Looks like 23% fib of the swing from 0.00175 to 0.01 is holding so far.  But, oh boy, did I underestimate the magnitude of this dump. Guess I have to uncondition myself from the experience of trading BTC, where the moves are a bit more, hm, stately. Anyway, I could get a taste for this altcoin trading thing. Those violent swings are fun. |
|
|
|
|
2014-06-28
trend: down
intraday median daily price: $598
intraday daily MACD hist: -7.0
RI1 = 60 78 [corrected wrong value for R1]
RI2 = 51
comment: RI1 now firmly in 'reversal' territory. RI2 still more cautious, but slightly leaning towards reversal as well. If I would trade on those signals (which I don't.) (yet.) now would probably be the time to take their advice and buy. MACD substantially up since yesterday, but still negative, so I'm happy that RI and MACD "disagree", which will make it more interesting later to compare which signal turned out to be more profitable.
|
|
|
|
It seems a glitch to me.
...this "glitch" toggled all the SAR up to 1d! Can anyone explain this? I don't understand.. Could've been a fat fingered typo. I understand the trade was a glitch or whatever you want to call it.. I just don't understand what toggling1d sar means. I know it's a moving average PSAR gives a binary signal (buy, sell) if price crosses it. That one candle triggered a 'sell' signal presumably on every time frame of the default setting of the SAR |
|
|
|
But in the end, it doesn't really matter how many coins you have, the idea would be that if you have a stake in it, you should be motivated out of rational self interest to keep the network decentralized (as much as possible at least). Donating, say, around 0.1% of your BTC worth to a cause like this seems reasonable to me.
So, say if you're sitting on around 100 coins, that means donating 0.1 coins. At a total of around 1000, 1 coin. I'd expect we could get a pretty decent amount of donations together like that, if people are convinced it's a worthy cause.
That all sounds great. I would donate maybe 0.5% - 1% of my stake to some concrete p2pool improvement proposals, that had been suggested (and voted on) by miners and GHash users. I would not donate any directly to miners though as I don't see that being a long term solution. It probably bears waiting to see about this scalability issue before actually soliciting donations though. Valid point. On the other hand, as I argued above, there is currently a "bootstrapping" that any smaller pool faces: while the pool is still small, variance is high for participating miners, so they are inclined to join a bigger pool, which in turn is less affected by variance, thus attracting more miners, etc. That's why I said above, in the *early* phase of supporting p2pool, it might be necessary to counter that variance disincentive by additional donations, so that more miners join p2pool, which in turn will mitigate the problem and will (long term) make donations less important. EDIT: Latching onto what calian and holliday discussed... is p2pool integration into the reference client, in one slick package, an option? Something the devs are considering? That might gain some support from donators. |
|
|
|
|
@Giancarlo, BitBits
Maybe there is some very basic misunderstanding going on in this discussion... If I understood Blitz' post correctly, the following summary is the essence of the problem:
Bitfinex traders are kinda retarded for not winding down their longs, despite the price going counter to their position.
That claim itself is debatable (and you can very much disagree with Blitz on this), but it is not (mainly) an attack on Bitfinex, so there's no need to argue against his point from the angle of "trying to protect the exchange's reputation".
Can we agree on this part?
P.S. I traded on finex myself, and will probably do so again in the future. I have nothing against the exchange, and don't (for example) buy the front running accusations made in another thread.
|
|
|
|
Also, the "Bitfinex market share increased" argument doesn't counter his main point: longs increased by factor 9, shorts increased by factor 2.
Where did you get that? I am looking at USD swaps for the past 6 months, it went from 10m to 25 m, this is point to point a factor of 2.5 (with the 20m peak in between - a factor of 2) . This is close enough to your factor of 2 for shorts, but you are just wrong about this one as well. For fair comparison you have to look at peak values . The fact that there are a lot less shorts than longs today (June 28th) in comparison to a time point about one month ago, is simply a reflection of sentiment (bullish market). We are in the uptrend right now. The stronger the uptrend the higher the ratio of long/short is. Good point. I didn't really fact check it, but Blitz mentioned 9 vs 2. Should look at it myself to see why he got that number instead of yours. The menacing part (that he pointed out) is that over the time period in which the long to short ratio rose, price decline. That is, and I agree with him there, one big fat long squeeze waiting to happen. |
|
|
|
Thanks again Oda for the great analysis as usual. Bare with me for a minute while I poke the subject few analysts like to touch. I am wondering why everyone is so confident about the next run up being smaller in % than 2013. Imo the next run up starts when an ETF is released and all of that pent up non technical buying demand is finally provided with their preferred buying option. Once that starts I do not see this run up playing out any differently than the others. Something to consider as well is just how different the medias opinion is now vs 2013. We did not have a resident spokesperson bloomberg tv in 2013, that would have been unfathomable. For these reasons I believe the market is still far too small of a market cap to absorb the pent up demand and corresponding usual frenzy without moving the price at least over 5k, probably 10k. This will happen within a few weeks of the etf release so I am also optimistic that it will happen this year.
Thanks for the kind words. Keep in mind, my initial remarks (about how far the next "bubble" will go) are comparably off-handed. I don't have the tools to predict the long term price, and I don't trust the tools that I know to exist (log linear extrapolation), so what I believe I _can_ do is short and mid term predictions and calculations. That said, the main reason that I do believe bubble size growth will decrease over time is that I believe that as the market gets bigger, the market also becomes more professional, which also entails it becomes more opportunistic, which entails profits will be taken earlier (because if you don't take profits comparably early, someone else will, and suddenly there are no profits for you to take anymore - i.e. a game theoretic understanding emerges that profits need to be taken earlier as time progresses), which entails the bubbles will overshoot less than they did in the past. But I'm not firmly committed to this, or rather: I don't really base my trading decisions on this (relatively vague) intuition, which in a way means I don't trust my own intuition. It's just that I trust others' intuition about the 10k coin in 2015 even less. Update: Watch out for $614 to $616. Daily SMA200 (which threw us back earlier this month) is sitting there right now, and it is the previous peak from mid June. Won't be trivial to break it, I'm afraid, but if we make it through it, we'll probably pick up speed. |
|
|
|
Blitz just got totally owned.
"Antagonistic one liner" much?  Seriously though, Blitz didn't get "owned". His choice of a title was maybe too sensationalist, but read his OP again: Blitz' concern wasn't that the loans somehow aren't backed (which is what urwhatuknow/Giancarlo from finex responded to - pure straw-man rhetorics) and finex would default, his point was (quote): here is what happened the last time around on Bitfinex when things went kaboom in a liquidation cascade
[...]
What on earth are these overleveraged maniacs doing? Are they waiting for the bubble messiah and not willing to deleverage, no matter what happens?! Also, the "Bitfinex market share increased" argument doesn't counter his main point: longs increased by factor 9, shorts increased by factor 2.tl;dr Blitz didn't call out the exchange finex, so Giancarlo's childish response was completely uncalled for. He called out the "overleveraged maniacs" trading on finex though. |
|
|
|
|
The amount of American Psycho gifs posted in here is a bit disturbing. Where's ElectricMucus when you need him...
|
|
|
|
First, there are no women in bitcoin.
Second, if I left, I really worry about what will happen around here. Since this is what you people do to others whom you disagree with (coerce them to leave the forums) I'm one of the few actual voices of reason that remain.
How old are you 10? I don't ignore people very often even fonzie is not on my ignore list (he used to be though), but I will gladly add you to the list. You're a shit stain on this forum, so bye now.  You can ignore me, but you can't ignore my message! Nobody can deny the truth. Informal surveys in here (one of which I started myself), Bitcoin meetups, those I've attended myself and those I've seen pictures of, point towards ~10% "women in Bitcoin" currently. Not nearly enough to claim both genders are equally represented, but definitely too much to pretend "there are no wominz in bitcoin hur dur". (hint: "there are no women on the Internet" also doesn't mean what you probably think it means.) |
|
|
|
Yes, education on blockchain 'insurance' is key for asset holders. There have been several discussions on reddit about this, and one comment which stood out was that P2Pool was not yet scalable. If a ton of people joined p2pool (like 50% of the network), the sharechain difficulty goes through the roof, and finding a share will become very difficult...so it'll be like solo mining blocks all over again, except slightly easier with lesser reward since it's still split (so still less variance than pure solo mining).
Regarding hashrates, yes you are correct. There is still the problem of p2pool share difficulty getting too high for 'low speed' miners, but the dev (Forrestv) is considering solutions to that, like multiple sharechains, etc.
I'm also thinking about ways to create a hybrid node. A centralized node, if you will, running on the P2Pool network. This will allow me to create services similar to the other centralized pools (whatever people especially like about GHash), while still making them indirectly mine on p2pool. There's still the risk of the hybrid pool growing too large (eg >51% of the sharechain), but that's a serious problem already...Petamine were going to trial p2pool, but it looks like they didn't, because they would immediately have had >50% of p2pool's mining power. Things like hybrid nodes would be more useful when there are large mining groups on p2pool, so smaller miners could still turn a coin.
Thanks for another really interesting post. Alright, so that's something I didn't know: that p2pool doesn't scale that well yet assuming a big increase in hash rate. Is this solvable, in the near/mid future? |
|
|
|
Those already using P2Pool are not necessarily those best suited to suggesting enhancements. The most useful opinions might be from those, like zimmah, who currently use GHash and don't want to switch. They are the target, right? I'm especially interested in the opinion of larger stakeholders on this matter, i.e. those who hold large positions in BTC. The speculation forum seemed like a good place to get a reaction from them, only, so far nobody picked up that invitation.
Define "large position" 
I think the really big holders are too busy sitting in their castles to comment or fund something important like this... pffft, most people are just mindless speculators with little care or understanding of the underlying technology. Tragedy of the commons and all that.
/pessimismDon't really want to force anyone here to reveal his net worth, it's a tricky subject. So I understand it's better done in a don't ask, don't tell manner, but like I wrote above, I know from the discussions in here that there's a decent number of 100+ BTC holders on this forum, which is what I'd call a large(ish) BTC position, agreed? But in the end, it doesn't really matter how many coins you have, the idea would be that if you have a stake in it, you should be motivated out of rational self interest to keep the network decentralized (as much as possible at least). Donating, say, around 0.1% of your BTC worth to a cause like this seems reasonable to me. So, say if you're sitting on around 100 coins, that means donating 0.1 coins. At a total of around 1000, 1 coin. I'd expect we could get a pretty decent amount of donations together like that, if people are convinced it's a worthy cause. |
|
|
|
|
This isn't looking too bad. Don't count on panic buying quite yet, but we're getting there... Too lazy to screen cap it now, but take a look at the 6h or 2h chart. Beautiful, almost uninterrupted move upwards, and not mean reversion momentum driven, which means it actually counts for something.
Real test is getting to the previous top at $616 though. Any chance we'll get there in 24h?
|
|
|
|
It sounds like money needs to be spent to making mining for P2Pool the easiest, slickest, smoothest way to go.
As a long time supporter of P2Pool I will say that this is the most important step. Imagine if it was integrated into the reference client. Imagine if you could start mining directly to an address you control simply by plugging in your ASIC device and clicking a "start mining" button. Let's say it is (integrated into the reference client -- which wouldn't be that easy to achieve actually, probably a bit of a hot topic to do that). Would that actually help? It was my understanding many miners aren't even using the reference client, so what would the impact be? Correct me please, if I'm wrong. |
|
|
|
Great observations, oda!
One thing I would like to point out. The Feb '12 bottom after the $7.22 high (the lower one) was caused by a trader who thought he would slam the market and make all this money. He even gloated about it on this forum with screen shot and all. Big mistake! Someone else quickly short squoze him in one of the fastest 100% swing volatility we have seen. This doesn't change that it happened, and it still stirred the psychology in the market, so by default, valid to use the data, but it was something that wouldn't have normally happened without the help of the #2 worst exchange (maybe #3?) Bitcoinica.
Thanks! Really interesting to hear that bit about 2012. I know the history 'first hand' since last year, and have done some reading into the 2011/2012 era, but it's different if you experienced it directly or not. The entire Bitcoinica debacle is something I only know of vaguely, and it almost feels a bit like "grandfather reminisces about the war" when I hear the 2010/2011 members talk about it... and it's aweseome, I hope I can do the same in 2016 for the new members "I will never forget the SR coins auction in June 2014, kids" :D |
|
|
|
Personally i prefer Ghash because they offer a userfriendly website. I can automatically split the income between several wallets for example.
And most mining pools offer apps to check your hasrate on your phone or on a google chrome plugin. So you don't have to check all the time if your miner is still running.
If those things would be created for P2P to make P2P as userfriendly as Ghash than personally i would love to join P2P. But ight now it's just too much of a hassle.
How about listen to the actual miner who commented here? It sounds like money needs to be spent to making mining for P2Pool the easiest, slickest, smoothest way to go. That would suggest to me that donations would be better spent paying developers to implement the kind of interface that miners want. Something that reduces their headaches. It makes sense that large pools would have the resources to provide this kind of thing whereas P2P being a decentralized open source tool probably still requires the command line to get running. What we need is the Ubuntu (company) for P2Pool. +1million, any donations should go to further development of this P2Pool. I'm not a miner so no nothing about p2pool and have never used it but typically open source software is ass backwards as fuck to use compared to commercial... Would happily donate some small amount to concrete and well defined enhancement proposals for this p2pool. This is the initiative that is needed. - poll miners, why do they prefer GHash, whatever - distil this into some concrete proposals for improving p2pool (or e.g. creation of additional services/apps for this "monitoring hashrate" or w/e) - crowd fund these [and also find some qualified bitcoin devs / community members who can say that P2Pool is actually the solution here, because I have no freaking idea!] P.S., why isn't this in the main Bitcoin Discussion forum? It needs more attention.I'd welcome opening this discussion on the main discussion forum, but the speculation subforum is pretty big as well, and as I hinted at in the title, I'm especially interested in the opinion of larger stakeholders on this matter, i.e. those who hold large positions in BTC. The speculation forum seemed like a good place to get a reaction from them, only, so far nobody picked up that invitation. |
|
|
|
EDIT: just saw that this month, you got 2.5 BTC. That's not much. Any idea what the total donations to p2pool are per month, on average?
I set up http://blisterpool.com/p2pdonate about 3 weeks ago, at the bequest of a business owner who wanted an easy way to donate to "decentralized miners". His catch cry was "1% for decentralization", hoping to inspire other business owners to donate 1% of their weekly profits to something like p2pool so there was more incentive to mine on it. In my experience with p2pool (4-5 months), I've not seen a single donation. I don't know how much as gone through prior to that. After presenting the tool, there was a flurry of donations totally about 2.5 btc so far (across 43 donations, to lots of miners), with the highest being 1.0 btc. Donations have died off somewhat the last week, but they still come in every now and then. I also posted the source on github, and noticed maybe half a dozen or so donations that didn't go through my tool. I'd estimate it was around 0.5 btc through those. I do think that investors and businesses have a vested interest in regularly donating to p2pool mining...if the blockchain fails, all their assets fail with it. 1% for decentralization is a great idea, and if enough people start thinking about it, p2pool should far out pay any other pool, and that's all the real incentive miners need. Thanks. Very interesting That's kind of what I'm afraid of... individual donations coming in, but no sustained awareness yet that this should be a thing for everyone who holds a relevant stake in Bitcoin and ever wondered if 51% hashpower in the hands of one conventional pool is maybe not such a great idea. (EDIT) One other remark: once p2pool gets big enough, variance should be less of an issue than it is now, so donations would be needed only to *sustain* miners staying in p2pool, while currently we need to give extra incentives to them in order for them to *join* the pool (because for reasons of high variance when mining with a low total hashrate, they would possibly better served to join a larger pool). Correct? Donation drive / request for comments from investors still continuing :D My own pledge (1 btc) still stands. |
|
|
|
I've been using p2pool for 6 months now and interestingly someone keeps sending me additional bonuses to my mining address: Status: 84 confirmations Date: 27/06/2014 08:06 From: unknown To: 1DmMArx84zA6fpAsvDzrR1hsjnFgC5h6EK (own address, label: Mining_06_2014) Credit: 0.00002588 BTC Net amount: +0.00002588 BTC Transaction ID: b11fd4e62df27c5ddd71c139603eed8006bfa298dced10632b5dd3281883055a-000 10 such transactions this month ~0.00025000  not much but I appreciate the support Nice But that's exactly why I'd like to see the effort a bit more advertised, and perhaps bundled. More exposure means more donations are coming in, means miners become more aware of the incentives, means donators see their donation have an effect, etc. I'd hope to get some positive feedback loop going here... To get this started, I'll pledge contributing 1 btc to this effort (EDIT: to be clear, not your personally I meant as a donation to an address as described in my OP). But I'm still waiting for any non-miners to say what they think of this, and whether they care to make an effort as well (or maybe say that they did already). |
|
|
|
2014-06- 26 27 (fixed ) trend: down intraday median daily price: $582 intraday daily MACD hist: -11.0 RI1 = 57 RI2 = 50 comment: interesting. one or two days of positive price action, and RI1 crosses 50, i.e. signals reversal. But as I said one post above, I'm worried about false positives now that I made it more sensitive, which is why I'd rather look at RI2, which is at 50 right now, i.e. waiting for a bit more confirmation before calling it a reversal. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
