Ok.  Just a few minutes ago, I paid through the second route.  I engaged in copy and paste of the invoice that you provided, and I got several errors before I was able to figure out a way for Phoenix (the wallet that I used for this transaction) to be able to recognize the invoice, which the app was saying: "this does not appear to be a lightning invoice".. so in my trouble shooting the matter, I saw that somewhere along the way, there were something like 4 extra spaces that ended up getting put into the invoice  that you had sent to me or the way that I had received it through my copy and paste - somewhere along the way, so when I took out those extra spaces (probably considered soft carriage returns), then my phoenix wallet was able to recognize the invoice so that I could pay it.

I will note a couple of things. 

1st.  I had mentioned PM in regards to making payments which I think is a better practice, especially in regards to OP sec, and perhaps even in regards to lesser of a need to be public about the potential back and forth difficulties that can play out through paying... that maybe we don't need to do within a thread like this.. because ultimately the question may only be whether the payment was received or not, rather than publicly discussing the process and/or maybe various barriers of how the payment was carried out.. or those kinds of minuscule matters.

2nd.  I am not sure what kind of a lightning wallet that you are using, and I am not sure if it is necessary to disclose, yet many times the lightning wallets will allow the production of a QR code, and that way we might get away from the copy and paste issues.  I know some wallets can also scan the invoice in its alphanumeric form and figure it out, but I am not sure if Phoenix can do that.. I tried to scan the invoice after I took out the spaces and even with the corrected invoice, Phoenix does not seem to be able to scan an alphanumeric format.

You can do what you like in regards to making an onchain payment to Chartbuddy, yet I cannot consider purposeful use of onchain payments for such low transactions amounts to be justifiable - especially if there are other options to still use bitcoin, but maybe on a second or a third layer as already discussed, including my stating my preference to not be fucking around with such small amounts on chain, especially if we might be able to figure out other options.. not trying to be against making direct bitcoin transactions, but instead attempting to be practical. 

As I think I already mentioned, in recent times, I also don't like the idea of sending payments under $100 onchain, and I would try to process for lower fees, and so the minimum fees have been fluctuating between 40 and 60 sats per vbyte - even though I do see some scattered blocks in the 20 sats per vbyte and the most recent block had fees as low as 17 sats per vbyte... but even attempting to process a transaction for around 20 sats per vbyt is going to cost around $1.74, and it may even take several days before it goes through - depending on what fees do in the immediate future, and then once it is received on the other end, then there may well be fees on that side too, but then we cannot know when the other side is going to end up attempting (or needing/wanting) to process the transaction down the road.

By the way, as a test, I just tried to process the same invoice a second time, just to see what happens, and when I went to paste the invoice into the Phoenix app, I got a notice: "You have already paid this invoice.  Paying it again could result in stolen funds."   So I am not sure if it could get paid more than once by a second person or through a second wallet..

I don't mind paying it.  I think that we were close enough to agreeing.  Yeah, I was annoyed with several aspects of what I perceived to be your waffling, but at least when you set forth the bet terms in a more concrete way,' I mostly found them largely agreeable, even though I was not 100% sure of your commitment to it (since the payment amounts were quite lopsided.. 100 to 1).. which both commitment to the bet and lopsidedness of the bet were a couple of my main motives for suggesting the potential appropriateness of escrow.. .. and anyhow.. as far as paying 0.0001 BTC through lightning network or something like that.. I would not have any problem with such a thing since those are generally not very costly ways of carrying out BTC (or BTC adjacent) transactions - with relatively small amounts, and I actually don't mind practicing with those kinds of payment methods (including that I am still practicing and learning) to see how they work out.

So yeah, sure, prepare to give me a lightning address, whether it is your own address or some other lightning address... and yeah, right now I am not very comfortable with such low amounts being processed on chain.. at least right now and not without the consent of the recipient to receive such a low amount (which might be a little bit lesser of a deal if the amount were sent to an exchange address), but yeah if you are agreeable to using lightning as a substitute payment route then we could probably make that work.. .. yeah if it comes to the actual exchanging of payment information, we most likely could figure out the part of the actual confirmation of the address by PM.. and I am not necessarily going to delay, but I might not be able to pay right away, either.. we have to make sure to coordinate and make sure we are available .. depending on if the lightning network invoice expires or if it is one that does not expire.. .. all good practice, in the use of various bitcoin (or bitcoin-related) payment options, I suppose...

Of course, on my end the amount of the bet is not very much (since it is being framed in terms of a 100 to 1 chances.. so the amount is attempting to reflect that, yet on your end, the amount becomes quite significant, especially in 75-ish days the BTC price could end up in over $100k and your 0.01 BTC amounts to more than $1k dollars.. while currently mine is around $7 and if the BTC price goes down in such a way that I would end up losing the bet, then presumptively it would be less than $7 when I were to pay the bet.  .. so lopsided bets seem to have more justification for escrow.. yet I don't really have any reason to believe that you are not good for it.. since the bet does not really seem that complicated.

As we already mentioned, the odds are surely more likely that I am going to lose, but the amount on each side justifies going into the bet at 99 to 1 odds... and the main point of the bet is that I would be betting that the BTC trade weighted prices through the system of positing of DirtyKeyboard is not going to end up going below

2021-11-09  67482.752117444

prior to that November 9, 2021 date getting pushed off the table.. and yeah, by today there are ONLY 75 days remaining that the trade-weighed price would need to stay above 67482.752117444 in order for November 9, 2021 to get knocked off the top 100 table.

As far as the payment of the beneficiary of the bet in the event that I lose (which is the most likely outcome), all you have to do tertius993 is give me a wallet address and I will pay it whether it is an onchain address or a lighting address, yet I am not going to feel as comfortable paying such a low amount (of 0.0001 BTC) to a regular onchain bitcoin address if there remains such uncertainties with fees.... or if it is going to someone who had not agreed to take it, then they might consider such a low payment amount as a kind of spam (or a dust attack) unless it is getting sent to some kind of a wallet that the recipient would be sure to be able to manage such small amount in the future.  An exchange address would actually work o.k. for that kind of a purpose, yet I am not sure if there might be some exchanges that don't want to receive dust amounts.. .. but I don't know about any of them providing such minimums.. . .even though I have seen some that have trade minimums (around $5-ish, and those kinds of minimums could change with times too)..

Your framing of such a proposed bet is not very annoying.. and I am thinking that right now it is 76 days remaining, since the number of days has to do with whether the tradeweighted price would fall of the 100 day chart without having any one day below that price.

In regards to your number 6, it would almost be impossible for there to be a tie if we were to use the actual digits of the underlying data,.. since DirtyKeyboard has already shown us that the data does down to around 10 digits or

I will have to think about if I want to agree or propose any changes, but what you are describing seems to be somewhat reasonable and even bettable in the 100 to 1 sentiment... .though I might want a escrow. and DirtyKeyboard might not appreciate receiving dust (of 0.0001 BTC), if I were to lose the bet.

yet originally I said that I thought that it was 10:1 and now I am more in the ballpark of thinking that the odds are getting to be 4:1, but why would I enter a bet in which you got all the surplus especially since you are thinking the odds are 999 to 1?

On the other hand the guy who believes that the odds are less than 1/1000, then he also considers the bet to be good since it is almost like free money since he considers that there is less than 1 time out of 1,000 that he would not end up winning the bet.  I am not sure what makes it so crazy that no one would enter into such bets if that is what they actually believe and they are willing to stand behind it.. It may just be a matter of the amount that ends up getting bet.  .. I mean would you really want to put a whole BTC at risk so that you might be able to win .01 BTC?  I did not even say that I would bet that amount, but I might allow you to put up 0.01 BTC if you are wanting to try to win 0.0001 BTC..  I think that would be 100 to 1 odds..  

I think when push comes to shove, you would not even be willing to stand behind your own probabilities of 1000 to 1

Of course the BTC price goes up and down all the time, and surely $2,500 does not mean as much in these upper $60k prices as it did when we were in the $6k prices.

It could go up before it goes down too..

Already sufficiently explained to the extent that any of the nuances even matter in the whole scheme of things.. The ONLY time that the assignment of odds might matter would be if there might be some action that is being considered around the assignment of such odds... so right now I am floating between 1/4 and 1/10 and you are supposedly higher than 1/1,000 even though you are unwilling to enter a 1/100 bet.. so it probably shows that you are not as convicted as you are making it out that you are... to the extent that any of it even matters...especially if neither of us is planning to act upon it.. at least we have not figured out some kind of an agreeable action point, yet.

I am not even sure if we understand each other enough to make a bet.. since I said that I would not be wanting to make any bet that merely reflects what I believe the odds to be in the event that someone else is proclaiming odds that I consider to be way outrageous as compared to my odds, so I would want to get surplus out of that.. so that is why I suggested the possibility of entering into a 100:1 bet (or was it 99 to 1, since you were proclaiming 1000:1 or 999:1... .. yet originally I said that I thought that it was 10:1 and now I am more in the ballpark of thinking that the odds are getting to be 4:1, but why would I enter a bet in which you got all the surplus especially since you are thinking the odds are 999 to 1?.. .. but yeah, if I say 99:1 and you say that all the surplus is on my end and I need to go back to 10:1.. since I would still be getting surplus since I really believe the odds to be closer to 4:1..

Anyhow, I would think that each of us would want to have surplus on each of our ends, since you would be more hesitant to enter into a bet that is closer to your true beliefs of 999 to 1, just like I am reluctant to enter into a bet that is closer to my current beliefs of 4:1.. .. which maybe in some sense I am admitting that they might be a bit higher than what I am tentatively thinking right now... . but yeah, we still may well have to describe it out or figure out numbers if we really were going to enter into a bet.. but you did move away from my real offer of 99:1 and suggest the other two possibilities of 10:1 or 4:1 which surely seems like you are wanting to suck all of the surplus value on my end, which is causing it to be unbettable.. .. so I had ONLY proposed possibly  considering 99:1.. while at the same time, there could be some [potential to negotiate another set of odds, but I had not proposed those lower odds (or is it higher odds that you are wanting to gravitate towards so that you seem to want to get more surplus value out of the situation.

I've trimmed a whole lot out to try to make it more readable.


Maybe you are misunderstanding me, and you conclude that I was assigning 90% odds that $67,483 would never be breached, and I was doing the exact opposite, which was 10% odds, and now I am probably in the 25% odds-ish.. .. anyhow this whole hoop-a-la might all be about some various misunderstandings.. perhaps?

Maybe I am just confused about what you are saying.. So for example, if you are placing higher odds than me, so maybe you should be willing to take the side of the bet that I was planning to take.. with the better odds that I had assigned..... give me 999:1 odds and I will take the bet saying that we will never cross below $67,483 again. .especially since you believe the odds to be 99.9%.. you have a lot of confidence. Way more than me, so you should be more than willing to give me some other kinds of odds that I might consider to be favorable and each of us considers that we have surplus on each end.., and let's see who is being ridiculous (absurd) and/or whether either of us would be willing to stand behind some aspect of the numbers that we are proclaiming... or at least something close to it..

And, yeah, sure,  based on subsequent BTC price movements, I am now saying that in the last couple of days, I believe the odds have turned to something closer to 75/25 rather than 90/10, so I am actually suggesting ONLY about 25% odds that we don't go below $67,483 in the next 81 days... and you are saying that the odds are closer to 99.9% or some variation of that that we do go below $67,483 in the next 81 days, and you seem to be taking a more extreme position than me, which should cause your position to become bettable if you would be wiling to stand behind some variation of what you are saying.. especially since we differ so much... and at first I was thinking that you were saying that my odds were too low, and now you are saying that my odds are too high, and I just made them higher... which causes me to question either whether we are actually understanding each other or what might be the terms of any bet that we might enter into, if we were to work towards such a thing.. especially since many times a motivation for a bet may well end up being that each of the sides considers the other side to be absurd (and/or ridiculous) in their perspective, which seems that we are getting into those kinds of territories.

So, if we were to make any bet, then it would need to account for if we can agree to balancing out the surplus on the sides of the bet, since I would not necessarily want to enter into a bet in the event that I perceived that there was no surplus value and/or cushion on my side, but yeah sometimes when push comes to shove, there may well be needs to figure out how much any guy stands behind his numbers, and right from the start, I had said that I likely would not be willing to stand by the 90/10 that I had proclaimed on at the time that the price had barely gotten above $67,483, and whether you thought that I was ONLY assigning 10% odds then maybe there was confusion, since I was assigning 90% odds, which I no longer stand behind since I currently believe it be closer to 75% which surely had created dynamics that it would have had been less certain that the price would be able to continue to stay above it.. especially for then another 82 days and now another 81 days and even today seems to also be in the can, so in the next 7 hours or so, we will likely end up with only 80 days left, since the price would have to correct quite a bit in the next 7 hours to drag today's daily average below $67,483... For today, we seem pretty likely to be back in the top 13 and also a fighting chance of getting back into the top 10 for today.. Let's see how the remaining 7-ish hours play out.

I suspect even 1,000:1 is in no way near what a bookmaker would actually be pricing that at ... in fact the more I think about it the more I believe that only a completely irredeemable gambler would take it on ...

Yeah, but aren't those the odds that you are assigning?  I would be willing to give you even lower (better) odds, if you want to take 99/1 odds, I may well be willing to enter into the 1% side of the bet, especially since you believe the 1% side of the bet is ONLY really supposed to be 0.1%.. and that way each of us ends up getting surplus value.. We would just have to formulate the bet so neither side is losing more than an amount that they are willing to put up and lose.

The way you framed it the first time, I thought that I would have had been the one putting up the 1 BTC and you would only have to put up 0.001 BTC, so surely that would have had been a no go on my end, but if you are the one putting up the 1 BTC, then no problema..

... we can modify that down to 0.01 BTC, since I am giving you better odds than what you really believe the odds to be... So I would put up 0.001BTC and you would put up 0.01 BTC, yet if I were giving you 99% odds then that means that I would only be putting up 0.0001 BTC, and that does not seem fair, so I cannot see that kind of a bet working out.. Initially I said that the odds were 90% that it would end up going below $67,483, and now I am saying around 75% that it would ... and yeah, maybe I am waffling around too much, and since you are proposing that either my 90% or my 75% are too conservative (but that seems to be potentially based on misunderstandings between us), yet we might be able to figure out some reasonable bettable number between the 90% that I first claimed and the 99.9% that you seem to be claiming... in other words, to the extent that we even understand each other at all, I consider your perspective to be too bearish..

Perhaps, from my perspective, I consider that you don't understand and/or appreciate the power of dee cornz.

I already said that I likely would not be willing to enter into any bet that would get even close to the 90/10 proclamation that I had made.. but yeah, there could be ways to frame a bet in terms of an amount that each side would end up having to pay that would be an attempt to reflect the odds.. and from my own perspective, in order to make a point about the claims being made, I doubt that there would be any need to create bets that would require the losing side to pay any more than 0.002 BTC or perhaps 0.003 BTC.. yet of course, folks are able to enter into whatever bet that they like in terms of amounts.. but I doubt that I am going to play any of the larger amount bets in order to make whatever point(s) that I might be wanting to make through any possible agreed-to bet.   Also, there may need to be some escrow involved depending upon how any such bet might be framed.. .. but like for example, even with a bet that is attempting to describe 10/1 odds, for one side might be as high as 0.003 BTC, and then the other side might end up being 0.0003 BTC.. and such low amounts, might end up having to be locked into being a lightning network bet rather than locking into on-chain transactions.. unless we agree to onchain transactions that might end up having some high fee risks.. .based on some of the latest happenings (meaning high fees) with onchain fees.

Surely the odds seem to be against, you even with a changing of the odds, yet surely you are seeming to be a bit disingenuine by moving the odds further away from the direction that I said that I would be willing to bet, even if I were to be wiling to enter into a bet.. in other words, I don't know why you need to express desires to be greedy rather than actually accounting for my already assertion that I may well not even be willing to give 10/1 odds. .. actually, I said that I would not be willing to enter any such bet, which surely showing that I would not get any surplus value out of such a bet, so why would I be willing to enter any bet that is at the very edge of my proclamation, which it seems that I already described the existence of that kind of a dynamic with my own thinking about what I had already proposed to be odds for the number of days in which November 9, 2021 could  be removed from the top 100 list.

It is just off the top of my head, and so I see no reason to show my work, especially since it merely my opinion, and you are free to come to your own conclusions, including if you want to enter into a bet with me in regards to your coming to some other conclusion and considering my opinion (assessment of odds to be outrageous) and/or to the opposite of your own in some kind of a bettable way, yet like I said most likely I would not be betting the odds that I believe to be likely, which maybe goes to show some lack of conviction on my behalf in regards to the specifics and what I would be willing to stand behind in terms of a possible negotiation of a bet.

Why would you consider my assessed assertion of probabilities to be needing any kind of showing in regards to how I arrived at it?  ..

and yeah sure, I will concede that if I were forced to show my work (or to enter into an actual bet), then that kind of exercise or forced action from me in regards to the topic might end up showing a number that more actually reflects to where I am wiling to put money.. ..

yet at the same time, you likely realize that almost no one is going to enter into a bet that he believes to be merely 50/50 odds unless he is mostly just interested in the idea (and/or funzies) of the bet, so most of the time, any rational person entering into a bet would prefer to ONLY enter into bets in which he believes the odds to be sufficiently in his favor, so his entering into a bet or playing certain odds might already show some kind of a cushion that the guy wants to feel that he has in any bet that he is willing to enter into.

In other words, it seems to me that any normal rational guys (not talking about compulsive gamblers) likely ONLY enter into bets when they perceive the odds of the bet to be sufficiently in their favor of winning... and yeah for sure there are going to be some differences in personalities in regards to differences between folks who are more risk averse and other folks who are more risk seekers... and surely, there could be some luck in regards to which folks end up being correct in their bets, yet outcome does not even necessarily mean that such losing person entered into a bad bet, especially if the odds were actually in his favor (not merely his assessment of the odds).

Approximately 1 in 10.. something in that range.. Are you in the mood to bet me, you gambling fool?   hahahahahaha no homo..

I  couldn't resist to address you as a "fool".. it just seemed to fit well.  

By the way, I would not be willing to give anyone the level of odds that I believe to be likely on me, but I might be willing give odds that are slightly greater than 50/50.. .. .. but yeah, so maybe that reflects that I am not as confident that I say, since I am not willing to give the full odds that I ascribe.. so then a balance might be considering what odds I might be willing to give, and surely each day the odds might be different from the previous day (and even changes on the hour could cause the odds to change). so today (or earlier today at that particular moment) I was saying (and still I say, for now) 90%-ish odds..

but with the passage of time and if we were to continue to stay above $67,483, then the odds surely would continue to come down with the passage of each day that we were to stay above $67,483, if such a thing were to happen, and then also questioning how far we might end up going above $67,483 would also likely be a factor and would also end up changing the odds in my own head.. So, for sure, odds are a kind of ephemeral concept that have to be captured at the time that they are proclaimed because various subsequent events could end up changing how they are perceived and assessed and based on the passage of time and event(s) could change such assessment of odds radically and/or materially in one direction or another.

rational thought
never exaggerate expectations then feel sad when things didnt meet expectations
instead lower expectations to rational amounts then celebrate things exceeding expectations

2x-3x per cycle (sorry folks we are no longer in the 100x days of 2011)
(last cycle $20k ATH - $70k ATH = 3.5x as a guide of expectation, with things slowing down to a 2x going forward)

so 2025 = $140k(2x)-$210k(3x) rational expectation
so 2029 = $280k(2x)-$630k(3x) rational expectation
so 2033 = $560k(2x)-$1.89m(3x) rational expectation
so 2037 = $1.2m(2x)-$5.67m(3x) rational expectation

Thanks again DirtyK.

I would have merited you these last couple of days but it seems I've exceeded the 50 merits in 30 days rule. Never happened to me before. I'm  generally pretty stingy with merits but this thread rocks.

Keep up the good work.

Nice one.

Seriously though earning for reading isn't a totally bad idea. And maybe limiting the number of posts in a day, or losing merit for every post after 10 per day or something like that. Although it's in the nature of a forum/social media that on some days a lot of things might be happening, with a lot of posts as a result, in a heated discussion, not shit posts.

I'm seeing Bitcoin rising to $400,000 before the first quarter of 2025, the bull run this time it will be different from the last one. Bitcoin is $70,000 now the halving have not started, I'm looking at the market that this is the right to buy and hold after the bull run then you sell and make your triple profit.

This is why I suggested a daily auto-posting in the WO. That's where the old school Bitcoiners hang out, the ones who care more about Bitcoin than just the price. Many here into crypto/blockchain/web3 don't realize how important this is in determining the direction of the price with which they're so obsessed.

As for the fact that only a few of us actively post here, I sometimes wonder just how many lurkers there are here.

I was thinking something similar. 

I was thinking that any second table would be all different currencies from the first table.

So maybe the first table would be the five currencies that we traditionally have had...and then so the second table would not repeat any of the 5 currencies from the first table, and so maybe it would be preferable to have like 7 different currencies on that second table.. so that just on the face of it, we can see the difference in terms of the size of the font, etc etc.  and maybe some guys would ONLY look at the first table. but then they would have the option to look at the second table...

You mean the top might be already in?  

Puh-leeze, geddaddaaheeeeya...  

I don't think so, even now the market is still showing a positive trend on bitcoin. dumping back to $61,000 - 63,000 is still reasonable, but i'm not sure about going below $60,000.


Where do you think we are now? complacency or anxiety?

We all saw this one gazillion times already.
The twitter "guy" doesn't even say where we are at in his opinion.
I would say, maybe "optimism", but according to all social metrics we are nowhere close to the "mania/thrill" yet.
79 is a lagging indicator too. We are not more than 70 rn, after a few days of declines.