What I meant is that people who were buying thought that yesterday was a clear sign of reversal, others thought that the 30K wall was a clear attempt of manipulation to buy "cheap" so they bought back fast, others thought it was the last sign before the Cho Cho...
What people seem to ignore or don't understand is that once we reach the bottom, no one will miss buying "cheap", because we will be trading at that level for several weeks before going up.
And you reach that conclusion based on what exactly? We don't have much precedents to work with, as Bitcoin trading history is only ~4 years old. During that time, 3 major rally/capitulation cycles took place, and we're still in the capitulation part of the of the 3rd one. (There are other ways to parse the trading history, but this one's fairly well accepted.) I'm mentioning this because any extrapolation from so little data points is of course dubious. Then again, it's the best we have. So, what do the two completed capitulations look like that we've seen so far: 2013: bottom 1 = ~$50, the initial post-ATH crash. bottom 2 = ~$65, about 3 months later. In between: extreme volatility. Nothing like a flat bottom that allowed you scoop up "cheap coins" at will. Also, 2nd bottom already 30% higher than the first. 2011: bottom 1 = ~$2, at the end of the almost straight down, multi month correction bottom 2 = ~$2, about 1 month after the first. Maybe that's where you get the idea from that you could scoop up cheap coins for weeks before it goes up again. The only problem - even in the 2011 double bottom, there was extreme volatility in between. Price went from $2 to almost $4 (i.e. +100%), before coming down again. tl;dr There's not much data to work with, given the short trading history of Bitcoin, but from what we have seen so far, a flat capitulation bottom, stretched out over weeks, doesn't seem likely. After a harsh corrective wave A, the bear market of April - July 2013 traded in a relatively narrow range, not with extreme volatility. It doesn't have to be flat to trade below major resistance levels, and could take 4 - 5 months, not weeks, to break the 680$. And that's in the bullish scenario, where we already hit THE bottom. In the bearish one it's going to be scary even for bottom fishers. That wasn't the point I made. I'll repeat it: "Scooping up cheap coins for weeks" is neither an accurate description of the 2013 correction, not the 2011 correction. That's all. The reason: "cheap coins" is defined in term of the absolute low of the correction. If, after reaching an intermediate bottom, price doubles (which it did, in 2013), I promise you it won't feel like "scooping up cheap coins" at all if it repeats in the future. Also: >April - July 2013 traded in a relatively narrow range, not with extreme volatility.  Maybe we have different definitions of volatility, but the closest to "a relatively narrow range" I can see in there is mid-May to mid-June. $260 -> $50 -> $170 most certainly isn't range trading, and going back from $130 to $65 isn't either. |
|
|
|
There are people who like Formula 1. And then there are people who like Nascar. And then there are people who like Monster Trucks.
I like cranes and bulldozers (but those are probably more boring than fast cars going round and round.)
The collective noun being dickheads? Really, the male obsession over the internal combustion engine is quite pitiful. Hey calm down woman. I notice a lot of males this and males that in your posts. In a negative way. I'm highly offended. And i might report you for discrimination. rule no. 16. There are NO girls on the internet. Look up what "there are no girls on the internet" really means. Also, I for one welcome our 2.5% share of womenfolk in here. Because, otherwise: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Wl_uQOABxg |
|
|
|
What I meant is that people who were buying thought that yesterday was a clear sign of reversal, others thought that the 30K wall was a clear attempt of manipulation to buy "cheap" so they bought back fast, others thought it was the last sign before the Cho Cho...
What people seem to ignore or don't understand is that once we reach the bottom, no one will miss buying "cheap", because we will be trading at that level for several weeks before going up.
And you reach that conclusion based on what exactly? We don't have much precedents to work with, as Bitcoin trading history is only ~4 years old. During that time, 3 major rally/capitulation cycles took place, and we're still in the capitulation part of the of the 3rd one. (There are other ways to parse the trading history, but this one's fairly well accepted.) I'm mentioning this because any extrapolation from so little data points is of course dubious. Then again, it's the best we have. So, what do the two completed capitulations look like that we've seen so far: 2013: bottom 1 = ~$50, the initial post-ATH crash. bottom 2 = ~$65, about 3 months later. In between: extreme volatility. Nothing like a flat bottom that allowed you scoop up "cheap coins" at will. Also, 2nd bottom already 30% higher than the first. 2011: bottom 1 = ~$2, at the end of the almost straight down, multi month correction bottom 2 = ~$2, about 1 month after the first. Maybe that's where you get the idea from that you could scoop up cheap coins for weeks before it goes up again. The only problem - even in the 2011 double bottom, there was extreme volatility in between. Price went from $2 to almost $4 (i.e. +100%), before coming down again. tl;dr There's not much data to work with, given the short trading history of Bitcoin, but from what we have seen so far, a flat capitulation bottom, stretched out over weeks, doesn't seem likely. |
|
|
|
Does it matter who or what placed the order? I see it as some sort of price manipulation by someone or some group. If they are serious in selling that much, they could do it quietly in trenches.
I keep hearing (well, actually: reading) that reasoning, but it just shows a fundamental lack of understanding in short to mid term trading, imo. There was a clear and expected bounce from 275 forming. A large player who really *wanted* to get out, fast, and at the best possible price, could have done worse than putting it up as a big wall. Maybe there would have been more sophisticated ways (e.g. splitting it up over exchanges), selling it in smaller chunks, but let's be real as well: 9M USD worth of Bitcoin were sold with zero slippage, in a rather illiquid market. That's not half bad. Now, if we assume that price will go to the moon next, sure, it was a bad decision. But at that time we're not arguing anymore whether the whale made the right decision in how he sold, but whether his outlook into the near future or our own is correct. tl;dr Sell wall into rebound from capitulation bottom isn't really the dumbest way to get rid of large amount of coins, if you want to get rid of them. |
|
|
|
Whew... wow man, look at all that rising volume! All that buying, wow. People are just killing themselves to get at these cheap coins.
Actually... yes. Highest daily volume since more than half a year. Higher than the April "bottom" even. Here's stamp, as an example:  Same on finex and okcoin. Huobi saw slightly higher in April. |
|
|
|
It continues to be puzzling to me that so many people in here seem to be completely unwilling (or unable?) to think in different time frames, or like to draw invalid (most likely) conclusions from developments in one time frame to another one.
Doesn't really matter whether the following is factually correct (feel free to disagree, obviously, it's just one guy's opinion), but just structurally, what's so weird about thinking that we'll probably have some move upwards ahead of us (rockets.jpg) on the short term, but will probably fall back sooner rather than later, because: bear market & not enough new investors, mid to long term, but that any of the previous two time frames say very little about the very long term prospects of Bitcoin (which, in my opinion, is better than ever)?
Lack of investors? you can't be serious... next you'll be saying bitcoin can't break 500 because everyone will sell immediately at 500 Way to miss my point. >draw invalid (most likely) conclusions from developments in one time frame to another one. >Doesn't really matter whether the following is factually correct ... If you're in this experiment for the long run, what does it matter to you if we don't see another sustained rally for, say, another year? If you can't take that prospect, it only shows you're *not* in it for the "long run", but instead speculate on shorter term profits (not addressed at you personally, adam) |
|
|
|
|
It continues to be puzzling to me that so many people in here seem to be completely unwilling (or unable?) to think in different time frames, or like to draw invalid (most likely) conclusions from developments in one time frame to another one.
Doesn't really matter whether the following is factually correct (feel free to disagree, obviously, it's just one guy's opinion), but just structurally, what's so weird about thinking that we'll probably have some move upwards ahead of us (rockets.jpg) on the short term, but will probably fall back sooner rather than later, because: bear market & not enough new investors, mid to long term, but that any of the previous two time frames say very little about the very long term prospects of Bitcoin (which, in my opinion, is better than ever)?
|
|
|
|
Your pic says at this volatility level (bb width) -3 line is safe place to buy and -1 line is best place to sell.
Ha, nice. Thanks. That's a much better way to think of it. |
|
|
|
Request for some input, luc: Would you consider this (orange box) to count as (conditional) support?  Daily SMA20, 3SD. Wick broke support, but close above. |
|
|
|
2) If emission is not changed, and adoption does not increase quickly, XMR will be perceived premine in 2 years, just like BCN
One point of clarification here. The emission while somewhat fast, is still only half the speed of BCN. So while there are risks of some sort of comparison, it isn't a direct one. I'd also like to add: While I am (cautiously, after we've gauged community consensus) a proponent of emission rate change, this: 2) If emission is not changed, and adoption does not increase quickly, XMR will be perceived premine in 2 years, just like BCN
3) If emission is changed, XMR will be perceived premine now, but only by a limited number of people, who don't even hold it ... is a bit of a loaded way to frame the discussion (as in: it introduces the question and seems to favor a conclusion at the same time). Anyway, it's a major and uncontroversially controversial topic, I'm sure everyone agrees. Hoping to see a mature discussion on this topic in here/other MEW channels. Also, for once, I'm glad it's taking place in a moderated thread. The previous "discussion" in the free-for-all thread was just a shouting match between who could dump his xmr faster in case the holy protocol is changed :/ |
|
|
|
|
Exciting day, no?
Do you have any good explanation for the weird 30k ask wall that was flashed for a while? Just wondering because I can't make much sense of it, other than someone who's trying to cause uncertainty, and wants to accumulate. Then again, that seems so transparent, not idea if that has a chance to even work.
|
|
|
|
down we go, where is the buy support, where are the walls ?  hard times for xmr holders, good time to buy i think if u have fiat BBR Buy Orders: 230 BTC XMR Buy Orders: 145 BTC WTF. Has this ever happened before? Because BBR is backed by the master scammer JL777 or whatever is his nick. Don't, please. I like to think of XMR and BBR as "brother" coins. Some amount of rivalry is fine, but slander isn't the way to go. |
|
|
|
Miclael Goldstein listed many types of bitcoin scammers: Everyone's a ScammerBut he forgot the worst one: the guy who tells everybody to buy and hold, while he quietly sells. Why do you feel the need to put 'academic' in your signature? I do not have financial or political interest; what should I put then? (And I am an academic after all.) Then you should call it 'personal' interest. Having 'academic' in there actually takes away from the so called 'intelligence' you're trying to convey with it. It is not personal and I am not trying to convey 'intelligence'. I am a professor of computer science, I lectured occasionally on Computers&Society. I started looking into bitcoin because it was computer thing, and it is my job to be at least interested in computer things. If that 'academic' bothers you, well, sorry. Those who can, do; those who can't, teach I have problems with Jorge because he attempts to bring his academic credentials into the bitcoin space to attempt to lord it over people and to attempt to lend some badge of legitimacy to his various claims. However, I do NOT subscribe to any belief that professors or teachers are less capable than others because they chose academia. Academics, in my humble bumble opinion, is a laudable profession. But in my thinking there is NO need to hold yourself out as a professor (or whatever other profession that you may have) in these forums in order to make your various claims (for or against bitcoin). Actually, there are many problems with Jorge's style of argumentation (hint: the dinosaurs in his charts are an accurate representation of his mental capacity to adapt to the Internet era  ), but "lording his academic credentials over us" is very much not one of them. |
|
|
|
So there is talk on the poloniex trollbox about changing the Monero emission rate to be slower.
Any thoughts about this? The great rpietila seems to be an advocate of emission rate change.
People can discuss, but there is actual plan right now to do this. do you mean NO actual plan right now? pretty sure that's what he meant. it's what he said previously, as well. |
|
|
|
|
amount: 300 xmr
tx id: f558cf832cb5eba52aa659d87d9f5bf98068aea571d1dcca77bbd436b1bba7b4
irc: oda_krell
|
|
|
|
Great point oda. I miss TERA. I've also been posting less and less (aside from the Bitfinex Credit Bubble thread perhaps), perhaps that is part of the reason why. It makes sense that when people insult you for making reasoned bearish posts that the reaction to that is thoughtless troll posts, insulting back. I wasn't here in 2011 but I am curious whether a similar effect was observed then.
It wasn't any different, only the moderation was worse (I think it was entirely unmoderated even). PS: I do get to the trolls/spammers eventually, but some people here keep bumping and responding to them. Don't feed them, thanks.Quick note on moderation: I wanna go on record that I think you're doing a fine job. Not an easy balance to find - during a bull run, the bears complain, during a bear market, the bulls want all bearish spam removed. One thing I believe could be better: Posts should never be removed /just/ because they're ultra-bullish or bearish. But there's a large number of posts made (prime example: fallling and his alts) that are entirely *contentless*. Nothing but rubbing it in. Similar on a bull run, with posts that don't even contain any new info or argument, basically just consisting of "told you so" in so many words. The problem is, people respond to those posts, probably out of the honest desire not to let the trolls go uncontested. Not the smart thing to do, but that's human nature. I noticed that if I (and others, I'm sure) report those posts, you don't delete them, probably because they already have gathered some responses. So that's my only request: if a post is really just pure non-informative "teasing", and someone reports it, I'd ask you to consider deleting it even if there are already a few responses.Any chance that made any sense to you?  |
|
|
|
Not really a surprise given you are short  Lets see if the april low holds. If that doesn't then we will flash down potentially on an elevator to hell. Haha, wait, is that an example of a "don't quote the troll post" quote? |
|
|
|
Monkey says 4 more days down. He might not count weekends though.
After that he wants it to go up for a couple of months.
I'd say monkey is probably plain wrong then, for once. Unless something radically changes in the next few days (say, bounce back to ~420-450 and staying there as week closes), we're most likely going to make a new low post-ATH. Even if we bounce up a bit from the exact spot, there's a good chance we're then in for a long decline, 2011 style. (<-- don't stress, read EDIT below) Here's the disclaimer that always seems to be necessary in this place: I'm not a "bear troll". The bear market didn't kill the coin in 2011, so let's hope it doesn't in 2014. But if there's any time not to believe in a couple of months uptrend, it's now - unless monkey placed the emphasis on "want", in which case I'd agree with him. EDIT: By "long decline, 2011 style" I don't mean similar magnitude of price decline, don't think it'll ever get that bad. I mean the overall shape, as in: an extension of the trend since July. |
|
|
|
|
Question for the devs:
What are complications to implement a lightweight client, similar to, say, Electrum, for Monero? Possible / impossible / difficult but possible?
In my experience, one of the easiest ways to get people involved in Bitcoin is getting them set up with Electrum: They avoid the hassle of running the full client, but they are in absolute control of their private keys (as opposed to web based wallets services.)
If I could submit only one missive after "official GUI client", it would be that: Electrum (or similar) for Monero.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
