Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com
Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 92. (Read 26710773 times)
December 16, 2024, 09:01:14 PM
December 16, 2024, 08:35:50 PM
Treasury plans to fund $200 billion for Bitcoin reserves.
https://cryptoslate.com/donald-trump-reportedly-plans-to-leverage-us-treasury-over-200b-fund-for-bitcoin-reserves/
December 16, 2024, 08:32:23 PM
My number is around that one too.
Like one of the answers I'm already having trouble getting to the office before 10AM, or getting there at all. Fortunately I can work from home last minute.
If you are approaching f. u. level be careful you do not want to pull the
trigger and do it in one shot.
Shave a bit off at a time.
Oh I would only sell enough to last 2-3 years at most. Confident in the price still going up, and if I end up totally wrong, well I would still be able to work again. Then I would probably build a plan to shave off at certain other numbers and put that into other investments to edge my bet.
December 16, 2024, 08:29:54 PM
OT: Google's quantum computer.
https://techcrunch.com/2024/12/10/google-says-its-new-quantum-chip-indicates-that-multiple-universes-exist/
and
https://blog.google/technology/research/google-willow-quantum-chip/
The logic of this is difficult to follow for me: they claim that the fact that their quantum computer is so much faster than the regular computer (does something in 5min that "regular"supercomputer can only do in 10^25 years, which is roughly 1 million billion times longer than our Universe existed somehow indicates that the quantum computer uses parallel universes to do the calculations. This just does not seem right to me.
However, I can imagine the quantum computer "spawning" those universes, maybe virtually, to "help" it's calculations.
Otherwise, it is not clear to me how it managed to link up with those preexisting universes as there is nothing there that one might consider an interface.
I read the D. Deutsch book, but the argument there was just as unclear. Perhaps, I am just not getting it.
https://techcrunch.com/2024/12/10/google-says-its-new-quantum-chip-indicates-that-multiple-universes-exist/
and
https://blog.google/technology/research/google-willow-quantum-chip/
Quote
Willow’s performance on this benchmark is astonishing: It performed a computation in under five minutes that would take one of today’s fastest supercomputers 1025 or 10 septillion years. If you want to write it out, it’s 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years. This mind-boggling number exceeds known timescales in physics and vastly exceeds the age of the universe. It lends credence to the notion that quantum computation occurs in many parallel universes, in line with the idea that we live in a multiverse, a prediction first made by David Deutsch.
The logic of this is difficult to follow for me: they claim that the fact that their quantum computer is so much faster than the regular computer (does something in 5min that "regular"supercomputer can only do in 10^25 years, which is roughly 1 million billion times longer than our Universe existed somehow indicates that the quantum computer uses parallel universes to do the calculations. This just does not seem right to me.
However, I can imagine the quantum computer "spawning" those universes, maybe virtually, to "help" it's calculations.
Otherwise, it is not clear to me how it managed to link up with those preexisting universes as there is nothing there that one might consider an interface.
I read the D. Deutsch book, but the argument there was just as unclear. Perhaps, I am just not getting it.
A related video by Sabine Hossenfelder:
Did Google's Quantum Computer Find Evidence for the Multiverse?
I've not read or watched any of that latest news but such announcements about a quantum computer having done something quickly that a normal computer would take ages to do are always very misleading. Because quantum computers are used to find results that you wouldn't even try on a normal computer. At the same time the quantum computer will be unable to compute something your smartphone will figure out easily. It's a bit like comparing a computer and a human brain if I can use an analogy that will speak to people.
December 16, 2024, 08:24:44 PM
My number is around that one too.
Like one of the answers I'm already having trouble getting to the office before 10AM, or getting there at all. Fortunately I can work from home last minute.
If you are approaching f. u. level be careful you do not want to pull the
trigger and do it in one shot.
Shave a bit off at a time.
December 16, 2024, 08:19:27 PM
My number is around that one too.
Like one of the answers I'm already having trouble getting to the office before 10AM, or getting there at all. Fortunately I can work from home last minute.
December 16, 2024, 08:01:14 PM
December 16, 2024, 07:01:17 PM
December 16, 2024, 06:01:13 PM
December 16, 2024, 05:43:39 PM
some of these huge new ATH numbers just casually tossed out around here would make satoshi proud
ngl enjoying this much
thank you again satoshi
Who knows he would be watching how the market is flying, dancing round in his seating room with kids and wife. Saying "we made it".ngl enjoying this much
thank you again satoshi
Just today two different ATH has been created. Hodl tight!
December 16, 2024, 05:38:28 PM
I already have so much extra cash just from small sales on the way up
Remarkable result, given the 0.63BTC you may or may not have.
December 16, 2024, 05:34:19 PM
What if....if Trump Bitcoin reserve allocation will indeed happening as a result the price will moon upwards $500,000+ in 2025. 
we'd have a run-up like back in the days. Last cycle's was was broken by shitcoiner Musk and the Chinese mining banGet out of here guys, and we can describe a variety of reasons for price swings and even over exuberance in the sense that if we have various frauds going on in the market too that caused a downward cascade of contagions once some of those started to fall.. so who really can identify any one point and if the BTC price should have had kept going up when we found out about cascading issues when they started to come down.
It seems like Terra Luna kind of started the cascading, but there was also artificial prop coming from how 3 arrows capital and some of those were trading on the premium GBTC, that turned into a discount.. and then all of a sudden everyone was fucked.. since many were depending on that trade in order to offer their various outrageous and guaranteed yield products... with Celsius, Voyager, Blockfi,.. and surely the cascade of those contributed to the FTX/Alameda fall (after SBF was going to save all of the fledgling businesses first).
What are you going to do at or around your seemingly modest target?
About a week and a half ago, I had already gone through a process of figuring out and then setting my sell orders after $150k and then up to around $450k, and sure I may have had been cheating a little bit since I had already outlined a tentative plan earlier in 2024, but then I thought that I could sleep on the tentative plan until BTC prices started getting closer to $100k, and so we kind of got stuck without getting too much closer to $100k, but then by December 4th / December 5th, my sell orders up to $150k started to seem quite scarce and as if they could easily fill and then catch me off guard without having any sell orders on the books.. so I did not want that.
Anyhow, it feels a bit better to have the numbers in place, and yeah, each time we get into these price discovery areas there are some disorienting aspects and at the same time some grounding that comes from making the readjustments.. like $100k is our new floor or something like that... even though sure, the floor could be pierced, but $100k becomes a new Schelling point... in which it seems more likely that we are going to Schell (if that's a word?) above rather than below the Schelling point.
Without giving too much away, I’m going to take what I deem as a lot of money out between $140,000 - $200,000. I still remember being deluded in 2016 and 2017 as a moon boy, thinking it would keep going up which led to me selling nothing. The ensuing bear market was tough because I had a lot of regrets. I said then, that would not happen to me again.About a week and a half ago, I had already gone through a process of figuring out and then setting my sell orders after $150k and then up to around $450k, and sure I may have had been cheating a little bit since I had already outlined a tentative plan earlier in 2024, but then I thought that I could sleep on the tentative plan until BTC prices started getting closer to $100k, and so we kind of got stuck without getting too much closer to $100k, but then by December 4th / December 5th, my sell orders up to $150k started to seem quite scarce and as if they could easily fill and then catch me off guard without having any sell orders on the books.. so I did not want that.
Anyhow, it feels a bit better to have the numbers in place, and yeah, each time we get into these price discovery areas there are some disorienting aspects and at the same time some grounding that comes from making the readjustments.. like $100k is our new floor or something like that... even though sure, the floor could be pierced, but $100k becomes a new Schelling point... in which it seems more likely that we are going to Schell (if that's a word?) above rather than below the Schelling point.
If the price continues to rise past $200,000 and we end up in some type of super cycle I will just sell more as we go up. Absolute maximum % of the current stash I am willing to sell is 50% this cycle but in all likelihood it will be 25% or thereabouts.
Obviously the plan will be to buy as much back as possible in the inevitable bear market that follows in 2026/27.
Fair enough. 50% would seem outrageous to me, and even 25% seems high, but I suppose you have to do what you have to do. I already have so much extra cash just from small sales on the way up (even here and even moreso I expect as we go.. which I can already see the projections), so I have a hard time imagining selling even more than I have, which still amounts to way less than 25%.. and probably amounts to less than just a few percent with the projected sales that I have all the way up to $450k, even though I can appreciate the inclination to sell some large chunks... and surely I have to figure out some ways to spend more money.. without causing too much work for myself.
These days, even if we get ups and downs all over the place, it seems that if we are getting to a place that if we end up getting crashes all the way back down to $100k then it does not even feel bad to sell some at the crash points, except my system already allows that I would be selling on the way up, so why would there be a need to sell at the bottom, unless I run out of money to buy BTC.. but it seems that the more the BTC price goes up (which was the historical case too) the more difficult it becomes to run out of cash..
just like it probably did not feel too bad for the guys who had average costs of below $100 per coin to be selling some of their coin around $20k in 2022.. in the event that they migh have had ended up in such a situation.. ... .. Sure, no one wants to sell the bottom rather than the top, but if some of us might end up getting to be so far in profits, then shaving off some extra cornz at various points along the way does not really make much of a difference if it happens to be at a mere 100x in profits rather than doing some of the shaving at 1,000x in profits or some number in between those amounts.. .. ..like whining in such a way that I only got 186x profits rather than I could have had gotten 342x profits.. . Don't get me wrong..since I might be talking a wee bit hypothetical about some of those levels of profits, since my own portfolio is only right around 106x in profits at the moment.. so it is not as BIG as the numbers that I am hypothetically describing.. which is one of the nice things about using $1k as an average cost per coin roundening.
What if....if Trump Bitcoin reserve allocation will indeed happening as a result the price will moon upwards $500,000+ in 2025.
we'd have a run-up like back in the days. Last cycle's was was broken by shitcoiner Musk and the Chinese mining banthat would mean we top 1.5 million next dec 2025
Even though there is a law of large numbers at play, what you say is not out of the realm of possible, but it is probably still around less than 9%-ish odds that we get more than $1 million this cycle. I must admit that my numbers could be wrong, too, since there are a lot of decently UPpity price pressure factors working in favor of dee cornz, at the moment though.
December 16, 2024, 05:31:49 PM
What are you going to do at or around your seemingly modest target?
About a week and a half ago, I had already gone through a process of figuring out and then setting my sell orders after $150k and then up to around $450k, and sure I may have had been cheating a little bit since I had already outlined a tentative plan earlier in 2024, but then I thought that I could sleep on the tentative plan until BTC prices started getting closer to $100k, and so we kind of got stuck without getting too much closer to $100k, but then by December 4th / December 5th, my sell orders up to $150k started to seem quite scarce and as if they could easily fill and then catch me off guard without having any sell orders on the books.. so I did not want that.
Anyhow, it feels a bit better to have the numbers in place, and yeah, each time we get into these price discovery areas there are some disorienting aspects and at the same time some grounding that comes from making the readjustments.. like $100k is our new floor or something like that... even though sure, the floor could be pierced, but $100k becomes a new Schelling point... in which it seems more likely that we are going to Schell (if that's a word?) above rather than below the Schelling point.
About a week and a half ago, I had already gone through a process of figuring out and then setting my sell orders after $150k and then up to around $450k, and sure I may have had been cheating a little bit since I had already outlined a tentative plan earlier in 2024, but then I thought that I could sleep on the tentative plan until BTC prices started getting closer to $100k, and so we kind of got stuck without getting too much closer to $100k, but then by December 4th / December 5th, my sell orders up to $150k started to seem quite scarce and as if they could easily fill and then catch me off guard without having any sell orders on the books.. so I did not want that.
Anyhow, it feels a bit better to have the numbers in place, and yeah, each time we get into these price discovery areas there are some disorienting aspects and at the same time some grounding that comes from making the readjustments.. like $100k is our new floor or something like that... even though sure, the floor could be pierced, but $100k becomes a new Schelling point... in which it seems more likely that we are going to Schell (if that's a word?) above rather than below the Schelling point.
Without giving too much away, I’m going to take what I deem as a lot of money out between $140,000 - $200,000. I still remember being deluded in 2016 and 2017 as a moon boy, thinking it would keep going up which led to me selling nothing. The ensuing bear market was tough because I had a lot of regrets. I said then, that would not happen to me again.
If the price continues to rise past $200,000 and we end up in some type of super cycle I will just sell more as we go up. Absolute maximum % of the current stash I am willing to sell is 50% this cycle but in all likelihood it will be 25% or thereabouts.
Obviously the plan will be to buy as much back as possible in the inevitable bear market that follows in 2026/27.
Good plan. Every time I sell (not this cycle so far), it goes up, though.
In fact, anything I sell in significant volume, goes up afterwards, so I kind of developed a sell "PTSD".
216K sounded cool to me before, but with all this new developments, I just don't know.
I don't believe 17x from prior high is likely this cycle, but it is not impossible.
Maybe, play it by the "ear"?
December 16, 2024, 05:31:31 PM
we ran up about 17x from jan 2017 to dec 2017
that would mean we top 1.5 million next dec 2025
that would mean we top 1.5 million next dec 2025
I don't think it scales that way. It can do that while the money needed to move the market cap is so little as to be negligible. Double 1 million, it's 2 millions. Or even a few millions - almost no sweat. Now, double a dozen of times and you get into several billions. Now the whole thing changes, because there's only so much the average Joe can do.
It's similar to the physics of pendulum motion. The famous result about isochronous oscillations - that is, the time duration of a pendulum swing is independent of the displacement - only works when we can assume the displacement x small enough: such that x/sin(x) ~ 1. As soon as the money needed goes beyond a certain order of magnitude (that is, when the pendulum swings are wider, as in over 0.1 radians ~ 6 degrees), isochronism doesn't hold anymore. And proportionality of our number movement won't scale anymore.
Another way to look at it is that perpetual exponential growth cannot be sustained in a closed system. There's a lid somewhere, and any exponentially growing quantity (such as btc number under unform rate of growth) is bound to hit it.
This doesn't mean number can't go up for a very long time. It only means it can't keep on going up at a constant rate for a long time. The rate of growth must decrease.
December 16, 2024, 05:14:52 PM
What if....if Trump Bitcoin reserve allocation will indeed happening as a result the price will moon upwards $500,000+ in 2025.
we'd have a run-up like back in the days. Last cycle's was was broken by shitcoiner Musk and the Chinese mining banAgain: don't forget Gensler hamstringing spot ETFs. I blame him and nasty senile Biden.
we ran up about 17x from jan 2017 to dec 2017
that would mean we top 1.5 million next dec 2025
December 16, 2024, 05:11:31 PM
What are you going to do at or around your seemingly modest target?
About a week and a half ago, I had already gone through a process of figuring out and then setting my sell orders after $150k and then up to around $450k, and sure I may have had been cheating a little bit since I had already outlined a tentative plan earlier in 2024, but then I thought that I could sleep on the tentative plan until BTC prices started getting closer to $100k, and so we kind of got stuck without getting too much closer to $100k, but then by December 4th / December 5th, my sell orders up to $150k started to seem quite scarce and as if they could easily fill and then catch me off guard without having any sell orders on the books.. so I did not want that.
Anyhow, it feels a bit better to have the numbers in place, and yeah, each time we get into these price discovery areas there are some disorienting aspects and at the same time some grounding that comes from making the readjustments.. like $100k is our new floor or something like that... even though sure, the floor could be pierced, but $100k becomes a new Schelling point... in which it seems more likely that we are going to Schell (if that's a word?) above rather than below the Schelling point.
About a week and a half ago, I had already gone through a process of figuring out and then setting my sell orders after $150k and then up to around $450k, and sure I may have had been cheating a little bit since I had already outlined a tentative plan earlier in 2024, but then I thought that I could sleep on the tentative plan until BTC prices started getting closer to $100k, and so we kind of got stuck without getting too much closer to $100k, but then by December 4th / December 5th, my sell orders up to $150k started to seem quite scarce and as if they could easily fill and then catch me off guard without having any sell orders on the books.. so I did not want that.
Anyhow, it feels a bit better to have the numbers in place, and yeah, each time we get into these price discovery areas there are some disorienting aspects and at the same time some grounding that comes from making the readjustments.. like $100k is our new floor or something like that... even though sure, the floor could be pierced, but $100k becomes a new Schelling point... in which it seems more likely that we are going to Schell (if that's a word?) above rather than below the Schelling point.
Without giving too much away, I’m going to take what I deem as a lot of money out between $140,000 - $200,000. I still remember being deluded in 2016 and 2017 as a moon boy, thinking it would keep going up which led to me selling nothing. The ensuing bear market was tough because I had a lot of regrets. I said then, that would not happen to me again.
If the price continues to rise past $200,000 and we end up in some type of super cycle I will just sell more as we go up. Absolute maximum % of the current stash I am willing to sell is 50% this cycle but in all likelihood it will be 25% or thereabouts.
Obviously the plan will be to buy as much back as possible in the inevitable bear market that follows in 2026/27.
December 16, 2024, 05:01:14 PM
December 16, 2024, 04:49:54 PM
Are we unpoor now?
https://yuizen.cqree.jp/premium/index
https://www.kurumesi-bentou.com/ranking/tokyo/1500-3499/
Oishisou!
Reasonable prices too. Could be thought of as extra luxury ramen (kind of that $$ category I mean).
I doubt they ship abroad though.
Indeed, the prices are really low for what you get. That goes for most services in Japan. Always great cost/performance!
December 16, 2024, 04:16:29 PM
What if....if Trump Bitcoin reserve allocation will indeed happening as a result the price will moon upwards $500,000+ in 2025.
we'd have a run-up like back in the days. Last cycle's was was broken by shitcoiner Musk and the Chinese mining banAgain: don't forget Gensler hamstringing spot ETFs. I blame him and nasty senile Biden.
December 16, 2024, 04:08:12 PM
OT: Google's quantum computer.
https://techcrunch.com/2024/12/10/google-says-its-new-quantum-chip-indicates-that-multiple-universes-exist/
and
https://blog.google/technology/research/google-willow-quantum-chip/
The logic of this is difficult to follow for me: they claim that the fact that their quantum computer is so much faster than the regular computer (does something in 5min that "regular"supercomputer can only do in 10^25 years, which is roughly 1 million billion times longer than our Universe existed somehow indicates that the quantum computer uses parallel universes to do the calculations. This just does not seem right to me.
However, I can imagine the quantum computer "spawning" those universes, maybe virtually, to "help" it's calculations.
Otherwise, it is not clear to me how it managed to link up with those preexisting universes as there is nothing there that one might consider an interface.
I read the D. Deutsch book, but the argument there was just as unclear. Perhaps, I am just not getting it.
https://techcrunch.com/2024/12/10/google-says-its-new-quantum-chip-indicates-that-multiple-universes-exist/
and
https://blog.google/technology/research/google-willow-quantum-chip/
Quote
Willow’s performance on this benchmark is astonishing: It performed a computation in under five minutes that would take one of today’s fastest supercomputers 1025 or 10 septillion years. If you want to write it out, it’s 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years. This mind-boggling number exceeds known timescales in physics and vastly exceeds the age of the universe. It lends credence to the notion that quantum computation occurs in many parallel universes, in line with the idea that we live in a multiverse, a prediction first made by David Deutsch.
The logic of this is difficult to follow for me: they claim that the fact that their quantum computer is so much faster than the regular computer (does something in 5min that "regular"supercomputer can only do in 10^25 years, which is roughly 1 million billion times longer than our Universe existed somehow indicates that the quantum computer uses parallel universes to do the calculations. This just does not seem right to me.
However, I can imagine the quantum computer "spawning" those universes, maybe virtually, to "help" it's calculations.
Otherwise, it is not clear to me how it managed to link up with those preexisting universes as there is nothing there that one might consider an interface.
I read the D. Deutsch book, but the argument there was just as unclear. Perhaps, I am just not getting it.
A related video by Sabine Hossenfelder:
Did Google's Quantum Computer Find Evidence for the Multiverse?
Jump to: