Bitcoin Forum

Hello,

I've just seen link for interesting chart on btc-e chat.

One user posted this:

https://i.imgur.com/GOYWUMo.png

Looks crazy couse this is logarithmic scale. Hard to believe that this prediction will happen but..

What do you think about this?

I'm okay with this.

As pointed out before, its cool, but also a load of shite, as past performance is not an indication of future results, especially with something as volatile as Bitcoin.

Also this: http://xkcd.com/605/

Heh funny chart but little bit exaggerated couse it is based on only one single discrete data. Bitcoin chart is based on milions of discrete datas.
Topic's chart looks enormously crazy for first look but, if worth of dollar will collapse then it can become true and then we will have some kind of devaluation of bitcoin. Am i right?

I like this chart better (considering an exponential curve) that is on on another post. It is easier for me to visualize it for some reason.  I think it is close to the OPs chart.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=322058.msg3464070#msg3464070

We might be on the bottom of the S Curve which implies the best is still yet to come!  ;D

Yup that looks even more interesting about where we can be right now ;D

Would love to be proved wrong but I find it hard to reach $10k next year. I'm pretty convinced we'll see 1k but 10k is just too much (and yeah I know when we were at 1 it seemed impossible to hit 100).

The chart says $1K next year, and $10K in two years. Right?

Ah, yup. But still…

So you are saying that a million random data point have more weight than a single random event, when predicting the future?

after the hysteria we're going through right now.. we'll be able to review data from 3 bubbles. seems like the first crash was much more significant than the 2nd, and that is probably what is to be expected of the 3rd crash.

first crash went $1->$12->$6, then the second one went from $10->$260->100.

of course, the scale is too small so i don't know.

Weird. What happened to the $300 now? Is it not included in the chart?

But they are not random.

I understand what you feel, but I would like to understand, why it could not happen? Just why not?

could be faster in my opinion  ;D

naah, to be honest: it could also be zero in 2014. dont expect to much and hope for the best.

Digital gold is OK with me actually.  Everyone will hoard until it reaches the top of the S curve and levels out.  And then the price will stabilize and everyone will start using it for everything.

I think that this is not so real.. It'll grow up of course but not so fast! I am new in bitcoin but I have a lot of friends who have known bitcoin for a long time and they have the same opinion as I have.

More likely to rise much higher towards the end. Also have to take into account all the bitcoins being mined.

$100,000 per BTC by 2016 seems a bit high.

Indeed, i would expect an amount like that to take at least 5 years, but hey let's op we are wrong :D

I have a feeling that $300 for the end of 2013 seemed a bit high a year ago too!  ;)  Granted, this still seems impossible but who knows.  With the rate of adoption it is more likely then winning the lottery at least!

This.

I frequently use this on people who think I'm crazy for investing, but seem to think lottery tickets are the shit. I probably will not become a millionaire with this, but that said it is the most probable means I have of achieve that goal at this time. Certainly more probable than lottery tickets. More so than a start up business investment (at this moment in my life & current circumstances).

So we shall see, it is indeed more likely than willing the lotto!

Having tried to start our own business with my husband, and investing much more then we have done in Bitcoin then having the business fail, I can already attest that we have eared 100% more with Bitcoin then a business venture did!  The best part of all is seeing the growth of our small investment (during rallys of course) while just hanging around the house watching a movie or even sleeping!  I joke that it is a much easier way to make money then working endless hours on a start-up company.  ;D  Hopefully it all pays off for us in the end, but it takes risk to earn rewards in life.

The thing to remember is in 2013 we have a few millionaires and the Bitcoin Investment Trust investing in the $1M - $20M range.

This is nothing. Bond, stock and gold funds are in the $100B range

If wall street takes BTC seriously at some point, money flowing into BTC will easily be 10,000x to 100,000x higher than we have today.

The question for when/if $100K BTC happens is simply when/if serious money starts to take BTC seriously....

 ;D That is my thinking too.  It is tempting to take out a loan just to invest with the thought of this.  But I guess even having a handful of coins at this early in the game (I think anything under $1000 is probably cheap!) is a great thing for us all.  Perhaps we really don't even understand ourselves how big this could become. 

The post reminds me of when I first read...

http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/8/2011/05/medium_foundation1.jpg

Yeah but the dollar sucks and bitcoin doesn't.  This is why bitcoin has the capability to have a higher market capitalization than dollars.

Your post made me think of something. I wonder if that's why some of them fat wallets that have sat idle for awhile started moving coins out.

We tend to overestimate rates of change in the short term, and vastly underestimate them in the long term.

For now the simplified linear regression analysis presented here may be fine for the short term but in the coming months all predictions of fiat/xbt will likely prove to be vastly underestimated.

Absolutely, and I am not at all against starting businesses. I hate the 8-5 life with such a passion that... well, nevermind. My situation at the moment is trying to get my wife through school with no debt - we're almost there. That means, for the moment, I have an extremely low risk appetite. If I were to quit my reliable slave labor income producer, and fail - we'd be up shit creek. Anyway, that will change soon though, I have a few business ideas I'm running the numbers on. I've run a couple semi-successful small part time businesses to try to make ends meet, so have some experience although limited. The way I look at it is, even if I swing and miss with a business, at least the ride will be more interesting and fulfilling than copy and pasting all day, and there is always optimism. The office click-click monkey life is very bleak. Even if it fails, I tried, enjoyed trying - and can try again next time.

Until then (and after!), bitcoin!

Technically, past performance is the ONLY indication of future results, for anything ever. You only know that trying to move your finger will actually move your finger because it has worked in the past. You only really know that letting go of your pencil will result in it falling down instead of falling up because of past performance.

Also, "the trend is your friend" is a trading adage for good reason.

Past performance is not a guarantee of future results, but it sure as hell is an indicator. If it weren't, humans would have no way to make sense of the world at all, because nothing would be even remotely predictable; all would be pure chaos. The consistency and regularity of phenomena is the very basis by which one navigates the world and manipulates it to one's benefit.

Looks pretty accurate to me. It all comes back to the binary bet: either Bitcoin more or less follows this chart, or it goes to zero.

The investment proposition is simple. Determine what you think the odds of those two outcomes are, decide how confident you are in those odds, and place your bets accordingly (based on your own life situation in the context of those two outcomes and their probabilities, as well as your risk tolerance).

Why accurate?


And this one isn't?

http://www.bilder-hochladen.net/files/big/94ig-c-c20a.png

What is the r squared for your regression or did you simply draw a line on a chart?

The OP isn't saying Bitcoin will do "this" simply showing that there the line drawn has a high correlation to the known historical price points.  In other words the chart of actual price points can be simplified/reduced to the line drawn.   If the trend continues (and it may not) it will generally follow the line drawn.  In other words MATH ROCKS.

Can't price points be reduced to the line of my chart as well, if you simply choose fewer price points?

Well if you are choosing point then you are just drawing a line where you want it to be.  It is a pretty line.  I like that it is blue.  The complete lack of antialiasing give is a kinda retro vibe. Not much value beyond that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_regression

 

Ok, one of the very first things about statistics is that extrapolation based on data becomes more innacurate the further you go out.

100k/btc by 2016 does not seem real.   The rate of growth per time is decreasing as time goes by.  Bitcoin is much more likely to slow down in percentage / proportional growth.
With that said I believe it will hit $1,000 to $30,000 in 5 years.   $10,000 to $30,000 is highly probable in 5 years per bitcoin.

No, it's not me who chooses the data points. What, if the computer chooses only monthly (median) or yearly data points?

I'm not a mathematician, I am only a philosopher and always happy to learn something. That's why I asked the Genius. Is it mathematically impossible to paint different lines? Who chooses R squared?

What, I don't even... Do you even math? How does that correlate to anything at all? At least the OP's chart had an idea of where it wanted to go, your chart makes my frontal lobe hurt trying to understand what possessed you to put that line there.

I am seriously not trying to mock you or anything. I just don't follow what your point is.

I guess you are tying to say that bitcoin will fail? Care to make a bet on it? Lets say that you owe me 1btc in 2020 if bitcoin is successful and I will owe you $420usd which is the ATH of bitcoin of today. Seems fair right? tollface.jpg

I mean bitcoin will fail so you would be making out like a bandit ;D Your chart says that we will never break the ATH again! Upon coser examination it looks like your chart is still bullish, just a lot lower :P

But seriously, what is up with this chart you made? I want to understand your position.

If you wanted to get a really good guess with all of the datapoints, you could take every possible set of datapoints from 2 points to all of them, and make an average out of all the different lines you made. If I had to guess, I bet it would be similar to the OP's line. But I am also not a mathematician, I haven't passed Calculus yet :P

That would be a cool chart though.

I do agree that the chart could use a few more lines though. A 'neutral' line, a bullish line, and a bearish line.

I guess, it correlates to a different R squared.


No, I don't. I think, it will work until civilization will fail again.


I'm not stupid. I made a similar bet this year and I won.


You are wrong. It doesn't.


Yes, and therefore it implicates that ATH will be broken later.



My position is, that the blue line depends on the R squared that we choose.

I not sure you understand what R^2 means.

We don't "choose" R^2, linear regression is used to find a formula (for the simple slope in this case) that describes the line as close to "1.0" as possible....a value of 1.0 is a perfect correlation between the line and the data. 1.0 is impossible unless all data points are on that slope. Since this isn't a straight line 1.0 isn't possible....so you calculate the best fit, the highest R^2 value we can find.  

I also understand the philosophers argument that you are stating....since the bitcoin market never closes...how can anyone determine the closing bell price in order to chart it?

Even without a closing bell we still have the ability to chart all trades....I don't think that is what is happening in this chart, but it could be done to make a more accurate linear regression determination.

In this chart I think he/she is using the daily indicator which is likely just the end of the day at midnight gmt.


Edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_determination

try again starting from november 2011 low at 2$, leaving out the first bubble of 2011 and compare results

Hehe, don't take DeathAndTaxes' snark too serious. 't was a funny one I have to say.

Anyway, I think I see your point/question: you basically wonder about the (arbitrarily) chosen time resolution. I.e. what result would the regression deliver if, instead of, say, hourly data, we daily, or instead of daily, weekly.

The answer is: a) the result might look slightly different, but not much. b) the finer grained your time resolution, the more accurate and possibly: predictive your analysis will be, because you have more data points.

In short: if you get a vastly different result, for example by using 'monthly closing price on btc-e' or some shit like that, you're cheating :D

...and some more things to consider: What happens when you introduce a weight function related to the trading volume that actually took place at that time/price? And should the weight be determined from the number of BTC traded or USD traded? Then of course you couldn't use a simple regression method any longer, but you'd have to move on to Chi-square or the likes.

Not saying that you have to do that, just take the results from a simple regression with a grain of salt. An analysis is always based on numerous assumptions. You should just be aware which your assumptions are.

Or, you know, you could still do linear regression, but on daily VWAP, once for $V and once for btcV and see how much they differ. Not different enough to really matter, I'd guess.

i doubt any form of finite values can rise exponentially and thus infinite
that means the rich get richer and richer for ever and at some time normal people can not even afford a satoshi
deflationary tough, a currency can not deflate more than the economy behind

i think any sort of logarithmic function would aproximate better

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigmoid_function

Also @Zarathustra: Please do some reading, your comments don't make much sense to those of us who understand the math that went into the first chart. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_squares http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_regression

But lets say that one day every avarage people that doesn't feel good with using computers will be able (becouse of some new BTC tech) to have Bitcoin wallet and easily pay/recieve money with BTC like they learned to use plastic credit cards before. Maybe then such a graph is possible. What do you think?

I think for certain growth phases an exponential function can be the best approximation. However, I'm well aware that this holds only for a limited period of time. At some point growth will be limited by the natural boundaries of the system, and bitcoin will slow down its growth at maybe 1000, 10000 or even 1 million USD. Where that actually will happen, no one knows yet.

I guess you math cracks are right, but I also guess that a linear regression over the whole lifespan of Bitcoin doesn't make sense.
With time passing, the line is flattening out.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=322058.msg3469380#msg3469380

Right, but if you change the line by selecting a subset of the data, you should be able to describe your methodology and a reason why it should be accepted as a model.  I have a feeling your methodology was "this looks good".

Yes, pure guessing based on the assumption that the 8 month-period of October 10 to June 11, in which the price went up thousandfold, will never be repeated again.

Then, instead of pure guessing, just start a logarithmic regression line after June 11 and post that. Just drawing an eyeballed line IS simply less legitimate.

1) I'm completely free to paint what I want.
2) I think, linear regression doesn't make sense even if we exclude the first Bubble.

Flashback time! This entire discussion reminds me so much of an exchange I had several months ago on the Wall Observer thread with a biological statistician guy (whose name I forgot, but he had a caricature of Darwin as his avatar I think), who didn't seem to be clear about the assumptions he made in performing his price analysis.

Anyway, I think this discussion suffers from a lack of mutual understanding. Those who know how regression works reject Zarathustra's claim that one might just as well draw random lines on the chart. And they're right of course. Zarathustra on the other hand (correct me if I'm wrong) probably feels the regression analysis is somewhat arbitrary as well. And he's right as well.

Why?

Because you make (at least) the following two assumptions:

1) It is possible to extrapolate from historical data. That's kind of a big assumption, but on the other hand: what else would you do? The only thing we *can* work with is historical data.

2) If you apply linear regression analysis to the entire, unpartioned historical data on a log chart, you assume there is exactly one linear price function (which you then attempt to approximate).

And the latter assumption is much more contentious, in my opinion.

Please note that I'm not saying that linear regression in general is useless to predict bitcoin price, just that it is important to be clear about the assumptions you make. So if you post a chart with a single big line like the one greaterninja posted, then the single function assumption needs to be addressed, because I'm sure a lot of people would be more critical if they knew this assumption is necessary to get this result.

It's arguably the best starting assumption, though. At least a straight line that is a best fit for the data is the simplest starting assumption. Occam's razor suggests not making it more complicated without particular reason, and it seems to me there's enough shooting in the dark as is that there's a very high bar on adding more complexity to the trendline.

True. You'll note I said that I'm not rejecting linear regression at all. Just that I want everyone to be clear about the assumptions made.

For me, it is useless in this case, because a thousandfold price increase within some months is possible exclusively in the very beginning. Or does somebody really believe that this could be repeated later in the game?

Why not?  We have just scratched the surface of what Bitcoin can be.  We are still on the ground floor.  We have not even begun to see what will happen when Wall Street gets involved with the Winkelvii trust.  I have heard people say that anything under $1000 is cheap.  I am really starting to believe that.  Call me crazy but in a year I think that this will be proven.

Where do you see a "thousandfold price increase within some months" anywhere in the above chart? The analysis basically said: 10-fold increase each year. In reality, we're above the price predicted by that line right now.

And why shouldn't such an increase continue, for now? Sure, there will be *some point* in the future when this growth needs to slow down, but while each increase by a factor of 10 requires more capital entering the market (to go from 10 to 100 requires a higher increase of absolute market cap than an increase from 1 to 10), this could well be countered by increasing benefits from network effects, as a result of the increased popularity (and perceived security) of Bitcoin.

edited: You are right, 500-fold only, 0.06 to 32

October 10 - June 11; which is included in the linear regression, which will never happen again.

$0.10 to $32 (as an unsustainable peak which crashed back to ~$2) isn't a thousand fold increase.

Unsustainable was not only the trend line to the peak, but the trend from 0.06 to USD 2 as well:

http://www.bilder-hochladen.net/files/big/94ig-d-c51c.png

But what I know from past experience is that initial stage investments like this are always volatile. But if they take hold then they can go up further than you could ever, ever, ever, ever imagine.
Microsoft back in 1986 to 1987 rose 400% then corrected 30% – twice – before rising again. Microsoft eventually topped out after a 44,000% rally from that point. Forty-four THOUSAND.

Source http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2013/11/Bitcoin.pdf

The Lables in the Chart wich say "bubble" are in Hindsight
Just overbought scenario s.  Where after price just returned  to its mean
Wich is rising ...  First time a hinsight Analysis isnt total Crap ;)

The Trend is up !

Nevermind. I see you still didn't educate yourself on what linear regression means.

a segment of the data can  contain such an increase but that  doesn't mean that the extrapolation of the line of best fit ever includes such a rapid growth again. In fact, the crash post 32 pulled down that line a lot by all chance.

There are good arguments to be made against simple linear regression as a predictor of future price, but yours are not among them.

No, I think I know what it means.


But not down enough:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=328186.msg3561426#msg3561426

Drawing a line through $0.06 and $2 is simplistic.  It assumes that both $0.06 and $2 were properly priced.  It also fails to consider that a minuscule amount of Bitcoins traded at both of those prices and also fails to consider the effect of all the other multitude of data points between them.

What if the $0.06 tick was a single scared trader who sold off a relatively small number of coins into a thinly traded market.  Excluding this trader maybe the low of the day would have been 2x as high.
What if the $2 tick was saved from a lower tape by MtGox lag?   In a perfect market with perfect access maybe it would have traded down to a buck.

Drawing another line through $0.12 and $1 on those days may look completely different.  That is the problem with just picking a few data points (often the peaks and lows by "technical" traders).  Those points have some value but they aren't "the whole story" and a few small events on those days (now given heightened importance) can significantly change the line drawn.

Linear regression attempts to discount the effect of those extremes by:
a) considering all data points not just two humanly chosen points which satisfy a conclusion you already had before drawing the line
b) consider the relative DISTANCE of each point from the overall trend.  The ticks the furthest from their peers (outliers) have the least influence on the line.

Is linear regression perfect? No.
Does the chart in the OP predict the future? No (it simply says IF and ONLY IF Bitcoin continues the historical trend it will follow a random walk around this line).
Is it better than picking two points at random and drawing a line? Yes.

IMHO I think Bitcoin will hit a plateua at some point in the future simply because the infrastructure (hardware wallets, deterministic wallets, node efficiency, legal issues, service providers) haven't kept up with the growth.  This will create a "bottleneck" of sorts on higher adoption and price but there is money to be made solving those problems and they will be solved in time.   Obviously (if I am right) this is something that no statistical model could see or even claim to see.  Growth would follow a trend line and then break the trend (significantly) for some period of time.

Still for the sake of argument lets pretend you "randomly picked and drawn line using two data points" was a perfect predictor of price on a long term scale.  You still really haven't shown that the trend is unsustainable.  Bitcoin is risky and there have been a lot of risk "hits" in the last two year (FinCEN, MtGox getting seized, SR closed, various exchange hacks/thefts, bank freezes by various Bitcoin related companies, legal notices by the state, etc).  It is entirely possible that risk is discounting the actual price from the trend line (remember in that early trend prior to the $32 spike Bitcoin was pretty much invisible to law enforcement, governments, and traditional finance).  So it is certainly plausible in the short term the increased risk would discount Bitcoin from the trend.  You will notice that even on your "chart" the price is following the trend it is simply discounted.  As Bitcoin gets bigger much of that risk will be reduced and you could see the price rise up to meet the trend line some years in the future.  Simply put drawing a line across three years of data and saying it is broken long term is .... well silly.

Now this is interesting. Another quote from the article: "Bitcoins being exchanged into or out of RMB now accounts for 21% of all volumes (versus 65% versus USD and 6% versus Euro)." . Bitcoin is the second-most exchanged currency in China behind the USD. Also: "I think we are in the take-off stage." And: "I bet you never thought you’d see this in a macro publication. But I’m serious. This just might work. Trade Recommendation: Buy Bitcoin"

Wow, just WOW. Mainstream media (and be it only the ones addressing traders so far) is picking up and recommending bitcoin!

Good point DeathAndTaxes.
Just like mining real gold we have come far since the sieve and we're now using deep mining rigs costing millions.
More expensive mining rigs will bring the price of a bitcoin to new heights just like gold.
If a bar of 12,5 kg gold can be around €400000,- why can't 12,5 Bitcoin be that :)

The bitcoin will hopefully reflect the price of mining hardware and effort needed to mine deeper.

I can understand the plateau because the amount of miners will decline and mining companies will come into existence to find bitcoins.
This will probably make the trend more based on the technology and less volatile between technology shifts. Mining will slow down considerably.

Dedicated mining companies / mining clouds are popping up so we are at the beginning of the "third phase" in my view on bitcoin mining.
We still have a few years of ASIC development ahead so the price will probably keep increasing for now.

My view on phases:
First is solo miners - no adoption by anybody, no real value
Second is mining pools - adoption limited to a few companies, exchanges pop up for trading, value picking up rapidly
Third is mining corporations / mining clouds - adoption starting to pick up by quite a few companies, value picking up even more
But then???
Forth could be
 - the death of bitcoin by quantum computers
 - worldwide adoption
 - replacement of bitcoin by bitcoin_v2 to solve some oncomming problems.


That said... If I can still get 10x to 100x my money it will be a good profit :)

Yes, but I guess, that a linear regression, which includes the very first period of trading is not only simplistic, but stupid as well.


I think, it can be an accurate method, but not if you include periods which can't be relevant for the future, and such a period is the very beginning of the game, say the first 1-2 years of trading.
Many other indicators support the view, that the increase is flattening out with time passing:

http://blockchain.info/charts/blocks-size?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=1&address=


I have shown that the trend is flattening out within the shown period.


Maybe, but I think it is not more silly than to include the very first periods of trading into a prediction based on linear regression.

Thank you for hearing me ..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj_xKA5C2vU

I wasn't really talking about mining.  Mining secures the network (and introduces new coins into the network) the value of Bitcoin is based on what Bitcoin "can do".  Note "price" may vary from value or utility but only so long.  If price gets too far ahead of value/utility it will eventually crash back down.   Rising value and utility is based on increased adoption and those users doing more with Bitcoins.  If you double the number of people using Bitcoin and double the number of non speculative transactions they each make then the value or utility of the network will go up and with it the continued climb of price against the dollar.  

However currently most Bitcoin users are relatively sophisticated when it comes to technology but as Bitcoin "taps out" that market to continue that exponential growth will require taping into markets with a lot less sophistication.

If your grandmother going to learn how to use the QT client, or deal with pywallet to manually remove tx that get stuck due to incorrect fees settings?
Is a Billionaire going to buy $1B in Bitcoins by wiring a billion dollars to companies he has never heard (MtGox) located in countries he may not be comfortable (BTC-e)?
If a a thousand "casual users" puts 1 BTC into an eWallet and the operator runs away with it  will they all continue to use Bitcoin in the future like a "diehard believer" might?
Are millions (and someday tens of millions) of users going to be able to keep Bitcoins secure form hackers despite being HORRIBLY bad at security and running a Windows OS full of malware because they disable security updates that take too long? 

I would guess the answer is no at least not today with the wallets, exchanges, and service providers that exist.  The bitcoin infrastructure is going to have to improve, it is improving but at a much slower pace than adoption and eventually that will be the bottleneck.  Growth will slow until Bitcoin can be made easy, safe, and painless for the "masses".  I don't care to speculate on where or when that will happen only that there is a good chance it will eventually happen.

Precisely, and that's why "economic singularity" is complete nonsense.

The most obvious best choice for this will be what innovations Circle.com releases in a few months.  They are betting 9 million that they can create some revolutionary tools for bitcoin.

I, for one, am curious.

Agree completely.  While we may experience a rush of adoption short term, the infrastructure isn't there to support adoption up to Bitcoin's full potential by a long shot.  With the recent rise a few friends have come asking about bitcoin and I've been telling them that bitcoin could be a good investment and is doing interesting things now but that real use by the public at large won't likely come (if it does come) for at least a couple years or more.

Looking forward medium term to hardware wallets and a system that camouflages the full bitcoin key displays from it's simple uses for users.

People are starting to ask me about investment opportunities (they have spare cash apparently) and they have actually bought bitcoins.  This has never happened before.

Hopefully this is just how it starts.  People begin to come for investment advice in bitcoin, pushing up awareness, market capitalization and VC funding.  Later more come for it's uses after sufficient infrastructure is built and appropriate layered services are created.

And I have told people before (around April run-up), but only 1 guy (out of about 10) actually invested.  Now it is closer to 50%.

Acctually the chart + drawings / channel  , should look more like this .. ;)


https://i.imgur.com/nchWAhs.png

Actually if you want to get technical about it the upper and lower limits should flare out as they extend in order to show uncertainty.
We call this a "trumpet chart" because they flare out like a trumpet.

Basically as we get further into the future the uncertainty increases....the trend line stays straight but the upper and lower predictions open up.
How much they flare out is based on the level of mathematical uncertainty.

erm , nope  ;D we have no uncertainty at hands..(chart)

what i drew in is a potential channel , ie. a diagonal trading range ..  with upper and lower limits , (where price got rejected)
waht is a trading range ? .. balance ... thats it..  (thats how markets move balance>imbalance and so on)

and a diagonal trading range so to speak..a channel ?

well in this case .. its a steady rise in price .. due to an increase in demand or a decrease in supply or both  :P


ps. if you meant if i would connect the two highs (bubbles) .. then it wouldnt be uncertainty .. but indecision .. ie Higher lows and Lower Highs)

And everyone else here is free to tell you how ridiculous painting a random line is.


Using some form of log regression doesn't make sense to you, but drawing a random line does? You're free to have whatever theory you want, but practical theories usually have some way to be translated into math.

I still refer to this chart quite often... has proven to be fairly accurate

https://www.tradingview.com/v/fy8wpDSZ/

That's a cool chart. I'd like to see it updated. I checked the price right now (~$420 on 2013-11-14) and we're topping out on that triangle.

Go to full screen then hit the "play" button to "load new bars" on the right side middle.

I like the chart also but I don't think we are moving in a giant triangle....that is exaggerated by the 2011 bubble.
The next "bubble" will probably make this chart go crazy.

Interesting chart.  The only thing that makes me wonder is that we are saying we will have only $2300 by the end of next year, but bitcoin so far has been going 10× about every 10 months.  So that would be over $4000 easily.  (Don't get me wrong, I'll take either one, but I was just trying to figure out the difference.)

Yes, because a line that is painted by a genius of prediction has more predictive value than a regression line which includes the very first periods of trading.

Hahah and we thought that chart was bullish  :D :D

Projected January Price: $330

Projected by whom?

LOL  :) ;) :D ;D

see  I disagree with this.

Physics and mechanics, biology etc is built upon extracting future performance from pas events and is very good at  it. Thats why that roof is not falling down on your head.

Bitcoin, or rather crypto's is physics/thermodynamics event being related to less entropy creation versus any competing currency due to central bank manipulation and central govt interference, over taxation, negative regualtion. In fact all systems are like this.

The problem is the finance industry to  cover their collective ass have this past is no indication of future along with economists who have massively differing views.

Currency and economies that minimise entropy creation will prevail over time as a consistent and largely predictable rate.

The log graph is good until the market share cap is reached.

Projected by OPs chart.. Did you even read this thread