Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 9682. (Read 26609452 times)

Hm?  Maybe you are correct, perhaps? and maybe the employment of such systems might work for some users?  You are suggesting that it is simple, and I know that d_eddie seems to talk about his strategies in the use of those kinds of tools, too.  I suppose I am not opposed about members learning various techniques that might work, and I believe that I tout out basic techniques that don't really use those kinds of tools, so even if those tools might be helpful, they might not be necessary and could cause some members to attempt to put their BTC at risk when they would have been safer by just employing more simple tried and true accumulation strategies such as dollar cost averaging, buying on dips and HODL.

I personally have been suggesting that the next more sophisticated step is to start to sell small amounts on the way up in order to use that money to buy back in the event of a dip.  Using leverage is even a more advanced strategy, which part of my point was to say that it is a bit more advanced, and I think that I continue to remain correct about it being a more advanced strategy than what I am suggesting to be good enough to make some peeps richie... under consistent and persistent strategies to dollar  cost average buy, buy on dips and hodl.. and more sophisticated would be selling small amounts on the way up, after they have largely already reached their baseline accumulation goals.

Still short term bearish. Id say fight me   but I dont really feel like posting much unless im short and long term bullish.

I will say 4900 is pretty extreme, its more like a floor I dont see us going under. 7-8k would be a more reasonable outcome imo, but this is Bitcoin and shit happens.  I think people shouldnt cry if 4900 is reached bc its still very bullish as a higher low than 3100 of Dec. 15.

China Could Be About To Throw Its Weight Behind #Bitcoin

https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.forbes.com/sites/billybambrough/2019/07/29/china-could-be-about-to-throw-its-weight-behind-bitcoin/amp/

https://twitter.com/xentagz/status/1155956658557739009?s=21

Bullish? China pump BTC instead of ban BTC?

Have to add I'm deeply disappointed with Lambie lately. He was a permabull when he first appeared but it seems he has turned into a bear now. What is more alarming he started posting his bearish prophecies of the so-called "one last dump before up" theory and now this $4900 bottom post. I'm worried that's a way how most beartrolls earn their merits and post count (also respect from other members) - post bullish things first, turning into bears later. So guys be smart, think twice! We're getting surrounded by werewolves.      

Incidentally, it is working splendidly so far.

Summary
Although BSV and BCH have some of the desirable features of a medium of exchange asset, like low transaction fees, this has not yet led to a large increase in activity as compared to BTC. Both BCH and BSV still only have a small fraction of the usage of BTC when measured by metrics like adjusted transfer value and active addresses.

Furthermore, BSV and BCH are increasingly being used as ways to store data on chain (often without an associated economic transaction), and not as a medium of exchange. BSV, in particular, is predominantly being used as a way to record data on-chain, with over 94% of transactions containing OP_RETURN, a majority of which come from a single weather application. BSV may ultimately be used as a data storage blockchain, likely due to their removal of the size restriction on OP_RETURN transactions.

Additionally, although both BCH and BSV have larger maximum block sizes than BTC, they have not yet utilized that extra space. For the most part, BCH and BSV’s daily average block size has remained well below BTC’s 1MB average.

Both BSV and BCH have had blocks that have exceeded BTC’s maximum blocks. BSV blocks, in particular, are increasingly being filled by OP_RETURN transactions. BSV and BCH’s increased block size may become a factor if either gain adoption as a data storage blockchain. But it does not appear to currently be a factor in terms of being used as a medium of exchange.

Additionally, BTC currently has a big lead over BCH and BSV in the four metrics we used to measure security. BTC has over 95% of the hash rate market share (amongst BTC, BCH, and BSV) as of July, 2019.

BTC also dominates in terms of daily mining revenue. BTC has over 30 and 60 times more daily mining revenue than BCH and BSV, respectively. This will become even more of an issue as block rewards continue to halve, as BCH and BSV’s total transaction fees are negligible compared to BTC’s.

We also found that if BTC miners were to theoretically attack BCH they could rewrite ten days of the blockchain in 7 hours. If they were instead to attack BSV, they could rewrite it in 3 hours.

As of now, BCH and BSV are not gaining real usage over BTC as a medium of exchange, and are not utilizing their larger block sizes. BTC also remains a much more secure blockchain than both BCH and BSV. It remains to be seen whether BCH and BSV can take more of BTC’s market share moving forward.

Missing r0ach... I absolutely need to have a dose of Schelling Point, Exter's Pyramid, Nash Equilibrium, Kalergi Plan, Daily Stormer... And, oh man, how I really, REALLY need to hear the "designed to centralize" line

Call for? No. Allow for? Yes.

Remember - permissionless.

That's what she said

kinda droopy looking...

FUCKING SHIT IF YOU ARE GOING TO GO UP GO UP ALREADY AND MAKE ME RICH FFS

IF YOU ARE GOING TO GO DOWN GO FUCKIN DOWN SO I CAN BUY MORE

...and i thought $5k was bad.

Getting stuck at $9-10k feels so disgusting. Don't want to buy many because dunno if it is going to go up sharply or go down and create more buy opportunities.

Sorry for caps, i lost myself a bit.

Just wanted to shout. 

Other than the fact that Satoshi's original release had no set limit on block size. Well, there is that.

I would argue that the 32MB limit was not a protocol limit, but rather an implementation limit on any network message that would be generated by the client.

Maybe when BTC gets near 32MB blocks it might become relevant.

Seems they took advantage of very low transaction fees.

BTW Croach, do you know how much will cost sending 66 tons of gold from your seller to attic ?  

Good questions. The shills from the BSV camp want bitcoin to be a centralized, corporate tool. This is one of the reasons people dont believe CSW is Satoshi.

When i see this kind of discussion there only one things that comes into mind.
the always relevant XKCD:



https://xkcd.com/936/

If you check your password into this site, well, they are pretty secure apparently

https://howsecureismypassword.net/

(no, CorrectHorseBatteryStaple is not secure, actually)

That is only partly correct.

So you can go 1x or lower leverage and actually use your BTC as collateral to buy more BTC or hedge against a BTC/USD drop.

It is actually VERY safe to do, if you understand what you are doing.

And to be honest i would advise every single one of you to actually inform yourself about it and try it out.

You will be able to quite safely preserve your USD value while being able to increase your BTC stack without being forced to add additional fiat.

Of course this is not for free, hedging or betting wrong has always a cost, but you have to accept this possible loss and can minimize it with proper risk managment.