Quote from: Greyhats on December 15, 2023, 10:45:40 PM

Quote from: True Myth on December 15, 2023, 01:12:19 AM

[edited out]

I’m working on a move excel sheet examples to show what I mean using forecast 200 wma(borrowed from jjg fu post). I get it tho to me using this is ultra conservative but would prefer to be in a position of doing better than worse and I think using this there is higher probability of being better off.

I look forward to seeing what you come up with, and my 200-WMA had gotten increasingly more conservative.

Of course, conservative in terms of where the bottom might be is different from trying to figure out where the top might be, even though some folks have tried to use the concept of how many multiples we are above the 200-week moving average in order to try to figure out if the BTC spot price is getting toppie or not.

Regarding the two tops of 2021, we can see that the first BTC spot price top that was nearly $65k got to nearly 6x of the then 200-week moving average that was merely at $11k-ish at the time.. and then the second $69k top was a bit over 4x from the then 200-week moving average which was at $17k at the time. Of course, if we look even further back we will see that the 2017 top of $19,666 would have been close to 16x higher than the then 200-week moving average of $1,240... .. so it can really be difficult to figure out if we are toppie yet or not because 4x to 6x might not seem sufficiently toppie as compared to 16x, but still they end up being tops for that particular cycle.

Quote from: Greyhats on December 15, 2023, 10:45:40 PM

Yes tax law changes but my opinion is my stash is small so honestly saving 15% is a lot of me in comparison to my stack. If I was 10x my stack I wouldn’t care so much tbh. It’s all about being realistic too I have some hopium projections too but I just can’t even fathom these being realistic.

There is a bit of irony how some of us might start to become quite flippant about throwing money around when our BTC stash goes up so many multitudes and even magnitudes. .. It could be something like.. I want to do x (related to some bitcoin transaction or transfer - do I sound like a shitcoiner transferring NFTs?), and we find out that it is going to cost a few thousand because we are in a really busy time, but then we will just throw money at it because we may well realize that we are already in 20x or 40x profits or whatever we are doing is going to end up paying for itself in a fairly short period of time.. or maybe our portfolio went up a by more than $50 thousand in the past 3 hours.

Quote from: Greyhats on December 15, 2023, 10:45:40 PM

Should have something up Monday or Tuesday night even create my first thread on this topic.

Want feedback on it help make it better

maybe it helps someone who knows

Hopefully you can provide a link here.. or where ever else you believe that you might get people to link to your thread (or your post).

Quote from: kurious on December 15, 2023, 11:27:32 PM

Quote from: JimboToronto on December 15, 2023, 05:22:31 PM

Quote from: Biodom on December 15, 2023, 08:16:41 AM

Quote from: Hueristic on December 15, 2023, 02:15:17 AM

No-one ever swapped the firmware on my paper wallet.

Attack surfaces:
1. Flood (that one we had and more than once)
2. Nosy gf/wife that likes to "tidy" things up...can't happen

3. Fire
4. Something falling on the house, like a tree (impossible, right?), causing rain to wash away or soak the paper.
6. Forgetting where you put it..or if BIP 38, forgetting the password.

That said, I might have agreed a bit more if you delineated how you are circumventing the above...yes, it is doable, but require some trust in those who would hold potential copies, maybe.

A "paper" wallet isn't necessarily paper nor a wallet in the sense of funds going in and out of it on an ongoing basis. It is just an address.

It is simply two alphanumeric strings, one public key and one private key. The only security consideration is how these addresses are created and stored.

Strings can be split into sections and stored in different locations or media. They can additionally be encrypted or passworded/phrased.. They should only be created offline on a computer which cannot be connected to the internet. Protecting those private keys is paramount. Private keys should only be used once and then new addresses created.

So simple, so secure.

Hi Jimbo, I have always used paper wallets, created offline, laminated and intended for single use. I make 2 copies which are each stored in 2 separate fireproof safes placed in two locations not in my home. When I want to access them, I can. If one location is destroyed, I can still access the funds. If I die, trusted members of my family have key access to the safes to recover funds. Simple and secure enough for me.

I like the idea of 2 copies, but I also like the additional step of dividing the keys into at least a couple of parts and they would not necessarily need to be in a fire proof safe because one part is not sufficient to access the wallet.. I actually personally like three parts since I think that any one part of three is more difficult to figure out as compared with one part of two, and surely if you know about your two locations in which your various key parts are kept, then you would be able to know if they have been damaged or destroyed, but of course, you still might need to check on them once a year or maybe more frequently. Surely one of the problems of having the whole key in a safe is your security is ONLY as good as the safe, and maybe that might be o.k. (acceptable) for $100k or less, but if you start getting into higher numbers, then you might wonder.. and surely some security set up might be o.k. for $60-$80k, but then like in 2017, the BTC price went up around 78x, and even in 2021, we got around 16x price appreciation, which even with a 10x price appreciation, $60-$80k then becomes worth $600k to $800k, so the security level needs to feel comfortable for that new higher level of value.

Quote from: OgNasty on Today at 12:24:26 AM

Quote from: Torque on December 15, 2023, 05:45:31 PM

[edited out]

This is indeed a big deal but it’ll be another year before it goes into effect so the timing of it being announced right before the ETF approval doesn’t mean much. What it does mean is that a perfect storm is once again brewing for the 4 year ATH to get set in mid/late 2025. Exciting for people who are already happy with the $40K price.

I already responded to the ideas of this post, and it appears that the accounting requirements are mandatory to follow after December 15, 2024, yet they are already optional to follow, which there does not seem to be too many reasons that public companies would not start following the new rules prior to December 15, 2024... including starting to follow them right away.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on December 15, 2023, 06:11:57 PM

Quote from: Torque on December 15, 2023, 05:45:31 PM

Corporations will now be able to report btc gains on their asset if they hold it, pumping their overall stock price value for EOY reporting.

Funny how a major barrier to corporate bitcoin holding adoption is changed right before the coming Bitcoin ETF approvals?

What amazing timing! I'm shocked, shocked I tells ya! /s Roll Eyes

https://twitter.com/davidmarcus/status/1734974716505649531

I think that part of my response (shown/linked below) in fillippone's "Micheal Salyor decalogue for a 10x Bitcoin Appreciation" thread also highlights an important part that public companies are allowed to implement the rule earlier than the December 15, 2024 mandate in which they have to use the new preferrable accounting rule.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on December 15, 2023, 04:20:16 PM

Quote from: fillippone on December 15, 2023, 03:17:20 PM

Finally, as the news was much anticipated, the FASB amended the accounting rules companies must follow when adding Digital assets on their balance sheets.

Standards Board Approves Long-Sought Change in Crypto Accounting Rules

Quote

Under current rules, companies have to record cryptocurrency holdings at their original cost and then write them down as an "impairment charge" if the value drops below cost—but cannot mark them up if the price rises. This method has drawn criticism for only reflecting one side of value changes.

The new FASB rules will require companies to account for digital assets at fair market value, capturing frequent price fluctuations. Gains and losses will flow through the income statement.

Having a mark to market pricing approach means the price discovery of the asset is efficient, meaning that the asset class is investable. Current standards actually tried to prevent swings in balance sheets trough a very cautious approach, that on the other hands potentially could lead to swings upon investment unwind.
This new rules is much more informative of the true value of the investment in the balance sheet, making it more transparent to the investor.

New rules will come in effect from 2025, but companies can anticipate the rule in 2024.

I think that the below statement from the article more clearly states what you might have been wanting to say in your last sentence.

Quote

All public companies and private companies will need to apply the new rules, with an effective date for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2024. Earlier adoption is permitted.

Essentially public companies have to apply the new rules after December 15, 2024, but they are allowed to adopt and apply the new rules earlier.. which likely means that any public company that holds significant amounts of bitcoin may well already be wanting to apply the new rules to any reports that they make about their companies finances from here on out (because they can and because the new rule is better and more accurate in terms of showing actual value as compared with the old rule).