Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 7085. (Read 26709638 times)

new game, i think. answer a question with someones elses quote?

Bullish

Has anyone got any charts with lines? Anyone?

I need some charts with lines.

Observing $10,309 - a 24 hour high. And a weekly high, given that weeks begin on Sundays, for some antiquated reason. Surely worth a glass of Rioja to celebrate.

jbrehrer is shilling a contentious hardfork of the English language, and accusing you of using “ANYONECANSPEND” words.  Is my witnessing of this transaction valid?

Dr. Craig S. Wright created the English language.  Maybe we should ask him.

---

As to the usage dispute, I have been preparing replies to JimboToronto and others.  Some of these little essays do take time.

Since I brought it up, I'll be happy to change the subject back to WO'ing bitcoin.

Let's see what's happening in the bitcoin marke--- ok still nothing.  

Btw, who sold sub $10K ?

I am so sick and tired of reading debates about covid from both sides. I tend to now just switch off and skip the topic. Everything has been said over and over. Like beating a dead horse.

Now let's get back to observing bitcoin and stop observing covid. Observing $10300. 5 digits still holding on.

Tiresome back and forth
Covid this, covid that. Argghh!
Time to snooze again

Yes!  I am an extremist in most everything, and proud of it.  Here, I will argue for—not the “middle of the road”, but a nuanced analysis.  Observe that the two opposite poles you describe are simple “easy answers” of the type for which people tend to reach.  I think that the situation is more complicated.

I myself have never said that Covid is inconsequential.  To the contrary:  In my first public statement about it, I said, “Some of you will die from the coronavirus....  The virus may kill me, too; maybe, maybe not.”  I then proceeded to explain at length why we should not destroy the world whilst failing to save it.

Perhaps the concept of managing and accepting risks in balance with worse risks may be too difficult for most people?


How many people here have experienced hunger?

I mean:  Real hunger.  Chronic malnutrition.  A starvation diet for an extended period of time.  To feel your body slowly wasting away, dissolving itself from the inside out, as you weaken and descend into madness.  You lie down, feel too weak to get up, fall half-unconscious, dream about food—any food...

I have that experience.  I think it’s likely that soon, many more people will have that experience, too.

Most governments worldwide have been following exactly the policy that they would take up, if they intended to destroy their economies and cause a global Depression.  That is not a “conspiracy theory”:  It is a blackbox observation of actual behaviour, with malice and stupidity being indistinguishable.  I believe that I have used the term economic arson.

I have been saying for the past six months that I fear starvation more than I fear Covid...

Whereas I don’t brush Covid off or pretend that it doesn’t exist.  I know people who have had it, including someone close to me.  That was very worrisome; I mentioned it at the time on this forum.  I myself am at high risk of complications due to pre-existing conditions.  I have said this before:  I am taking personal precautions, which do not affect society.

So as for my own experience.  Thereupon, how about this for a change:  Isolate nursing homes.  Encourage people with high risk factors to get a little bit “OCD”.  And otherwise—let life go on.  Perhaps encourage some moderate precautions that don’t leave masses of people totally dysfunctional.  Improved hygiene and a social respect for personal space are good ideas anyway—hey, I never wanted anybody within two meters of me unless we intended to kiss!  I said that before Covid:  Back off.  What is unacceptable is turning the whole world into a prison, and potentially a starvation GULAG, in failed attempts to prevent the ongoing spread of a virus that has low lethality for people without high risk factors.

Too nuanced?  I am trying to be blunt.


Panic is also a foundation for malicious actions.  Panicked people are easy to manipulate en masse.  (Insert book-length post here.)

---

Agreed.  I was always against the lockdowns.

What’s much scarier than Covid is that “lockdown” is prison terminology being openly applied to people sheep who fancy themselves to be “free” because they live in “democracies”.


Also agreed.  Though the death rate won’t be so low if (when?) economies are imploded to the point that people are starving in the streets.

---

Almost everything that I have said in the foregoing is a repeat of what I said in March and April.  All that has changed is that we are further along on the same trajectory toward global disaster.

You are suggesting that I twist language to my advantage in some kinds of ways?  

Regarding this particular topic, I already chimed in against the use of they to refer to a singular, but I understand peeps are going to do what peeps are going to do, so I think that I am making less of a BIG deal out of the whole phenomenon, even though I had already chimed in a wee bit about that particular topic.

Anyhow, more broadly, for some reason, you seem to be using me as "language is plastic" example ... but I am not sure about why you are using me for such an example, except maybe you are mad at me for calling you misleading, disingenuous and ridiculous, too many times, perhaps?  poor wee lil picnic bear.  


 

 


Good luck, and don't blame me if it does not feel as if it worked out well for you, financially, psychologically, or otherwise.

 


Now that is some real humor.    

I will believe it when I see it.

 


Well, I am thrilled that we seem to be having such a seemingly subliminal positive effect upon each other. #nohomo

Indeed. Just googled.

The fact that we still have not been able to make a reliable test for covid19 should scare you rather than stroke your conspiracy egotrip.

Around 3.6% of the human population had covid19. Around 3.3% of all covid patients died and a large majority has long term / permanent damage. Scientists are working day and night for a vaccine, doctors are robbing themselves of sleep, all the governments in all countries have acknowledged the danger and are actively working to prevent covid19 until a vaccine is out. And then theres you. Sucking that big fat conspiracy dick. Yeah yeah its all a conspiracy until you're gasping for breathe, hoping you can breathe tomorrow too. Fucking idiot.

Go to university, study virology for 5+ years, read the research papers on covid19 and then come back and delete your idiotic posts.

-100000 WO merit


edit: And I say this to anyone who feels the need to be an edgy rebel. Nobody is impressed.

Isn't that when WW1 stopped?

hahahahaha

Good one, d_eddie.... .Problem was that SwayStar123 was not in any kind of position to make such a strong statement (like the one that satoshi had made) because SwayStar123 was not really putting out any kind of convincing argument that was based on sound facts, tight logic and/or reasonable conclusions.

I knew satoshi, and SwayStar123 was no satoshi.     

Fair enough.

Sometimes there are OPsec risks in oversharing personal details or even some of the strategies can sometimes be too personally revealing.

I have had sometimes where I drafted a response, and then I decide to change some of the details to either make them percentages or to change it into a hypothetical or even to take out or add some information to remove it a bit more from myself (whether we are talking about what I have done, what I am doing or what I might do).

For me, I have batted this topic around so much that I have found several ways in which I can feel comfortable putting out the information, and maybe some guys might proclaim:  "hey your detail 1, detail 2 and detail 3 do not match up with what you said 3 months ago"....  Do I give any shits?  likely not.    

Accordingly, I understand that sometimes you may want to reconsider your phraseology or even some of the details that you are providing or to suggest that you are asking (or responding) for a friend...    Not that any of us internet personalities have any real world friends.    



Sure it is possible that you could suggest that one of your goals is to pass on all or some of your wealth, but seems to be somewhat unrealistic to suggest that to be any kind of reasonable goal that should motivate the vast majority of regular investors.

Let's say that your goal is to reach the accumulation of $2million in value because you believe that once you reach that level, then you can have a passive income of $6,666 per month, and that is more than sufficient for yourself to live in perpetuity on that amount of passive income per month.  So by the time you pass from this here earth, you still have not dug into your principle, but you have just lived off of the passive income for however much time you end up living.

i would proclaim that you have both achieved a kind of fuck you status and you have also been able to pass on value to your heirs, to the extent that those snot-nosed non-appreciative brats deserve any of your wealth to be passed on to them.

On the other hand, you might decide (purely discretionary) that your goal is to reach as close to zero as you can by the time that you die, without necessarily becoming a burden on anyone else... So you reach your $2million goal, but at some point, you decide to not only draw from the passive income, but that you are going to create a schedule in which you are withdrawing from the principle...  You may need to create a timeline for this, such as 10 years or 20 years, so if you have $2million dollars, it could well take you more than 20 years to deplete the whole value of your principle in BTC and asset value appreciation, even if you were to double your withdrawal rate from $6,666 to $13,332 per month.. partly depends upon how well the asset appreciates, so if you are trying to withdraw both principle and value, then the goal would be to make sure that you are withdrawing at some kind of rate that sufficiently exceeds its average appreciation rate in order to ongoingly dig into the value of the principle and to deplete the value down to zero over a timeline that may well be within your discretion to choose.



Sure if you put the assets in a kind of trust, then the you have chosen the various allocations, but if you give the assets to the kids outright, then as soon as they get control of the asset, they can choose to reallocate into whatever kind of asset that they prefer, including if they want to convert such assets into hookers, lambos and blow.  Their choice.  


So, yeah, generally speaking, the rule against perpetuities suggest that you can only create some kind of legal instrument to control your assets and the wealth determinations for the measurement of any life in being plus 21 years.. So you are not going to be able to control how those assets are held forever, and I am NOT even sure if that is a reasonable goal, but hey, I understand that people sometimes want to contribute to some kind of lasting legacy that extends beyond their lives and perhaps touches the lives of many others.


I think that you are making my point for me, or maybe it is that we just agree about this point.

The further out the limitations, if those limitations can even be sustained through such legal instrument as a trust, the more difficult it is to attempt to incentivize or to control behavior or to get your wishes fulfilled, so might be a lot easier to pass those assets and values onto someone that had been much more influenced by your values, but even that could be a very difficult goal to achieve because sometimes kids engage in rebellious behavior (as your anecdote kind of suggests), they pre-decease their parents or their values change along the way.  Difficult objectives to achieve, but there are likely some people who are successful in both being that kind of influential and having some heirs that end up ready, willing and able to carry out such wishes - even generations down the road.



Surely, I do not proclaim to be any kind of expert, yet property rights tend to be a combination of state law and common law, so there could be some jurisdictions that allow for some deviation beyond the general rule against perpetuities that I stated in my above post.

Namely:
>>>>>generally speaking, the rule against perpetuities suggest that you can only create some kind of legal instrument to control your assets and the wealth determinations for the measurement of any life in being plus 21 years.<<<<<

fine. keep your secrets 

It's simple, in the UK the government almost deliberately killed old people by putting ill people in care homes.

Now they're not doing that anymore, the most fragile people are well protected.

Add to that, the virus is better understood, so people with bad cases of COVID have a much better survival rate than at the beginning.

You have capital and want to lend it. Surely you need a mechanism to get back the money if something goes wrong, usually a contract ? Contracts are regulated by countries. And you need ways to enforce that contract, that's the job of courts. You see how governments are involved ?

Also, lending crypto with a very volatile price doesn't seem like something that will work in practice, unless you lend it to companies already dealing with crypto. Last time I checked lending gold wasn't a thing, for example.

I need a mortgage to buy a house, why would I ask a crypto mortgage instead of a fiat one, especially when fiat is probably going to devalue over the next 20 years, while BTC will go to the moon ?

In some countries, carneval season starts on 11th of november at 11:11...