created by anonymous coins is multiple size that of bitcoin), do you think people were like "oh, it's ok we have big blocks and we are ok"? No. They had to quickly implement high fees to stop the attack as it would bloat it to unusable levels. It was the fees that stopped the attack, not the self-adapting increasing blocksize.
LTC also used a patch, in the past, to prevent some spam techniques that were used against it. BTC might need to integrate it too.
A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. I can't help you, if you don't understand this.
We ?
Who is we?
Cause the more I look the more I can't find any significant support for XT from anyone that actually matters in the ecosystem. Just a bunch of reddit trolls, forum posters and general foot soldiers of the "Free Shit Army"
If there is so little significant support for XT, what are you afraid of?
Afraid?
I'm just trying to show you the light
The light is built into the system. If a group of developers fail to deliver, WE replace them
The "we" you're referring to is the crowd. The "we" you represent doesn't have a say in this issue
August 20, 2015, 10:32:55 AM
If there is so little significant support for XT, what are you afraid of?
I'm not personally afraid of XT altcoin. What I am afraid of is the level of coordination of current attack. XT crap is just a small portion of it. 
August 20, 2015, 10:31:27 AM
What's up with these bs rally and fades right back down to the beginning of the rally point? Pretty annoying. Plus XT talk has killed this thread as well.
Bad times we are living in
Bad times we are living in
If you are a trader you should be well advised to keep track of the XT issue.
Anyone and their mother could tell we were going to see a dump after the PR propaganda that begun on Monday.
There is no point trading this absolutely manipulated market at this point anyway.
I can keep track of XT elsewhere. Wall observer thread is not the right place.
Everybody and my mother were surprised with the dump. XT could have easily been seen as the savior and price could have skyrocketed.
Manipulation, manipulation, manipulation...don't you guys ever get sick of crying manipulation? It's the way markets work, big money moves the markets.
Maybe you need to keep track better.
About markets: I absolutely agree but there is an important difference, in Bitcoin big money breaks the market. We are in an accumulation phase and so you never know when a whale might get hungrier for more cheap coins. When they do there is nothing your TA & wall watching do to help.
how long do you think before they get tired of waiting ?? ... lol.
August 20, 2015, 10:30:38 AM
Bitcoin allready has a fee structure to deal with spam, and the wallets are implementing dynamic fees as we speak. A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. If you think 7 tps is enough for the future of bitcoin, why don't you just say so?
An increase of TPS is already being discussed by core-devs, and they are trying to find the optimal way to implement it.
With a very large percentage of BTC txs being dust, they have plenty of time to figure it out.
What we don't have the luxury to do, is to start rogue forks that create friction in the dev community. But then again, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger.
As for spam, fees and block sizes: Altcoin Monero has a dynamic sized block. Let's say that, dynamically, the size can enlarge significantly. When it was spam-attacked last year (hint: the bloat created by anonymous coins is multiple size that of bitcoin), do you think people were like "oh, it's ok we have big blocks and we are ok"? No. They had to quickly implement high fees to stop the attack as it would bloat it to unusable levels. It was the fees that stopped the attack, not the self-adapting increasing blocksize.
LTC also used a patch, in the past, to prevent some spam techniques that were used against it. BTC might need to integrate it too.
A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. I can't help you, if you don't understand this.
We ?
Who is we?
Cause the more I look the more I can't find any significant support for XT from anyone that actually matters in the ecosystem. Just a bunch of reddit trolls, forum posters and general foot soldiers of the "Free Shit Army"
If there is so little significant support for XT, what are you afraid of?
Afraid?
I'm just trying to show you the light
The light is built into the system. If a group of developers fail to deliver, WE replace them
August 20, 2015, 10:26:11 AM
Bitcoin allready has a fee structure to deal with spam, and the wallets are implementing dynamic fees as we speak. A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. If you think 7 tps is enough for the future of bitcoin, why don't you just say so?
An increase of TPS is already being discussed by core-devs, and they are trying to find the optimal way to implement it.
With a very large percentage of BTC txs being dust, they have plenty of time to figure it out.
What we don't have the luxury to do, is to start rogue forks that create friction in the dev community. But then again, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger.
As for spam, fees and block sizes: Altcoin Monero has a dynamic sized block. Let's say that, dynamically, the size can enlarge significantly. When it was spam-attacked last year (hint: the bloat created by anonymous coins is multiple size that of bitcoin), do you think people were like "oh, it's ok we have big blocks and we are ok"? No. They had to quickly implement high fees to stop the attack as it would bloat it to unusable levels. It was the fees that stopped the attack, not the self-adapting increasing blocksize.
LTC also used a patch, in the past, to prevent some spam techniques that were used against it. BTC might need to integrate it too.
A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. I can't help you, if you don't understand this.
We ?
Who is we?
Cause the more I look the more I can't find any significant support for XT from anyone that actually matters in the ecosystem. Just a bunch of reddit trolls, forum posters and general foot soldiers of the "Free Shit Army"
If there is so little significant support for XT, what are you afraid of?
Afraid?
I'm just trying to show you the light
August 20, 2015, 10:24:57 AM
At least Mark Karpeles is under arrest for buying a 48,000$ bed
what an ass
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f4595a04-471b-11e5-af2f-4d6e0e5eda22.html?siteedition=uk#axzz3jHqWcDY1
Japanese police investigating the disappearance of nearly $500m of bitcoins are poised to rearrest the French founder of the Mt Gox virtual currency exchange amid questions about the purchase of a $48,000 four-poster bed.
Before the exchange collapsed in 2014, sending shockwaves through the global bitcoin community, Mt Gox was the largest such trading platform in the world.
Mark Karpelès, who was initially accused of manipulating the Mt Gox computer system and inflating the size of his own company account, has been in police detention in Tokyo without formal charges since the beginning of August.
People close to the matter said police on Friday will issue a fresh warrant for Mr Karpelès’s arrest on the different charge of embezzlement — a change that grants investigators a further three weeks to interrogate their suspect.
The rearrest will extend a process known informally to police and prosecutors as shomusen — the “war of attrition” waged by investigators seeking a confession from their detainee. A lawyer for Mr Karpelès said that his client denied the original charges and has made no confession under questioning.
But after three weeks of interrogation, said those close to the matter, police believe they have enough evidence to accuse Mr Karpelès of embezzlement, alleging he misappropriated $2.6m of deposits from the trading accounts of Mt Gox customers. A substantial portion of that money is thought to have been used to buy software rights on behalf of the company.
However, Y6m, according to police allegations, was diverted to the purchase of a bed. Police suspect the bed was intended for the personal use of Mr Karpelès.
But a lawyer for Mr Karpelès said the deposits were used for investments in new businesses while the bed was purchased as interior decoration for his guesthouse, both of which were meant as marketing tools to promote the use of bitcoins.
The Y6m bed appears to have been part of an effort by Mt Gox to impress potential clients and glamorise the trading of the virtual currency.
“It’s too much of a stretch to call this embezzlement,” said Mr Karpelès’s lawyer.
“Despite the long detention period, the fact that investigative authorities could only come up with these reasons to make their case for embezzlement is evidence that Mark was not involved for personal reasons in the disappearance of massive cash and bitcoins,” he added.
The Tokyo Metropolitan Police Department declined to comment.
Behind Mr Karpelès’s arrest is a mystery that continues to elude the Japanese authorities and a host of independent investigators.
The collapse in 2014 laid bare a company where, say independent investigators, a range of baffling activities had occurred.
Foremost was the absence from the Mt Gox accounts of what was thought at the time to be 850,000 bitcoins — a disappearance that could theoretically represent the single biggest cyber theft yet committed. Mr Karpelès has not been accused of bitcoin theft.
Legal sources said the police use of embezzlement charges to extend Mr Karpelès’s detention was a sign he had failed to provide any significant information on the missing bitcoins and that, after a year, that side of the investigation was still yielding few results.
At least that piece of shit is rotting in jail right now. with my 6 BTC somewhere in his wallet.
ass.
what an ass
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f4595a04-471b-11e5-af2f-4d6e0e5eda22.html?siteedition=uk#axzz3jHqWcDY1
Japanese police investigating the disappearance of nearly $500m of bitcoins are poised to rearrest the French founder of the Mt Gox virtual currency exchange amid questions about the purchase of a $48,000 four-poster bed.
Before the exchange collapsed in 2014, sending shockwaves through the global bitcoin community, Mt Gox was the largest such trading platform in the world.
Mark Karpelès, who was initially accused of manipulating the Mt Gox computer system and inflating the size of his own company account, has been in police detention in Tokyo without formal charges since the beginning of August.
People close to the matter said police on Friday will issue a fresh warrant for Mr Karpelès’s arrest on the different charge of embezzlement — a change that grants investigators a further three weeks to interrogate their suspect.
The rearrest will extend a process known informally to police and prosecutors as shomusen — the “war of attrition” waged by investigators seeking a confession from their detainee. A lawyer for Mr Karpelès said that his client denied the original charges and has made no confession under questioning.
But after three weeks of interrogation, said those close to the matter, police believe they have enough evidence to accuse Mr Karpelès of embezzlement, alleging he misappropriated $2.6m of deposits from the trading accounts of Mt Gox customers. A substantial portion of that money is thought to have been used to buy software rights on behalf of the company.
However, Y6m, according to police allegations, was diverted to the purchase of a bed. Police suspect the bed was intended for the personal use of Mr Karpelès.
But a lawyer for Mr Karpelès said the deposits were used for investments in new businesses while the bed was purchased as interior decoration for his guesthouse, both of which were meant as marketing tools to promote the use of bitcoins.
The Y6m bed appears to have been part of an effort by Mt Gox to impress potential clients and glamorise the trading of the virtual currency.
“It’s too much of a stretch to call this embezzlement,” said Mr Karpelès’s lawyer.
“Despite the long detention period, the fact that investigative authorities could only come up with these reasons to make their case for embezzlement is evidence that Mark was not involved for personal reasons in the disappearance of massive cash and bitcoins,” he added.
The Tokyo Metropolitan Police Department declined to comment.
Behind Mr Karpelès’s arrest is a mystery that continues to elude the Japanese authorities and a host of independent investigators.
The collapse in 2014 laid bare a company where, say independent investigators, a range of baffling activities had occurred.
Foremost was the absence from the Mt Gox accounts of what was thought at the time to be 850,000 bitcoins — a disappearance that could theoretically represent the single biggest cyber theft yet committed. Mr Karpelès has not been accused of bitcoin theft.
Legal sources said the police use of embezzlement charges to extend Mr Karpelès’s detention was a sign he had failed to provide any significant information on the missing bitcoins and that, after a year, that side of the investigation was still yielding few results.
At least that piece of shit is rotting in jail right now. with my 6 BTC somewhere in his wallet.
ass.
August 20, 2015, 10:23:51 AM
Bitcoin allready has a fee structure to deal with spam, and the wallets are implementing dynamic fees as we speak. A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. If you think 7 tps is enough for the future of bitcoin, why don't you just say so?
An increase of TPS is already being discussed by core-devs, and they are trying to find the optimal way to implement it.
With a very large percentage of BTC txs being dust, they have plenty of time to figure it out.
What we don't have the luxury to do, is to start rogue forks that create friction in the dev community. But then again, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger.
As for spam, fees and block sizes: Altcoin Monero has a dynamic sized block. Let's say that, dynamically, the size can enlarge significantly. When it was spam-attacked last year (hint: the bloat created by anonymous coins is multiple size that of bitcoin), do you think people were like "oh, it's ok we have big blocks and we are ok"? No. They had to quickly implement high fees to stop the attack as it would bloat it to unusable levels. It was the fees that stopped the attack, not the self-adapting increasing blocksize.
LTC also used a patch, in the past, to prevent some spam techniques that were used against it. BTC might need to integrate it too.
A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. I can't help you, if you don't understand this.
We ?
Who is we?
Cause the more I look the more I can't find any significant support for XT from anyone that actually matters in the ecosystem. Just a bunch of reddit trolls, forum posters and general foot soldiers of the "Free Shit Army"
If there is so little significant support for XT, what are you afraid of?
here a poll to find out which side has more supporters in the speculation subforum:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/core-or-xt-1157838
August 20, 2015, 10:18:44 AM
What's up with these bs rally and fades right back down to the beginning of the rally point? Pretty annoying. Plus XT talk has killed this thread as well.
Bad times we are living in
Bad times we are living in
If you are a trader you should be well advised to keep track of the XT issue.
Anyone and their mother could tell we were going to see a dump after the PR propaganda that begun on Monday.
There is no point trading this absolutely manipulated market at this point anyway.
I can keep track of XT elsewhere. Wall observer thread is not the right place.
Everybody and my mother were surprised with the dump. XT could have easily been seen as the savior and price could have skyrocketed.
Manipulation, manipulation, manipulation...don't you guys ever get sick of crying manipulation? It's the way markets work, big money moves the markets.
Maybe you need to keep track better.
About markets: I absolutely agree but there is an important difference, in Bitcoin big money breaks the market. We are in an accumulation phase and so you never know when a whale might get hungrier for more cheap coins. When they do there is nothing your TA & wall watching do to help.
Stop acting like you knew XT would crash BTC. Seriously, some good pr before the proposed change could have convinced the masses it was positive. It still might be positive, although XT nodes sit at 13% now and acceptance has slowed so we may not even get to 25% let alone 75%.
You don't really know if we are in an accumulation phase or not. A whale could just be dumping to get out bc they see no future for BTC and not bc they are trying to get people to dump so they can buy more.
I want and believe BTC can succeed and own coins for the record, but just saying...
August 20, 2015, 10:15:56 AM
Bitcoin allready has a fee structure to deal with spam, and the wallets are implementing dynamic fees as we speak. A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. If you think 7 tps is enough for the future of bitcoin, why don't you just say so?
An increase of TPS is already being discussed by core-devs, and they are trying to find the optimal way to implement it.
With a very large percentage of BTC txs being dust, they have plenty of time to figure it out.
What we don't have the luxury to do, is to start rogue forks that create friction in the dev community. But then again, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger.
As for spam, fees and block sizes: Altcoin Monero has a dynamic sized block. Let's say that, dynamically, the size can enlarge significantly. When it was spam-attacked last year (hint: the bloat created by anonymous coins is multiple size that of bitcoin), do you think people were like "oh, it's ok we have big blocks and we are ok"? No. They had to quickly implement high fees to stop the attack as it would bloat it to unusable levels. It was the fees that stopped the attack, not the self-adapting increasing blocksize.
LTC also used a patch, in the past, to prevent some spam techniques that were used against it. BTC might need to integrate it too.
A higher capacity system will be a lot more expensive to spam. I can't help you, if you don't understand this.
We ?
Who is we?
Cause the more I look the more I can't find any significant support for XT from anyone that actually matters in the ecosystem. Just a bunch of reddit trolls, forum posters and general foot soldiers of the "Free Shit Army"
If there is so little significant support for XT, what are you afraid of?
August 20, 2015, 10:14:08 AM
indeed, if you don't trust Mike and Gavin's XT code, but (for some unfathomable reason) you do trust Adam and Greg's Core, and Wladimir, Jorge, Pieter, Matt, Todd, Mark and all the others
You pathetic pathological lying POS
Great linguistics. That's why you and your soul mates are down voted everywhere.
Those warriors are always followed by a minority of the communitiy.
August 20, 2015, 10:07:54 AM
What's up with these bs rally and fades right back down to the beginning of the rally point? Pretty annoying. Plus XT talk has killed this thread as well.
Bad times we are living in
Bad times we are living in
If you are a trader you should be well advised to keep track of the XT issue.
Anyone and their mother could tell we were going to see a dump after the PR propaganda that begun on Monday.
There is no point trading this absolutely manipulated market at this point anyway.
I can keep track of XT elsewhere. Wall observer thread is not the right place.
Everybody and my mother were surprised with the dump. XT could have easily been seen as the savior and price could have skyrocketed.
Manipulation, manipulation, manipulation...don't you guys ever get sick of crying manipulation? It's the way markets work, big money moves the markets.
Maybe you need to keep track better.
About markets: I absolutely agree but there is an important difference, in Bitcoin big money breaks the market. We are in an accumulation phase and so you never know when a whale might get hungrier for more cheap coins. When they do there is nothing your TA & wall watching do to help.
Jump to: