Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 8796. (Read 26609992 times)

Pugh, Pugh, Barney McGrew, Cuthbert, Dibble, Grubb.

Here's some more stuff about inter-generational differences, makes me feel old and poor; kids coming for my money etc.

That beer was a test to verify if any real astute peep was reading.

Hm.  You have verified my test....


meh




 




Oh my... am I biting my nails.....

https://twitter.com/BitcoinEcon/status/1203469841828581381?s=20
weird flex: capped stock-to-flow https://swissrexag.ch/wp-content/uploads/1910_Newsletter-8_stock-to-flow-model-proof-of-non-linearity_EN.pdf
someone wants to stock up before all hell breaks loose - 'oh planB's predictions are too wild'

meanwhile in old stuff https://seekingalpha.com/article/4310421-how-much-silver-is-above-ground

Beer example.....mehhh. It must be late night for you JJG so i can understand that,  Will wait for another example   

Classic signs of the alt market bottoming 

Whoaza!!!!!!   Coming out hardball, but I am glad that you are still willing to play ball.  Let's see how "obvious" is your explanation or my purported wrong thinking on the matter.


So far, so good.  I am with you.  I mean I agree.


Yeah.  You own what coins are in the dust address and you own the coins that you sent to the exchange - except the exchange has custody over those coins that you sent to them, but you are still the owner, whether you refer to it as technically or not.  Of course, they have the private keys so you could end up getting fucked by giving them your private keys.


I think that you lost me a bit here, but I believe that I still get your point that we are talking about coins that are on an exchange, and yeah if they screw up, you get hacked or they exit scam you, then you are fucked out of your coins.  That is correct.  You are not getting those coins back in those situations.


Now you are getting patronizing.  Of course, I have heard about that.  I referred to the concept in my earlier response.

Fair enough that some of the GOX coins might have been moved to individual addresses, but I doubt it.  The GOX coins are just under higher level of scrutiny now, and they are still combined into a few addresses and held /managed and oversaw through a custodian who is also under court review.


I still think that you are getting caught up on the fact that the custodian can fuck you over.  Of course, they can, but if you are at a bar, and you ask a friend to hold your beer for a few minutes while you attempt to chat up the girl next to you, and when you come back you expect your friend to give you back your beer rather than to have drunk it.  Yeah, he may have drunk it, but that surely was not part of the agreement, so you might punch him in the face or having buy you a new beer or just unfriend him, but it still was your beer, even though you gave custody over to him for a short period.

Yeah, maybe you are getting caught up on whether the agreement was clear about who owned the coins or the beer or whatever, but that is the technicality, not whether you actually owned the coins or the beer.


We count them as bitcoin investors because they are bitcoin investors who have left their coins with a custodian.  They may or may not get their coins back when they claim them, but they are still bitcoin investors for the purpose of counting, whether you want call it "technical" or not.  Now, for the purpose of having securely ensured that they can get their coins, that is another issue, but the underlying account holders are still bitcoin investors even if their coins are co-mingled with thousands of other account holders.


Of course, having your coins with a third party creates a variety of third party risks, but that does not take away from the fact that the underlying account holders are bitcoin owners.  Whether they actually ever remove their coins from the exchange or choose to leave the coins there for years and years will affect the odds that something might happen to their coins to cause them to be removed from ownership.


That's right.  There may be millions of them, and we can agree to disagree, and I am going to call your thinking fuzzy logic to the extent that you want to continue to insist that an exchange with one address of millions of account holders who have claims to the bitcoins within the address is just counted as one owner.  That is just irrational principle and technical based bullshit, that does not align with the actual on the ground facts that the individual owners could chose to get their coins and to remove them from that address.. . maybe through proof of keys or whatever, and if the exchange does not give the coins or say that they were hacked or exits, then that is another story that may or may not result in the owners who thought that they have bitcoins ending up not having the bitcoins that they thought that they had.


Yes there is an attempt to figure out how many actual people are in bitcoin and whether adoption is growing because addresses are growing.


Yes, you are trying to read "real" possession as a requirement concerning whether someone actually qualifies as a bitcoin owner, and I disagree with you.  Likely a lot of other peeps are going to disagree with you too, but whatever, we can agree to disagree and I can call you deluded in terms of your "technical" limitations that you want to impose onto bitcoin owners, and you can disagree with me too.  Whatever.


Again.. patronizing and you proved no point, except maybe reiterating and/or explaining your previously asserted beliefs, and I am surprised that you want to double down and go to town so strongly on this "technical" but seemingly inaccurate factual point.

The number of 28 million bitcoin addresses surely has a significance, but it is not exactly reflective of numbers of people involved in bitcoin or owners of bitcoin whether talking about on chain ownership or claims through various kinds of custodians or even lightning channels that are linked to addresses.  

Anyhow, I doubt that we really need to go on about these foundational points and our disagreement on such foundational points.  It is trite at best.  In other words, I stand by the points of my previous post and any other subsequent explanation attempts that I have made in this post.

Can you store half the paper seed. Then the value is nothing.


Sorry about your finger.

With all due respect, why should the bank insure your bitcoins from being stolen when you have access to the private keys and could steal them from the bank at any time?

1st) the person who you spoke with at the bank who is checking with the manager might not be getting back to you because they are still looking into the matter, to the extent that they understand the question.

2nd)  I find real problems with your attempt to get a bank involved to insure bitcoins that you safeguard in a safety deposit box or whatever you are doing with that.
I doubt that they even need to know what you have in your safety deposit box and the value of it (especially when it comes to the bitcoin aspect of it, because the bitcoins [eg keys] should not be only in one place, anyhow).  Furthermore, hopefully you are storing one back up or one aspect of your bitcoins in such safety box rather than your ONLY ability to access it.  Don't get me wrong, I am not against the idea of having either a back up or part of a key in a safety deposit box, but I see no reason to either tell the fucktwat bank managers about the contents of your box or the significance of it, or to attempt to insure such contents, but that does not mean that you should not be taking measures to ensure your coins in various kinds of means, whether it is using back ups or multi-sig or some variation of those kinds of security measures.  Of course, passing on your estate and considerations like that will likely involve instructions to second and or third parties that may or may  not know their instructions until after your passing (if that were to happen.. or should I say when it happens and if you have bitcoin at the time?).


Additionally:  What jo-squared said.


Agreed about everything you said, AlcoHoDL, except there might be some need to write down the additional pass phrase for a few reasons 1) in case you get brain trama or otherwise detained, 2) to pass down to heirs and 3) possibly other related reasons

I'm not really sure why Jew shill Harry McLarry pretends his non-TA "fractals" have any significance or meaning.  It's gotta be the most lazy, incompetent form of TA anyone can possibly do.  But the charts aren't even really repeating. Like the two below, he doesn't even attempt to apply any form of meaning to the fact one 'fractal' broke upwards and the latest one broke downwards.  Like all shitcoin scammers, he just sort of pretends the chart is somehow guaranteed to always go up no matter what.  If that is your claim, than you're saying it's a literal Ponzi scam by default.

Thought I'd post this link as further deterrent to trust a bank safe no matter where (referring to the country where you'd think you could trust a safe to some degree):

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/business/bank-burglary_safe-deposit-boxes-plundered-in-basel/43961252

AFAIK no refunds have been paid to safe owners to date..

On top of that you have to yell "Cukoo" every hour... [1]

These clown charts haven't addressed the gorilla in the room:  the Elwar reverse indicator - the #1 most accurate Bitcoin prediction tool.  He was in here talking about attempting to invade other countries with seasteads again just a day or two ago, so you can probably get ready for the next leg down.

So an update.  We have made good progress in the last couple of days since the most recent post below.  The short term downtrend line has been invalidated by the price breaking sideways.  Which is a good thing, although we still need to do something about this downwards channel we are in.  




New chart below - you can see we have broken through the mini downtrend.  It's almost like we are starting to get support from the deep....  Support from the deep could help us break upwards out of our current down channel.  



If support from the deep can hold, it can carry us back up to $14k towards the end of next year.  Which would nicely position ourselves for a run at a new ATH in early - mid 2021.  Which would be right on schedule.  Obviously it wont be in a straight line, but you can see the intended principle for a V shaped recovery.

Wrong move on so many levels.

Haven't you heard these kind of news before?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/19/business/safe-deposit-box-theft.html

Once you lose what's inside it is pretty much impossible to get back ESPECIALLY,

When it is a volatile asset.

If it was a bag of gold what was lost, the bank would probably cover you. But when it is somthing you can't explain its value, they are fcked.

Let's say you went to the bank and declared that some insider thief stole your private keys from your box. They don't know how much you had in that box. You can say it was 1000000 btc or anything.

They simply can't take that kind of risk. That's why they ignored you.

11 = (VB)1001

---

https://twitter.com/100trillionUSD/status/1203403201913008128



First coffee of the day, good sunday.

True. As are the following:

11 = 9
11 = 13
11 = 17
11 = 21
11 = 1001
11 = 1011
11 = 10001

The possibilities are endless...

All I know is Borderlands 3 was garbage and has the system requirements of accurately rendering physics for what happens to JayJuanGee falling into a black hole while having graphics 10% better than Borderlands 2.  They even snuck some bizarre, little, hunchback, Jew character into the game that randomly uses the word "schlep" every two seconds.  Most fun games nowadays are just not AAA titles.  The last AAA game I played that was decent or better was probably Dragon Age 3.  Otherwise, the two best games of recent memory are King's Bounty and Metro 2033 redux.

Thx, V8