Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 3638. (Read 26608023 times)

Movie recommendation:

The Outfit (2022)

A great performance by Mark Rylance, coupled with the edgy innocence of Zoey Deutch. Classy, witty, suspenseful, intense, will keep you hooked until the end.

Enjoy!

Bro, I am just too long in the tooth for it, I cannot abide that little angry dog nipping at your ankles vibe from anyone... its fucking annoying, and I will tell anyone that does it to go and take a running jump.

As for "shitcoins" and "maximalists" yeah yeah, I am aware that it is a hot topic for some, for whatever reasons,  which I often personally view as being extreme, dogmatic, narrow minded.. but each to their own...

What is good for the goose is good for the gander, and I do believe that a good natured ribbing in regards to the topic, in either direction, is fair game... and I personally do not let it ruffle my feathers.

What ruffles my feathers a little, and I mean a little,  is the angry little dog nipping at your ankles vibe, for no reason , maybe they got out of bed the wrong way, or maybe they have a stick up their ass for whatever reason, or maybe they are projecting something onto others , that is in fact just in their imagination... either which way, I do not care its just boring and annoying, and imma gunna tell them to fuck off.  

Either communicate straight up , like a human , or get fucked.

I am not against being disagreed with , or someone taking the piss or having a laugh... but act like a bitch for no reason, and , I will after a three or four strikes, if there is no let up , and they continue to be a bitch nipping at my ankles...  then I am going to tell them to fuck off and hit that ignore button.

It is what it is.


ps, most of the time, I am having a laugh, if anyone is in any doubt, then I am probably joking about...
 

Explanation

I would gather that the larger the font of the word(s), then the more frequently that/those word(s) are used?  Some of those words seem like something that I would not say too many times, but I would not deny saying them, I am just surprised that I would use the same expression/word several times - surely bitcoin or shitcoin or something like that.

In the end, I cannot really deny that there is a reflection of aspects of my common word choices in that cloud, and I suppose it is a bit surprising to see, even if I am the one who had been in the habit of using those words in my recent posts.



NOT!!!!!!!!!


All three of us came to this thread around the same time.  I doubt that suchmoon was inspired by dogecoin.. but whatever, maybe that is a potentially based in fact speculation?

By the way, empowering... I had to fix your quotes to make them less confusing.... not the substance just the quotes.....  you had not properly quoted in your earlier post.  I think that it is right, now.



No problem with that.  Each of us choose how much to engage, how heavily to engage and whether we will get emotional about our engagements.  And, of course, some folks are more emotional by nature and so might not be able to control that aspect very well, and some folks are more shit-stirrers, which is likely a learned habit rather than by nature, but who gonna know the exact boundaries between nature and nurture merely from text on the interwebs?



You can do what you want, and sometimes folks are going to respond or disagree with the way that you said something - whether you change your way of saying it or change your opinion seems to remain within your discretion for the most part.

By the way, regarding the sentencing of Virgil Griffith, I had merited posts from both you and Suchmoon, and even if it might seem that I am waffling or that I might not have strong opinions that might lean one way or another, I would not necessarily find it a personal confrontation if I had made a post (maybe something like the ones that you had made, empowering), and then to get upset because Suchmoon made some comments that were taking the other side of the matter.... So one thing is to consider the matter in terms of free speech and government intervention but another thing is to consider the matter in terms of bitcoin versus shitcoin.  Of course, my attention becomes more piqued when we start to devolve into shitcoin discussion within this thread.. and then I might start to wonder what the fuck are we talking about shitcoins in this thread?  and for sure, even if I find some behaviors of shitcoin pumpers to be problematic, I do not automatically take the side of government when they are cracked down upon because surely the Griffith behavior could have been a bitcoiner involved in similar conduct.

"The value of privately held art is estimated at more than $2 trillion, and the potential market for art loans could easily top $400 billion"


"Lenders say the big opportunity — and the new risk — is in the business of reselling art loans to investors."


.... rehypothecation , and bankers go hand in hand

I think the one way this is useful and secure is on a Bitcoin rooted semi-trusted sidechain. It's a disaster on any fat layer 1 like ETH et al. But I could see a set of government entities banding together using a fedarated sidechain to do land/title registration.  THAT is where this goes I think.  We do not need full Bitcoin level security/distribution, but we don't want to build this on a decentralized blockchain used for everything else either.

For what it's worth, this is also how blockchain based EMRs (Electronic Medical Records) could be built as well.  Shit that's a billion dollar idea...

Liquid would be perfect for this.  It could even be run by governments.

Agreed.

Musk head alert... live at TED Vancouver on about twitter and stuff

https://livestream.com/tedprivate/ted2022

I have always been a fan of Dave's sensible analysis. 

But he is kind of a "see I told you so" type personality.

This will make the move that bitcoin does that blows up all his models PARTICULARLY sweet when it comes  (I think it is a when rather than an if!).  Of course he will point out somehow that he had accounted for this possibility all along.  I dunno.  Maybe he will be a good sport and bow to the force that blew up his models.  It will be especially good if Bitcoin does it in a way that validates the S2F model for one last moment before blowing it up too.  In that case PlanB's model will outlast Dave's by a smidgen.

The scenario in which the above happens is EXTREMELY bullish, and would be great for us OG holders.  It really can only play out in a move to over 100k BEFORE this cycle is over, and then a good start on the "supercycle" that others have mentioned.  It is looking less likely now than it did 6 months ago.  But it COULD happen.  I will never give up!

Many no-coiners like to refer to Bitcoin as a "digital pet rock".  Though they are fools, it is quite understandable the reasoning behind this position.  And frankly that's exactly what an NFT is.  At least with a pet rock there was something tangible to own.

The thing that bugs me about NFTs is everyone has now seen that they were a scammy rugpull, and yet the public is still fascinated with then.  They are CLOSE to something useful.

When I bought my Jade HW signature device I received a token on Liquid that would be tradable for the Jade when it came in stock.  I remember thinking... look at that... an actual "ICO" like token with an actual functional USE and rooted on a BITCOIN sidechain, therefore secured by BITCOIN but adding no stupid bloat to the base layer.  Transferred using some of Monero's privacy tech!  Neet.

This was one of the moments that I came to be a fan of the "evil Blockstream" as this is all the real functionality being promised by Ethereum, but with the CORRECT tradeoffs chosen.  At least an acceptable set of them.  I do think a company headed by a wizened cypherpunk is a good thing.  Jade is also OK.

My point is there is a right way, and a dumb way to do things.  I do not think we have seen the actual utility that the NFT concept provides.  But it took a while with tokens, too.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/25/the-wealthy-are-borrowing-billions-against-their-art-collections-.html

https://www.privatebank.bankofamerica.com/articles/your-art-collection-as-loan-collateral.html


https://www.widewalls.ch/magazine/borrowing-against-art-collection


Guess the idea would be to disintermediate the existing players, in a industry worth billions... whilst also creating an easier path to investment in art for the average joe.


Not the worst idea to do this via blockchain nfts/shards


Like I said, not married to it, but interesting enough... and I bet the margins could be improved for the collectors vs using the already established players in the industry.


I would not be surprised, at all to see this come to fruition...  funnily enough , I was told about this by someone involved with art collectors (serious serious mega art collectors)

2 minutes 18 seconds you will never get back

https://twitter.com/VagabondAP/status/1514415619608924165

+1 WOsMerit

It won't work. First, to have real meaning in the real world, it needs a government system. If they for instance replace the DMV by an Nft, I bet many people will lose their keys and with that lose ownership of their car. The same will happen to properties: if you lose your backup, you lose your house!

Obviously he wouldn't pay a cent for it. Probably some sort of leveraged buyout shit. Although I wouldn't cry if Twitter gets pillaged and razed.


Or you could get the "real world asset" and not invent new "more interesting" types of fraud.

Obviously there needs to be a mechanism in place to verify that the nft confers ownership of said asset... or even a "shard" of the NFT that represents the asset..   Art collectors, for example, I believe in the end could possibly embrace this model, for various reasons..  for example, art collectors, currently, have serious funds locked up in their collections... now imagine that an art collector can sell, via "shards" effectively shares of individual pieces of art..  but the collector maintains a "controlling share" of said piece of art.  The art itself, remains, in verified lockups, or gallery's. (Yes there would need to be a legal framework that is established for this, but this could be done via a legal framework within a DAO, coupled with a "established custody solution for the underlying asset".

This then enables an art collector to release equity from their collection, whilst maintaining control of the art. Which in turn enables them to speculate and purchase even more art to add to their collections... For the buyer of the nft shard, it allows a way to speculate on the appreciation of the art, without having to cough up for an entire Monet...

Tbh there are for sure other mechanisms whereby this could be achieved.. but NFT shards which represent partial share of a minority share of art, could be one way it is done...

Would it be entirely "trustless" , in truth no, there would still be some counterparty risk involved with the custody solution... and in theory the warehouse/gallery/vault etc could be robbed or burned down/flooded/involved in a boating accident etc..  but then I suppose there could be some insurance set up that is coupled with the custody solution.

Does this really solve a real world problem? hmmmmm not a huge one ... but it could be a interesting way to "democratise and decentralise and distribute" art speculation..  and also, to make the whole process easier.

This whole industry of releasing equity from art collections is already done by various companies in meat life that are not connected to blockchain/NFT projects.  Its pretty big business. Could this be done by simple tokens and smart contracts sans NFT's or shards, yeah sure.  


There are various other projects that play on this theme in other niches also... property, wine etc.

Personally, I am not in a hurry to buy shards in art, but some may.

I'm not married to the idea, but I find it interesting enough to follow..

Around width=300 tends to be pretty good, but sure sometimes you will want it larger so that it is legible, and sometimes it is legible even if it is smaller.  Sometimes (especially when quoting someone else) width=30 is good enough.. just to show that an image was there in case the reader would like to click on the original and see the actual size.. so you would need to use your discretion regarding how much of the visibility of the image is relevant to what you are saying, and hopefully you can arrive at largely correct outcomes rather than just posting whatever you like - merely in way that just seems to be more annoying rather than actually contributory.

I don't disagree with how Vapourminer described what he does either.

After you have selected the size for your image, then just click on preview and see how the size looks before you post it, and if you make a mistake and post an inappropriate (or not useful size) then you can edit and adjust the size up or down to a size that fits whether you are posting an image for the first time or if you are quoting someone else's post that happens to have an image contained therein.

The choice is yours ultimately.,. and I have noticed that you, Cosmic Beyonders, have a tendency to NOT post links very often, even though there is likely needs (or wants) to verify your sources.. If you are not attempting to make it easy on fellow WO members we are likely going to just get increasingly pissed off at you and start to call you names... even though maybe some of us will try to give you some benefit of the doubt and help from time to time, but patience can ONLY go so far if it seems that you are not even trying.


It is probably better to not even say anything about gender, unless it is relevant.

For example, sometimes some of us get caught up on topics about health or lifestyle, and surely some of the choices, preferences and even what is better for one person or another might relate to their gender, too.

Another thing is that women are sometimes in relationships with men in which they might be stuck with way more of the childcare duties than men, and so sometimes those kinds of duties/interactions can end up contributing to a perspective that is different than a typical guy - yet even some guys here talk about some of their interactions with their kids too.. whether we are talking about finances or just day to day interactions that might or might not be directly related to this thread - including whether the snot-nosed brats deserve any bitcoin inheritance - and guys/gals will differ in how to consider those topics too.

In the end, you do whatever you want in terms if you want to bring up the girl thing or not... and yeah, sometimes I can see how it might matter, and also sometimes you might want to suggest that you are more receptive (or less receptive) to certain kinds of ways of expressing yourself.. and some of those choices might be o.k. or not.. For example, there are choices in what kinds of language that you use.. but there is all kinds of variance in the ways that guys/gals here express themselves.. some are more polite and formal than others, and others talk like drunk sailors 24/7 whether they are drunk (or a sailor) or not.

I think your missing the point.  Nft as a public register for land/property etc can be very useful

The Gaussian and the Guppy all bunching up here.

Whichever way it goes, bound to be explosive soon...



https://mobile.twitter.com/davthewave/status/1514411735574548483