Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 27513. (Read 26710624 times)

Bots executing buy orders with StampBux.

You just said you moved money into Bitstamp. Who can't move money in?

Answer the questions or goto BTC-e.

I got a small deposit (100€) in yesterday at Bitstamp and now they want me to answer 5 questions.

1. How did you learn about Bitcoin?
2. What is the purpose of your trading on Bitstamp? Please describe in as much detail as possible how you intend to use your trading account.
3. Which banks do you intend to use? Please provide the complete addresses and SWIFT codes.
4. Estimated amount that you would be depositing/withdrawing to/from your Bitstamp account per month (in USD and BTC)?
5. What type of trading will you conduct? Buying/selling/both? Estimated trade volume per month?


How are we supposed to reach new highs when no one can move money in?

The answer to that one is really quite simple: the raw transfer mechanism is irreversible, which is a byproduct of the 'no authority has complete control of the network' property. Should Bitcoin become the backbone of global financial transactions (or get near that state), it'll simply mean that a vast number of escrow services will be developed (some automatized, some with a human in the driver seat).

It's not that Bitcoin is perfect, or even that irreversibility is always a good thing: it's a necessary consequence of an extremely efficient, distributed and owner-less (your term ) system that in principle can be unrivaled in its low transfer costs. Escrow will add to that, but at least for most (small) transactions, automatized, or at least extremely streamlined escrow should be enough, and probably won't raise the cost above the fees taken by credit card companies or banks.

People here consider a money that is impossible to steal a better solution than empowering a central authority with the ability confiscate and return funds that they deem "stolen". Apparently there are some who don't think that's better, so it must be a matter of preference.

Bitcoin allows the forcible return of stolen property just the same as any form of tangible property does. You find the person in possession of, or with knowledge of how to obtain, the property in question and you persuade or coerce them into handing the property over. Bitcoin simply doesn't contain a back door for anyone claiming authority to alter ownership of the property the public ledger keeps track of.

I'm flexible. I might buy them back even if we "just" go below 500 or whatever. It depends. And even if we won't get there in a "couple of weeks or so", we will eventually, soon enough. There will be plenty of crashes/corrections still.

Interestingly, Bitstamp seems unwilling to let a third party do an audit of its fiat reserves (if there are any left). So far, Mike Hearn has supposedly seen "proof" that they still have around 180k BTC in reserves. (But there's no way of knowing whether this number corresponds to what customers actually have deposited in the exchange.) They didn't show him any fiat reserves though. I wonder why? Maybe because they used (a lot of) their customer's deposited fiat to buy up huge amounts of BTC shortly before Hearn's audit, to cover losses after an undisclosed theft?

This would help explain the price spike we've experienced recently.

I think we're in a general downtrend still, and I suspect this will be accelerated when more and more people report their inability to withdraw fiat from Stamp. All it takes for BTC to go (temporarily) back to the 300-range is another large exchange failing, or another "China ban". It's fragile. There are still plenty of exchange owners who haven't stolen their customer's money, but they will, eventually. So there's a lot of downside potential, while not much potential for upside, since adoption basically has ground to a halt, and the general public is becoming increasingly sceptic towards Bitcoin.

We're still far away from anything resembling mainstream adoption. If it ever comes, we won't start seeing it until 2017, at the very earliest.

My preferences are not important.  The point is that a system that does not allow the forcible return of stolen property will not be acceptable to society, except for thieves and other criminals.  In the end, it will be rejected even by the libertarians who now think that irreversibility is a good thing.

Explanation

I don't see this being the likely event. If anything, we'll drop back down to 500. Going to even 450 is unlikely, but lower than 400? That's a stretch. There's just too much positive news now.

Fortunately for you, if these things bother you and you'd rather have a malleable money supply managed by unelected officials who can seize funds and reverse transactions at will: you are well served with the current monetary paradigm - be it Keynesian, monetarist or neocon - the differences are of cosmetic character, really.

Those of us with the (obviously wrong!) view that a monetary system should be predictable and not prone to manipulation by individuals have been longing for the chance to try out something like that. It will quite obviously fail, because centralized systems run by experts are naturally superior to decentralized systems run by no one but some people just need to convince themselves on their own, deferring to the wise opinions of experts is not enough for them. And who knows - if by some freak accident such a monetary system turns out to be better than what we have now, you will benefit as well

Thanks. We'll see ... 

Good luck, you will need it

I'm selling my coins today. Will buy them back when we hit sub-400 prices in a couple of weeks or so.

Why would people risk losing a lot of money on BTC when they can pay for DISH via bank transfer or w/e. Dish sucks anyway, just like overstock - the drowning ones are trying to catch everything they can.

My original technical analysis method predicts that at 14:17:02 on September 23, 2018 (UTC), Western traders will begin to suspect that any news that is irrelevant to the Chinese traders has no effect whatsoever on the price of Bitcoin.   

But my TA is often wildly optimistic, beware.

Yes that plus also when big news like this comes around the only reason price moves upwards is traders pre-empting so to speak the influx of potentially interested new users or people just hearing about it. It takes weeks from someone learning about Bitcoin to then going ahead and purchasing.

Few people were predicting a significant rise before July/August.  We're still in May and we're about $125 up from this time last month.  Patience and a steady hand is all that's required at this stage.

There's often a good amount of delay between good news and the price reaction. This place was full of posts about China's positive news coverage on Bitcoin back in May/June 2013 and how this would rocket the price, but the Chinese BTC market didn't actually took off until Sept/Oct 2013. It takes a while for people to absorb the news and learn about Bitcoin, I only bought my first bitcoin after 6 months or so first hearing or reading about it.

Agreed. But maybe more people should have reminded themselves right from the start of the rally that 'leaving the bear market behind' doesn't automatically entail 'rocket to DA MOON'.

I'm mid term pretty bullish (and I'm not even completely ruling out that we can break through 600 now-ish), but going up to new heights in a straight line was never an option, and I'm not 100% sure if the bulls that were cheering all through last week really understood this.

(maybe they did, and were just inebriated by the first decent swing up in a while...)