Resistance lines - is that what the whitishblue and tan lines are? And if so, are they referencing: white = resistance to going up and tan = resistance to going down?
Have you guys started buying or are you just riding up on the panic buys?
No. We bought at $425, $400, $375 and $350 on the way to the absolute bottom. This is what you learn after a while. When Risto starts saying "ROCK BOTTOM", it means if you are smart you start buying right then. Thank you, BitchicksHusband, for that nice bit of wisdom! I really need to make a mental note about Risto. Well, he DOES have a castle in Estonia, so I'm going to listen to him over all these broke so-called experts. I mean, it's like trying to get marriage advice from a divorced guy. Think about it. Wouldn't you rather ask the guy who's been married for 50 years? I recommend you read Taleb's "Fooled by Randomness" to understand why this is sort of thinking is generally a bad idea. Ever heard of survivorship bias? So, you're saying I should ask the divorced guy and the poor fools on here that made $200 on a day trade and now think they're the emperor of bitcoin? Uh, no thanks. No, I think you are creating a strawman. I'll leave it at that, you do seem fond of your current knowledge. |
|
|
|
Resistance lines - is that what the whitishblue and tan lines are? And if so, are they referencing: white = resistance to going up and tan = resistance to going down?
Have you guys started buying or are you just riding up on the panic buys?
No. We bought at $425, $400, $375 and $350 on the way to the absolute bottom. This is what you learn after a while. When Risto starts saying "ROCK BOTTOM", it means if you are smart you start buying right then. Thank you, BitchicksHusband, for that nice bit of wisdom! I really need to make a mental note about Risto. Well, he DOES have a castle in Estonia, so I'm going to listen to him over all these broke so-called experts. I mean, it's like trying to get marriage advice from a divorced guy. Think about it. Wouldn't you rather ask the guy who's been married for 50 years? I recommend you read Taleb's "Fooled by Randomness" to understand why this is sort of thinking is generally a bad idea. Ever heard of survivorship bias? |
|
|
|
|
If you withdraw USD from Bitstamp, you get a questionnaire where you have to strip naked before them.
|
|
|
|
|
When on earth will we get Bitcoin tradeable on legit brokers or exchanges? We need this for moon.
|
|
|
|
In a February 2012 email cited by prosecutors, Mr. Shrem wrote "wow, Silk Road actually works," explaining he had just received a shipment of marijuana brownies. This won't ever get any less hilarious. |
|
|
|
|
Thanks Walsoraj, you're the only one I can rely on.
|
|
|
|
So, who's to say that TA isn't just a self-fulfilling prophecy? I'm not trolling here, just curious. It's quite a bit easier to predict the actions of someone if he has the same beliefs as you.
Why would you care about the why rather than the what if both amounts to the same? Are you a philosopher, or are you a speculator?  |
|
|
|
|
Would someone post the WSJ text please? Thanks.
|
|
|
|
The more contact points a trendline has, the more meaningful it is. There's no reason to go for a version that follows the price less closely over the same period. Yours is arbitrary because it uses all candle wicks but one for the trendline. Either you do it by closes, or you do it by high/lows, not both.
Actually, not sure if that's a 'hard rule' of trendlines. Anyway, the triangle looks fine to me. Broke out upwards. Don't know what porcupine's problem is with it... I think he just doubts that TA could ever dominate fundamentals, news, sentiment, etc. If there is an actual glitch in the exchange data or it is due to some form of illiquidity (then again, you don't chart illiquid exchanges), then that's ok, but it's a bad idea to assume you can say which is valid and invalid, which is to be included and which ignored. It's the same thing with news, you don't have a framework of judging that, so might as well draw some dinosaurs. I really don't think I know this as a 'hard rule'. Can you find me a quote on it? The way I understand it, there are two ways to go about trendlines, in the most general sense: 1) not allowing any violation (in which case, only candle extrema are possible points of contact), 2) minimizing the no. of violations and only allowing candles that /closed/ above the trendline. In the latter case, you can mix up extrema and closing points of candles. But like I said, I can be corrected on this. And most importantly, DO NOT EVER draw trend lines by forcing them to fit the market. If they do not fit right, then that trend line isn’t a valid one! I suppose that can be interpreted such. I never read it anywhere, but it's my experience and it's the same way I approach all other things in technical analysis. If you start cherry picking, the only thing that will happen is for your bias to dominate the analysis. If you already know what is meaningful and what is meaningless, then you probably have no need for trendlines in the first place. The point is that once you judge the validity of data itself, then you have (except in special circumstances) departed from the realm of analysis and entered the realm of wishful thinking. You should take the data as is. But if it worked for you in the past, who am I to judge you?  The other things I'd say about trendlines aside from contact points and consistency is, like many other things, disregard all that is short term, because almost all of it is noise. Holy shit. Time to buy and get your BTC off exchange. |
|
|
|
I can't say anything about a chart which has a trendline with only 1 contact point (it only goes back a month). I'm guessing it's a downtrend with points from earlier, but I'm not about to check. |
|
|
|
Yours is arbitrary because it uses all candle wicks but one for the trendline. Either you do it by closes, or you do it by high/lows, not both.
Actually, not sure if that's a 'hard rule' of trendlines. Anyway, the triangle looks fine to me. Broke out upwards. Don't know what porcupine's problem is with it... I think he just doubts that TA could ever dominate fundamentals, news, sentiment, etc. If there is an actual glitch in the exchange data or it is due to some form of illiquidity (then again, you don't chart illiquid exchanges), then that's ok, but it's a bad idea to assume you can say which is valid and invalid, which is to be included and which ignored. It's the same thing with news, you don't have a framework of judging that, so might as well draw some dinosaurs. |
|
|
|
Maybe the graph above just looks arbitrarily. This graph is better. And what tells you that? That Bransen and other investors just sit there and drawing lines? Here, this one works:  Yours is arbitrary because it uses all candle wicks but one for the trendline. Either you do it by closes, or you do it by high/lows, not both. |
|
|
|
so, I live under a rock and I am lazy as hell
can someone tell me what just happened?
Karpeles made an appearance on Oprah earlier today and pulled the private keys for 600k coins out of his ass. One at a time. That would lower the price I think. 600k BTC lost is 2.9% of all Bitcoin that will ever be mined (more than 5% of currently mined ones) All that time cautioning against rocket pics and suddenly this?!!  Yeah. Guess being bullish brightens one's mood... Bear. Not even once.I make money being bullish, but I can't make any money being bearish in part because I don't trust the exchanges to hold my short, and because Bitcoin is in a long-term bull trend and I probably dare not short it even in an intermediate bear market. |
|
|
|
so what bit of news has come out to make it jump by $40 overnight?
I see what you did there. |
|
|
|
I was beginning to think that the one thing that could kill bitcoin would be boredom. Good to see the patient still has a pulse  +1. You people need to look at the past and realize that congestions are always followed by large moves once the scale is tipped. Not that hard, is it? Yet it always happens the same, because in humans, emotion drives reason and seldomly the other way around. And of course, there are the "why did the price surge? any news? what happened? what about china?" cries. Because it couldn't be that price has a will of its own, as a manifestation of the consciousness of people around the world, and that there are some triggers that will incite movement. Nah, must be some NEWS. |
|
|
|
|
Isn't it a bad idea to have wallet software in your browser? Even for hot funds, it seems to me as if it would be particularly prone to malware.
|
|
|
|
What I do see being (ab)used ad nauseam is FUD (some news I don't like? Oh yeah, FUD!), and "Facts U Dislike" to me is a counter to that. Fire with fire. As to that, I don't really like the HODL CCMF 2DAMOON either, but you won't see me complaining. And really now, can you even remotely compare the two in frequency? That's why I am bewildered about the (feigned?) annoyance. PS: Who wrote that quote in your signature? Mat too? |
|
|
|
There is a difference between using "facts U dislike" for FUD and hodl for hold. HODL is innocent and a non-substantive form of fun.
[snip]
So many words. So little information. LOL...that should be JJG's signature. "NOT" funny |
|
|
|
Based on my anectodical experience, people who mislike usage of "Facts U Dislike" are prone to mislabeling facts they don't like as FUD, as in "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt". It's a kneejerk reaction to anything that might not be good, and questions its authenticity and nature.
Based on my psychological skill, the people who keep FUD's original meaning will on average have 10 times better ROI in the next 3 years, compared to the people who troll with "facts you dislike". But if the "original FUD" crowd, as you certainly believe, makes a fortune, then /10 that fortune is still a fortune and an amazing return. Is that really what you meant to say? There is a difference between using "facts U dislike" for FUD and hodl for hold. HODL is innocent and a non-substantive form of fun.
[snip]
'facts U dislike' and 'hodl' are both rather idiotic expressions, at least when used ad nauseam as is common in here Seriously? Never seen anyone else using it until this particular instance. Where on earth do you see that ad nauseam? Funny how vitriolic people are because of that phrase. |
|
|
|
|
Based on my anectodical experience, people who mislike usage of "Facts U Dislike" are prone to mislabeling facts they don't like as FUD, as in "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt". It's a kneejerk reaction to anything that might not be good, and questions its authenticity and nature.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
