Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 3569. (Read 26652597 times)

Exactly this, anything like BIP 119 should be in a higher layer, maybe even on top of Lightning in the current framework. I think the reason Bitcoin is king is in part due to its solid foundation development wise, core needs to be minimal and secure, lets keep it that way.


Agreed, one of the risks with BIP 119 is the potential for blacklisted coins, that would make Bitcoin less fungible, this is a bad idea, especially at the core level.

You could have snipped that, I have bitch tits on ignore so I do not have to scan through endless waffle whenever he has a mental breakdown because someone else has an opinion.

Explanation

hold the line..


Toto - Hold The Line (Official Video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htgr3pvBr-I

I was not keeping track, and I usually do not disclose that kind of largely irrelevant information anyhow. 

Nonetheless, I feel like I rambled quite a bit in my last two posts.... ...


I personally do not have any problem bringing up shitcoins as long as it does not appear that you are pumping them, because that ends up devolving into everyone and his/her pet rabbit wanting to talk about his/her favorite shitcoin or even to talk about which shitcoin is the least shitty of the 16k shitcoins out there.  Gets old and distracting, quickly.


Did I say that you cannot make money from shitcoins?

Did we ever concede that this should be the money making thread?

Last time I checked, this was not the thread about how many ways to make money blah blah blah..

Many of us here already know that you can make money with various shitcoins, but merely because you might have made some money with shitcoin 1, 2 or shitcoin 548 does not all of a sudden make that shitcoin relevant in this thread based on those kinds of potential facts.


I was not trying to get into the specifics, but surely if we are considering various aspects of bitcoin versus gold, bitcoin is likely around 1,000x better than gold, but it is less than 1/10 the market cap of gold (even when BTC was at it's $69k top).. So yeah it could take many years for bitcoin to reach its true value relative to gold - but at the same time, the important distinctions with bitcoin is that it is way more portable than gold, way easier to verify, more divisible, and less costly in terms of not having to have custodians. 

Those bitcoin characteristics become fairly important in terms of how much more difficult it will be for the powers that be to manipulate bitcoin as they had been able to manipulate gold because bitcoiners can demand to take their bitcoin into their possession (which is way more difficult to do with gold).

Of course, there are going to be plenty of bitcoiners who will continue to trust third parties, and many bitcoiners will also contract away their right to directly take possession of their bitcoin, but these kinds of concepts regarding the value of possession or otherwise the value to verify that the third parties hold the quantity of the bitcoin that they claim to hold become way more important in terms of challenges that the powers that be are going to have in terms of manipulating bitcoin. 

Sure, we are still transitioning between old systems and new systems, so there are still a lot of bitcoiners who have been keeping their bitcoin with third parties, but we are also seeing a decently large number of bitcoiners to be actually take possession of their bitcoin too... so again, I am not completely comfortable projecting the various ways that these matters are likely to play out beyond just pointing out that the past successes of the powers that be to manipulate gold does not automatically imply that they are going to have similar successes to manipulate bitcoin, especially if bitcoiners are able to really bring into question if some of the third party actors are claiming to possess way more bitcoin than they have and furthermore, there may be some instances in which no one really needs to verify if they have the bitcoin because if the bitcoin price goes up 10x, and some third parties claim to have $1billion worth of bitcoin but they only happen to have $100 million worth of bitcoin, they are likely going to be fucked if they end up losing $900 million.. and sure some of the BIG players may be able to afford some of those kinds of losses here and there, but the level of losses can end up adding up to a whole hell of a lot of value that they are not able to print their way out of such predicament that they end up putting their lil selfies into.

Explanation

Like according to my understanding of your these words i think the the similarities between Gold and BTC are the store of Value ( Reserve ) and potential asset to control the Devaluation but Gold can Devalue if Supply increase.

But Difference is Decentralization, More reach to the community as compared to the Government and Centeral hands Fix in term of Supply So Devaluation not possible even if Continues Capital gained by BTC value will be like a Vertical Line towards Sky always.

If you had not noticed, bitcoin is both similar and different from gold.

Of course, some of the same tricks are going to be attempted, and of course, they likely have some new tricks that they believe that they are going to be able to employ.


I would not even claim that they are not going to try, and that they are not going to pull out multiple bags of tricks to perhaps even play dirtier than they had played before.

Will they be successful?  or significantly successful?  or sufficiently successful in order to be able to reach their goals of "controlling" bitcoin?  There deeply inbred aspects of bitcoin that are attempting to prepare for these kinds of attacks, so part of the question will be regarding what levels of success that the status quo manipulators and their various allies might be able to achieve.

Sure those of us in this thread already have some doubts about if they are going to be able to be successful, but I doubt that any two of us are going to agree on all the aspects in terms of either attempting to describe where we are at, how we got here or where we might be going, but if we own some bitcoin we are at least hedging such a future in which the manipulators are not going to be even as close to as successful as they had been in gold.. and furthermore, some guys here might even believe that the status quo powers might be able to be successful in manipulating bitcoin, but there is still value in bitcoin, even if the status quo powers that be enjoy various levels of success in controlling bitcoin more than what the more radical bitcoiners might prefer as the outcome.

For sure, these kinds of battles have already been going on for a while, and likely part of the rationale of approving future based ETFs and not approving spot based ETFs is to attempt to get bitcoin under control, but still does not guarantee that the status quo powers that be are going to be even close to as successful as they had been with gold in that regard (largely - but not completely) demonetizing gold.

Articulate the goal as Demonetizing bitcoin?

Good luck with that.

Of course, there is likely going to be ongoing battles for years to come.


Yes.. of course, there are going to be attempt s to push the BTC price as low as possible and keep it as low as possible for as long as possible... There are more tools this time around than there were in 2013. and even more tools than there were in 2017.. but still there seem to be pretty BIG risks too if they fuck it up and are they going to just keep pumping naked shorts into BTC without breaking some of their own systems.. and the BTC price ends up moving the other way anyhow, and all those players with the naked shorts (whether governments, financial institutions and/or rich no coiners) end up having to figure out what to do when the BTC price ended up moving against them, and they do not have any actual BTC.. all they have are the paper ones.. Are those paper ones going to work when push comes to shove and the various accounts are supposed to be settled?  Who's going to be holding the bag if there are not enough BTC?  Who's going to pay for that?

I don't claim to know the answer(s), but I do appreciate that bitcoin is similar to gold, but at the same time it is different from gold, too.

Bro Really How much time you took to compose it.
Anyhow I got all what you said. Personally i try to avoid the Shitcoins talk reason some of Our community memeber don't like and its the rightthing that this thread is for BTC Only.

Unlike Your point of Some advancement in Shitcoins and the their experimental excersise made some inovation as the concept of tokenizing anything which seems attractive to user many of the Crypto users made Massive money from Shitcoins.

Fuck crypto.

I am not even sure what crypto is, but fuck it anyhow.


Stop trying to tell us that you have some kind of a unique position and that you are smarter than other members in this thread.

Sure, each of us have our own perspectives, but you seem to be suggesting that a bunch of guys here believe that bitcoin is the ONLY coin - merely because some of us prefer to stay away from shitcoin talk.

I doubt if any guy here, including yours truly, who does not believe that shitcoins will be around for many years, maybe 50-100 years or more  - and potentially even forever as you suggest, even if high percentages of the value will actually flow into the hardest money (which is currently bitcoin) but still there will likely be some uses for other kinds of less hard money and even various kinds of transactional mechanisms that may well get reconciled in bitcoin at some later point.. but even having bitcoin evolve into reserve currency or even reserve truth keeper could take several hundred years to play out, so that level of speculation seems a lot less relevant in terms of watching walls or some of the more immediate decisions that a lot of us are making in this thread regarding how to accumulate bitcoin and then to maintain ones stash and perhaps even some liquidation concerns based on timeline limitations that each mortal has, the last time I checked.

I doubt that anyone here, including yours truly, has been denying the potential for various innovations coming from or through various shitcoins and even from various angles that had been started by shitcoins, but just because some learning can be done from shitcoins, there is no reason to try to treat them as if they were some kind of equal to bitcoin - or to otherwise fail/refuse to put them in their place rather than talking them up as if they were some kind of best thing since sliced bread....... blah blah blah.

The last time I checked, this is not the let's talk about all things in the world, and you likely already know (but refuse to have much courtesy) that there are devolution dangers in pumping shitcoin talking points in this thread without trying to give them a proper context so that we might be able to not devolve into shitcoin talk rather than trying to maintain some semblance of bitcoin focus herein.

By the way, on a personal level, if there were some seeming shitcoin that either seemed to be better than bitcoin or moving towards being better than bitcoin and not filled with smoke and mirror scams (like ethereum and some of those related products).. and likely POW is the way to go because POS is another fucking scam, so any coin/project that fails/refuses to appreciate the betterness for POW for the sound money aspects, decentralization and censorship resistance, can go get fuck with their disinformation scam nonsense.  

In other words, what I am trying to say is that I have no problem diversifying into whatever better coin that might come about that is either POW or improves upon POW or bitcoin and/or even I would completely abandon bitcoin for that superior product if we end up going in that direction with some project/coin that is either in existence, comes into existence or comes to be known to be moving in that direction...   Most of us regulars in this thread should know/recognize that there is no such product/project/coin currently that even comes close to bitcoin in terms of what I already mentioned about sound money, decentralization and censorship resistance - which are the features that matter especially if any product/project or coin is holding itself up as being meaningfully disruptive, and many of the shitcoins/projects or whatever they are referred as are likely ONLY able to survive under the curtain of bitcoin providing a space in which nobody can do shit about bitcoin, so therefore, these other projects are kind of allowed to get away with quite a bit because various powers that be wheter governments, institutions or status quo rich have few clues about what to do in order to address various disruptive angles that come through bitcoin and is also pushed out to various shitcoin/bitcoin wannabe imitators as well.

And yeah, some of the shitcoins have some decent features or attempts at innovations that end up being way more meaningful because they have built some network effects that go beyond the snot-nosed 14-year olds, so to the extent to which some of those matters might come into bitcoin's layer 1 or layer 2 (or higher) or end up getting pegged to bitcoin at some point is still to be seen how a lot of these matters are going to play out.  So, don't try to act like you, empowering, have some kind of superior vision because you recognize a multi-coin future and the rest of the WO bitcoin maximalists (or whatever you would like to call us in your strawman arguments) cannot appreciate the ongoing existence and roles (even possible contributions) of shitcoins in the future that ONLY you can supposedly see and appreciate in your infinite wisdom that supposedly goes beyond the rest of us.. blah blah blah.

Fu*K ChartBuddy

Explanation

Explanation

Even if some of us might not agree with what you are saying (it didn't seem to be too controversial of a position) and maybe even not agree with how you might be lumping the various asset classes, it still is way more helpful to see that you had used both the term bitcoin and the term crypto rather than just vaguely/amorphously referring to everything as "crypto."

Disagreement is probably way better to deal with than vagueness.. and too much vagueness.. especially with a term that is already in itself vague (Crypto) just seems to devolve into misleading, even if the author might not have had intentions to mislead.


You seem to feel that I am a wee bit focused on you.  I see.


I doubt that I know enough about the topic, yet I understand that in some ways, fungibility remains tricky.

Even though at the same time, I thought that the greater building on Taproot is going to help to address some of the fungibility matters and make it more difficult to trace transactions or even to end up having some levels of mixing or coin join/merging (those are probably not the right words) to possibly become standard practices that do not really cost much more to conduct...

And, with any of these open source projects, it seems to take time for developers to build systems that are somewhat user-friendly and will end up contributing to greater adoption of something like privacy/fungibility systems.. and then perhaps inabilities for third parties/exchanges/governments to try to pressure/discourage/threaten normies from using those privacy/fungibility systems.

Fungibility does come up quite a bit in regards to the various ways that privacy oriented folks realize that these systems and practices need to continue to be developed and made easier and easier.. if your coins are not already known/traceable, then do you have the ability to make them more private and non-traceable by using some of the newer developments (I am not even proclaiming that such great fungibility/privacy systems exist even though there are likely some members who are more able than others in that direction - but we see that even seemingly smart people get caught using faulty systems/practices (Canadian Trucker situation serves as a pretty good example of folks getting caught with their pants down in terms of some of the practices that they employed).

I don't exactly feel articulate on the topic, even though I feel that I understand your concern Hueristic - while at the same time, I feel that you are taking an overly negative/pessimistic stance regarding current bitcoin capabilities or even possible ongoing developments, and maybe you are attributing too much blame to bitcoin rather than the likely many mistakes (or lack of prioritizing) that many bitcoiners seem to employ in their own practices.

Many of us, including but not limited to yours truly, are probably guilty of some of that too.. because in my case, for example, I do not feel like much of a technical genius and sometimes I am ONLY willing to put in so much time in terms of some of the various protections while at the same time, there may be ONLY so much that normies might be doing - and there sometimes can be problems with people locking themselves out of their own coins because they end up overcomplicating some of the systems that they are trying to employ.

Duh! We are still above 34K.
Personally, I don't have any bitcoin on exchanges, apart from few thou sats.
Going down with the ship, captain!

When we go sub $30k, who sold at the bottom?  

Who's our next Mindrust?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Too soon?

Explanation

bear attack !!! 

There is a fair amount of information on this subject. The most important thing to draw from it is that there is no 3rd party that has safely audited their books for at least 6 months. The main excuse given is that Tether cannot spare their main developer to explain to the auditors how they "secure" the "reserves". Tether only has 13 30 employees, the fewer the easier it is to keep their mouths shut.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-whuXHSL1Pg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgJjf4HaRsk

DYOR