Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 3476. (Read 26712942 times)

"Military grade" ..

Made me think of that guy that said his dad explaining to him that "military grade" actually means the cheapest contractor bid winning the contract.    

Still range bound between $29,000 & $32,000. Meh, still feels a lot better than $7,600 which is what we were at on 6th June in 2018. If it follows the same path we should bottom at approx $21,000 early in 2023 & then go sideways for a significant period around $25,000 before a slow climb upwards as we enter 2024 which is halvening year. Absolute moon in 2025, something like $250,000.

I still advocate that everything under $30,000 will look like a genius buy within 2 years. Keep stacking those sats, boys.

This is not financial advice.

I watched this clown from day one of his appearance, and also the "interview" that was recorded shortly after.
While i could not rule out a possible Satoshi (nor an imposter) by the info on the coming-out (#nohomo) website, this "Satoshi applicant" was showing many mimic tells of lying,  throughout the interview. This is 99,9% NOT Satoshi Nakamoto. Also, he was advertising his "new platform", a network (a shitcoin) that should supersede Bitcoin, be super fair and give late adopters a second chance of getting in early. I didn't investigate this further.

EDIT: Probably he was also behind the production of this book. You never know. If he comes out as the "most likely Satoshi", i would even more think so...

EDIT2: Old McAfeee (RIP) once tweeted he identified Satoshi by mainly analyzing his writings, phoned him up, told him that he knew he is the one. His reply was like "Yeah, got me. But don't tell anyone, because you don't want to see me dead, will you?". A british man, by the way.

 Allegedly, Khalid’s computer was a Fujitsu laptop that had “military-grade encryption.”

Red flag #1.

Satoshi would never say "Military grade encryption".

I am sure that's the only red flag though...

Explanation

He published his "reveal" in 2019. Even if the laptop died in 2015 or 2016, everyone who used bitcoin knew about cold storage and backups and private keys and all of that. That guy mentioned could not possibly be Satoshi. And whatever the book says, if it's another person, then, well, we won't know about it until someone mentions who that is, but it is also unlikely that anyone else would be Satoshi.

There are some very simple ways to self-identify or prove you are Satoshi, yet no one has been able to do it. Sign a message using the PGP key that was published before. Sign a message using any or at least some (maybe 3 or 4) bitcoin addresses ... or do all of them if you really want the world to believe you.

And for the traders or watchers, here's what I see:

Thanks for your analysis. To a non-trader, could you eleborate a bit about sellers trapped under (Adam's magic) $32k?

Explanation

Explanation

This is main bit I'm not buying:


1. I'm supposed to believe he had 980K Bitcoin on a harddrive and didn't make a backup? I'm sure there are enough satoshi quotes about making backups?
2. He sent the laptop to a repair shop WITH the hard drive (with 980K BTC)? If he didn't think it was the hard drive, why didn't he remove it? They wouldn't be using it to check his laptop anyyway.
3. Why didn't he use a bootable USB/disc to check the hard drive himself using another laptop? Or try his laptop with a different harddrive? This is the basics of problem solving tech problems.

I'm basically supposed to believe that Satoshi was a tech noob who didn't know how to identify whether his disc was broken, or his laptop

Explanation

RIP bearwhales. Many more short liquidations than the previous move to $31K last month. Not convinced this short squeeze is over yet if price can clear $32.4K previous lower high.



After 9 weeks of red came to an end yesterday with a Weekly doji reversal candle, today's upside shouldn't really come as any surprise. The wring was on the wall, written in big bold letters. Looks like it was also overdue by about 2 weeks imo. My only concern is that price remains in a bear flag on the 4hr, but the macro factors of Weekly oversold should override that eventually, even if takes a week or more. Between $35K and $40K things could really get interesting as sellers would again be trapped under $32K which we've seen twice before in January and Summer of 2021.

Weekly RSI is currently at a critical level, currently at 37.45. Closing above 37.5 would likely signal the end of the downtrend, similar to 2019 and 2020, but still 6 more days to go:



I also realise how bored and/or frustrated people are with various signals (particularly on-chain) that have signalled a bottom since the mid $30K range, basically 6 months ago. The fact that people are losing faith with various indicators is also a good thing though, the more people think this isn't the bottom then the more likely that it probably is. That said, enough indicators also suggest a bit more downside, so clearly various indicators aren't being as reliable as they usually are (or have been previously). Hence macro bull trap @ $69K followed by macro bear trap @ $25K by the looks of it.

Yes.. and they may well get fucked. if they put too much weight into getting BTC at prices cheaper than what has already been achieved.. already a 63% correction?   More is expected?

One way to screw a lot of folks waiting for cheaper bitcoin is to not allow the BTC price to go down as much as they expect.. then what?  Seen it plenty of times in the past.. folks looking for and waiting for lower BTC prices that do not end up happening.  What else is new?

https://twitter.com/pete_rizzo_/status/1533392147738656769

I don't disagree with anything that you are saying, and surely Saylor was a fast studier into bitcoin, but I take him at his word in terms of his explanation that our March 2020 liquidity event (and governmental actions/reactions) surrounding that had triggered his looking into bitcoin.. so actually prior to March 2020 bitcoin was not on his radar.. except that he was largely dismissing it as a big nothing burger.

Sure, Saylor is smart.  Sure Saylor has a lot of sophisticated tools, and he articulates various bitcoin fundamentals quite well.

At the same time, he is not really saying anything new in terms of what OG bitcoiners had been saying for at least 6-8 years before he came onto the bitcoin scene... In some sense, the people coming into bitcoin are becoming smarter and smarter, but really they are building off the foundations of various giants and there is some symbioticness in regards to how the information builds, and for sure Saylor has put information together that is quite sophisticated in framing some of the bitcoin matters in new ways - so sure some aspects of bitcoin consciousness is likely changed and better informed and better able to parrot some of his talking points, too.

Maybe I am rambling a wee bit in my not disagreeing agreement with you.. and yeah, it sure is nice that we have Saylor on the bitcoin train.. and even though we can sometimes see his relatively BIG ego coming through some of his interviews, he does seem quite able to restrain various ego aspects and to ongoingly stay on message... and even he seems to recognize and appreciate that he is ONLY one cog in a bitcoin wheel that is much BIGGER than him.. while at the same time he seem to be doing his part to help spread the bitcoin message.. fairly regularly and much more than he needs to be doing.. as Gachapin mentioned he could be banging hot chicks all daylong from now until he kicks the bucket, but instead he chooses to spend his time talking about various aspects and angles of bitcoin 24/7-ish.


You can only help yourself in regards to your own mental ways of dealing with the various ways that bitcoin continues to grow (or not), and even if I had used the word pessimism to describe you, I consider you to be overstating both the powers of any potential challengers who want to kill the golden goose, and understating bitcoin's already built in ability (even as a bunch of people) to stave off the various attacks that are likely to be thrown in the direction of bitcoin.

I have already responded to this point, so I doubt that I have much to add, and I doubt that I am even discounting that large attacks can be made onto bitcoin, but I question the extent to which we need to be living as scaredy cats in regards to such attack actions that they may well not be able to coordinate as well as you expect or to be successful.. yeah bitcoin is small and yeah bitcoin could get pushed underground....

I think the most important questions for each of us regards how we are going to allocate ourselves, and really, I had asked you at one point, DW, what is it that you want me (and others to do, exactly), and maybe I don't really want to know the answer to the extent that you have already provided some answers in that direction.


oh gawd!!!!    

Explanation

Explanation

Hory sssshhheeeeiiittt!!!!!


Any relation at all to this actual topic.. ?




Corns...




have you ever heard of dee corns?



You are probably not saying anything different from what I am going to say in regards to the rich (and even regular folks with very decent cashflow) being able to use debt in ways that less cashflow rich folks are able to achieve... So sure, there is nothing wrong with having a lot of capital, but if you ONLY have capital, then you are fucked if you have not sufficiently/adequately figured out how to continue to service your debt during high downity asset depreciation liquidity events.

In other words, there still are needs to be able to draw cashflow from other sources, if primary cashflow sources dry up...

To me, it seems that a lot of people believe that they can just leverage their bitcoin (or whatever other asset) and get away with being richie.. but if they have not sufficiently planned for a variety of scenarios, they could end up transitioning back into pobre status after they had already presumed they were richie (or reached fuck you status before they actually did).


I don't necessarily claim to understand all points that you make, so perhaps sometimes I will end up going on my own tangent that I had thought responded to the presented issue(s).... Even in your paragraph above, you seem to be framing some of the LUNA matters as if they were structured in a way that anyone could actually logically and prudently involve their lil selfies in such scam products... so they are lured into earning massive gains, but there is no way to profit in those kinds of schemes unless you just have in and out gamblers luck (or maybe inside information or some kind of insured/assured closeness to the Cantillon effect distribution of the proceeds that are distributed while the rug is being pulled and/or the exit is being scammed).

By the way, if you (or anyone else) is attempting to completely stay away from increasingly KYC dollar systems, then you are trying to balance your BTC exposure with various "stable" currencies, you are likely making yourself vulnerable to a variety of exit scam issues because any of the ones that are "acceptable" by various governments including the USGovt, are forced to follow all kinds of KYC/Tracking procedures, so some of the coins that are trying to stay out of the KYC/Tracking procedures seem to have their own greater likelihoods to NOT provide you with the stability (or peggedness to the USD) that they proclaim to be providing.

Ok... I feel that I am going too much astray with some of this shitcoin discussions, and sure there might still be some ways to deal with USD (or other fiats) in a physical form, and surely engaging in some direct transactions with BTC can be quite good - but at the same time, any of us who might be attempting to balance some of our BTC exposure with something dollar/fiat pegged (maybe not exactly the dollar/fiat of your choice?), then there might be some limitations in what we can do without exposing ourselves to the scammers - if we do not have some KYC avenues.. that might be able to provide some of their own better security, even if there are then needs to retain some feet in legacy systems... and for me, I like options, and I don't really like having people steal my money because I thought that their system was not rug pull based.

The bill text that you linked is incorrect.  It has been explicitly disclaimed by Senator Lummis.  Please be more cautious.

https://nitter.net/SenLummis/status/1530281115247951872


I found that tweet when searching for this about a week ago.  It was linked in a correction to an article by The Block.  The said article also linked to the exact same Scribd page—I didn’t notice earlier that it is the exact same link.


Since The Block failed to fact-check this adequately before publication, I will make a mental note to be more skeptical of their articles (and of the byline “journalist”) in the future.

---

This is not only of interest to Americans.  Just as political pressure on mining in the E.U. affects American Bitcoiners, and just as 1990s-era U.S. export regulations on cryptography affected everyone in the world, I think that major American legislative activity about Bitcoin and cryptocurrency is of more general interest.

With all due respect to Senator Lummis, I’ll just say for now—this could be for better, or for worse.  If the bill released June 7 is anything like that early draft, I think it is overall much for the worse (despite a few improvements to the situation).  However, Senator Lummis obviously did not want to be held to whatever that text said.  Perhaps there may have been some major improvements.

Explanation