Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 9406. (Read 26710226 times)

Roger's character and integrity does come into question, in part because the frequently emotional dumbass takes matters personal and makes matters personal.  Therefore, his history is relevant and likely sheds some light  on his character and integrity.

On the other hand, it is possible that Roger was more sane in his youth and has become more pickled in his older age.  Cannot turn a pickle back into a cucumber, for whatever that is worth?

You seem to be presuming that these postulated coins will actually be cryptocurrencies, as per accepted definitions. Definitely not a foregone conclusion.

I'm not so sure. I'm not going spelunking through the entire trial transcript. But from the sentencing, it appears that the term 'pipe bomb' appears only once. To wit:

"I think one factor that the Court can take into consideration or at least should consider is there were some pipe bombs involved in this case as well that were not charged and are not incorporated in the conduct that's before the Court..."
(emphasis added)

To me, this looks as if the matter of any pipe bombs were never even discussed in trial -- no evidence entered, no testimony revealing, etc -- and that the prosecution was allowed to get a sideswipe freebie in unchallenged.

Of course, 'pipe bomb' is a pretty specific term of art. I'd be curious to know what the legal definition of such was -- if indeed any evidence referring to such was ever entered into trial. But it apparently was not.

Until someone points me at anything within the trial transcript itself indicating evidence of dealing in pipe bombs, I'm inclined to accept Roger at his word.

As a sidebar, I find it kind of funny how this here crypto community is absorbed by long-past actions of various parties that have absolutely nothing to do with any crypto topic whatsoever.

Did somebody say free stuff?

Jeebus Cripes. So much wrong, I hardly know where to start. Let's try.


While Yang being crypto-friendly is cool and all, the balance of his insanity makes this 'surge in popularity' the antithesis of 'good news'.


Ohkaaaayy....
ThatWordYouKeepUsingItIDon'tThinkItMeansWhatYouThinkItMeans.png


Thereby demonstrating once again that the easiest way to garner mindshare is to throw money at the people, never matter the true cost. Never underestimate the stupidity of the mob.


*cough* bullshit squared. Most crypto enthusiasts are too smart to not be repelled by this inane pandering.

What's dumb is he took the opportunity to say nothing new. He just regurgitated the same tired talking points he's been yammering on about for the last 3 years. It's almost as if he is completely unaffected by Bcash's dismal failure as compared to BTC. He wants to pretend Bcash is cash while Bitcoin is not because it has lower fees. That's dumb.

If he wants to get technical about it, actual peer-to-peer cash transactions have zero fees, which renders EOS even more bitcoiny than bcash, according to his scale.

If he wants to get super technical about it, no bitcoin system is actually "peer to peer" since each transaction must be broadcast to the entire network and validated by miners before moving from one peer to the next. The Lightning Network is much closer to a "peer to peer" interaction than Bitcoin, or Bcash for that matter.

People always ask me some derivative of this question, so let's set the record straight.  Bitcoin was never the future or a sure thing to me.  I always saw it for exactly what it was, a sort of experimental contraption with extremely questionable "decentralization" and poor options for scalability due to the inherent extreme overhead of anything using a blockchain.  Nevertheless, the so called value prospect of Bitcoin was NEVER what it currently is *right now*, it's value proposition was always what it could possibly be some other day in the future.

Where the problem with this arises is, although digital shitcoins are composed of completely arbitrary variables, the number of ways you can create a digital shitcoin are actually very finite; finite enough where anyone with sufficient economic, technical, and even physics knowledge already knows all the possibilities at this point for variables such as 'focal points'.  Once you know all these possibilities, you know it was never even possible to create a decentralized digital currency in the first place - not now, not in the future.

The summary of these focal point systems is that they're mostly just a rehash of governance systems that have already existed for thousands of years.  Hence the existence of things like the 51% attack - it's not an 'attack', it's just a stupid form of democracy.  Why would anyone ever submit their personal finances to be governed by some unaccountable, faceless bureaucracy when you don't even know who the owners are.  And yes, they all turn into a centralized, unelected slum lord govt because proof of work isn't actually 'work'.  No 'work' is being done, all you're doing is putting an ASIC on cruise control and collecting interest then parlaying the profits into more interest generating ASICs, so it's just like any exponential interest system - complete centralization.

If you wanted digital shitcoins to actually be valid and not a retarded exponential interest system that completely centralizes, you would need to create a digital shitcoin that requires humans to physically solve some sort of captcha in a race for blocks.  In that manner you're not generating work-free interest because you can't parallelize your brain to solve thousands of captchas at the same time.  It's inherently restricted to one man, one vote such as the Bitcoin whitepaper fraudulently claims but fails to deliver.

Such a system would just be gamed by weak AI, so it's also completely useless.  Not to mention the fact there's STILL no point whatsoever in submitting your personal finances to an outside governance system by using imaginary, valueless, digital shitcoins with built-in rent seeking middlemen when you don't have to and can just use physical metals instead.

ooooooh

secret club

not Vinny...his days being a "prophet" are officially over since 2017.
I wonder if planB will encounter similar treatment (if price fails to deliver), but maybe not since his opinion was based on numbers, not some made up "influencer" stuff.

Yep, Vinny is one of many douchebags that came sweeping in during a Bitcoin bullrun and suddenly crowned himself a Bitcoin Prophet^TM.

There are others, but I won't waste time listing them. It doesn't matter if they are perma-bulls or short term bullish/bearish, they're all full of fkn shit. NONE of them have a fkn clue what the price action of Bitcoin is going to be tomorrow, next month, or next year.

The fact that they have "followers" that hang on their every word makes me ill.

Big Picture

#Bitcoin dominance is falling
Bitcoin going sideways
ALTs staging local breakouts

Most ALT/$BTC pairs will face 50/100/200 Daily MA Resistance & will keep getting rejected until a major trend reversal

Play local breakouts & book profits against key resistance


Source: https://twitter.com/tradingroomapp/status/1173881560719691776

You are right, Juan.
That Anon meme is only one of the million predictions over there.. We only cherry pick the one thats semi accurate, and make fun with it.
But truth must be told.. he was right!! lol 

Attn: Gentlemen of the order of the 21st (you know who you are)

PMs issued - check orders.

Message ends.

Thanks, but we were mostly talking about dynamic changes in inequality.
You cannot explain change by referencing Pareto.
That principle does not explain why in some epoch Gini is 0.35 while in other 0.85
The book at least shows correlation with historical events and even then it is not a proof of the causation, however, it is at least a starting point.

Sidenote...who put a cap on bitcoin? Bizarro.

OT
Released today  

Can't you assign your "team"^tm to crowd sourcing (even within the team) the clarification of the confusion situation?   

FTFY



FTFY

What the fuck?

I gotta spend time fixing peeps all day long?

Likely a lot of luck in there.

None of us should get sucked into the trap of deifying posters into sorcerers. 

Remember how revered Vinnie Lingham was in 2015/16 and how he squandered such reputation in early 2017? - but probably only after a decent number of folks got R3ckt  by selling because they actually relied on his bullshit early 2017 propositions that bitcoin was going below $500.

You are likely correct, nutildah.  Roger does not come around in order to actual interact.  He wants to pump out his various dumbass talking points and then disappear back to the slums from which he had come.

Yeah.. .let's get in the game of comparing the relative shit-worthiness of shitcoins.  That sounds like a great topic for this thread.   

In my thinking the mere fact that you are trying to make more bitcoin from shitcoins does not cause the topic of shitcoins to become relevant to this thread.