I know this may sound somehow impossible for some, but really, to be successful in trading, you need to have the mind of a machine. Now, you cannot have this if you do not have a strategy and you cannot have a strategy if you do not take your time to learn.
Let me explain myself better, for instance, when using trading robots, you input your strategy, and they do it better because there is no emotion attached to it, except that they just do exactly what they are programmed to do. You cannot do well without a strategy and you cannot do well too when you keep changing strategies over and over again.
Learn, get a strategy, build on it, and then trade it like a pro. It is imperative that you get to see trading as a profession, which would always make you to see yourself having to let your strategy play out than letting your emotions rule you, which I believe most new traders are guilty of.
What makes you even better than a machine is the fact that you can think, you can fine tune your strategy with experience you keep gaining over time, but when it comes to never letting your emotions come before your strategy, you need to be like a trading machine.
I agree to 90% but you should not completely remove emotions from your decision making, it's better to learn to understand your emotions and what they're telling you, you can then choose to ignore them or not. For example fear is often a good indicator that you've invested too much or your investment is perhaps not fully researched. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin cash can't be considered the real bitcoin simply because it's not, but it is closer to what some people consider to be the vision of btc due to the lower fees. But each have their own advantages, I think the argument is similar to those arguing crypto vs fiat - I think it's a pointless debate because both can work together and people can just choose what's right for them.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think there are many coins which are worth nothing, almost everything has some attributable value and when we can go as low as 1 satoshi most coins will be above that. That being said, 99% of coins probably should have a value if we didn't have such a speculate market.
|
|
|
|
This year, 2018, the price of bitcoin has been consistently playing around $6000-$7000, but it is expected to rise by the end of the year. It is almost the end of the year. If the price did not move up by the end of the year, how much do you think and/or hope the price of bitcoin to change next year? Can we expect a huge bump or do we have to prepare ourselves for an even lower dip? What do you think?
I do believe 40 thousand dollar is possible. The logic behind that number is just twofold  . First of all I believe the highest bitcoin will ever go is 60 thousand dollars for now, maybe in the future if something happens with dollar than the devaluation of dollar could cause the bitcoin price to get higher but until than right now the highest it could achieve is 60 thousand dollars since that is the marketcap of stock exchanges of wall street. Now that is the first reason why it won't be anything above 60 thousand dollars, why it will be 40 thousand dollars ? Because, so far we have always seen bitcoin break its own all time high insanely but usually stay under the stock marketcaps, which means if its going to break the all time high it should be above 20 thousand dollars but if its going to stay under stock marketcap it should be under 60 thousand dollars. Between 20 thousand and 60 thousand the even number was 40 thousand. For what reason could it not break the stock marketcap? You also fail to account for the fact that the stock marketcap continues to grow each year, if it takes 4 years say for BTC to reach 40k then the marketcap for the stock market might be up a further 50% |
|
|
|
|
I won't place too high of an expectation for 2019, I suspect it will be a better year but still not a great year, something akin to 2015. Best case scenario I think we might see the price back at the previous ATH, more feasibly I expect we might see the price in the $10,000 to $14,000 region. That would still be a very positive year.
|
|
|
|
|
I think the price will still be in the 6000-7000 region based on the fact that it's not moved out of that region for nearly 8 months, and there's little to suggest that will change in the coming months. I hope I am wrong and I am optimistic a bullish momentum will be coming some time in 2019 but I'm not sure exactly when.
|
|
|
|
Waves used claim since its announcement that they would be the fastest bitcoin.And recently they have set the record for maximum transactions per day. So for now I think it is fair to say its the fastest blockchain.
Were these real transactions or generated transactions? Despite the fact other blockchains are faster than those of bitcoin or ethereum it's hard to see others doing more transactions just because of overall popularity. Even if waves is currently fastest there are a multitude of new blockchains claiming to offer far higher speeds than waves does in the coming months. |
|
|
|
|
I don't think this is anything too novel, China never banned bitcoin or another cryptocurrency, just multiple exchanges and ICOs because they were outside of their jurisdiction and their control. I think the main issue the Chinese government had is its residents using exchanges that were unregulated or that came under the domain of other jurisdictions. Before long I think we'll see a major exchange which is backed by the Chinese government and only serves Chinese citizens.
|
|
|
|
|
I think it has to be the Genesis block and I'd like to use the example of a baby to make my point. We do not call a baby 1 year old a year after the parents first decided to try for a baby or a year after they were conceived, no - we call a baby 1 year old a year after they first came in to existence as a real thing - their birth day. It's the same to my mind for bitcoin, before Genesis block bitcoin was just an idea or something in development, it didn't yet exist.
|
|
|
|
|
### SIGN UP ### signature campaign
Bitcointalk name : clrpod
< Telegram > @clrpod
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think this is really new news, or even news at all. It's not a change to anything. What's more important is clarity on how bitcoin will be regulated going forward. Will it be treated the same as a currency or a security for example
|
|
|
|
|
At any point it could happen. Right now we seem to be cycling back between 6600 and 7200, eventually either the bulls or the bears will run out of coins to sell or fiat to buy with. When this happens we'll know who's going to come out on top. The resistance has been strong and a move to 8k might get some people starting to FOMO in.
|
|
|
|
As an economist you should know that the market price is always the 'fair' price. If people don't want to pay it for whatever reason then they won't. If you are intent on using bitcoin to purchase goods and services as it's intended then it does not matter if you buy at $1 or $10000, the use is exactly the same.
Scalability is a clear issue and it's being worked on, it's not so prevalent right now because there aren't huge amounts of transactions but we saw in November/December what an increase in transactions can do to fees and transfer times.
Again I question your reasoning for investing, if you are looking for profit from an investment then maybe an ICO is better for you, or if you are looking for something different to bitcoin then an ICO again could be best. But if you want bitcoin and its futures then there is no reason to look to an alternative.
I fully support you. The mistake of many people is that they forget that bitcoin is a currency. They dream about what buying 1 bitcoin, they can't work until retirement and always to earn an income due to the growth of prices on the bitcoin and attract new users. I see this as an attempt to turn bitcoin into a pyramid. Bitcoin will never reach the vision of becoming an adopted currency until people can get over this idea that bitcoin is designed to make them rich. It was not the intention, if it's a by product of people who support and use bitcoin then great but it should never be the focus. |
|
|
|
|
If you mean what's the minimum market cap an asset must have before a futures market will be opened up then I'm pretty sure there isn't one. As long as the market is big enough that there's a demand then someone will list futures for it.
People are definitely manipulating the market to get better outcomes on their futures contracts, we've seen some high volatility on previous futures closing dates.
|
|
|
|
i keep seeing topics asking "why is it going down" "when will it reach $$$",... and everyone is panicking about when the "moon" is going to be!
well if you are not a trader then why are you even asking these questions? just buy and hold. come back in long term and enjoy the big profit.
if you are a trader then asking these silly questions won't help you. if you see price is not recovering and falling then just adjust your strategy to match the new trend. and i am not just talking about now. this happens each time the trend changes!
market is not always going to stay the same, it has ups and downs and sideways and ... for each of these trends you need a specific strategy. you can't just apply one thing to all of them.
You're entirely right, but it's still important to try and understand why the trend has changed and speculate as to when it might reverse. Or else you might be that guy who reverts their strategy to fit the bear trend and sells all their coins at the bottom. If you take your time to understand why the trend has reversed and don't see any reason why it will revert back to bullish (in this case) then it's time to change your approach. |
|
|
|
|
As an economist you should know that the market price is always the 'fair' price. If people don't want to pay it for whatever reason then they won't. If you are intent on using bitcoin to purchase goods and services as it's intended then it does not matter if you buy at $1 or $10000, the use is exactly the same.
Scalability is a clear issue and it's being worked on, it's not so prevalent right now because there aren't huge amounts of transactions but we saw in November/December what an increase in transactions can do to fees and transfer times.
Again I question your reasoning for investing, if you are looking for profit from an investment then maybe an ICO is better for you, or if you are looking for something different to bitcoin then an ICO again could be best. But if you want bitcoin and its futures then there is no reason to look to an alternative.
|
|
|
|
Am I missing something here, they can be worth billions and already are. Facebook's market cap is about 450bn and cryptocurrencies as a whole is at about 300bn, that's only a 1.5x difference. I think comparing crypto to facebook is a strange choice because they're very different but if I had to I would argue it actually shows cryptos to be a little overvalued just based on numbers. It's very incorrect to draw such conclusions because they function so differently and so their values should be very different.
I think it's not accurate to compare one social network and all cryptocurrencies. And I think that main difference is a numver of users. If I'm not mistaken, Facobook have more than 2 billion registered users. How many people are using cryptocurrencies? Not sure, maybe tens of millions. Just imagine how much Bitcoin and ofher cryptocurrencies would be used by, let's say - 0.5 billion or 1 billion. Then only Bitcoin without other cryptocurrencies would be worth more than Facebook. And there is another thing - after recent scandal, Facebook are loosing it's value. Not at all, or even just to bitcoin. Facebook is far far bigger in terms of global reach and influence. More than anything I think it just shows that market cap is not a great measure of the size of cryptocurrencies.
Somehow , bitcoin or crypto currencies and Facebook have different functions anyway. . Obviously , that the owner of Facebook is a billionaire as he counts the users , almost all people in the world . In cryptocurrencies just only those who knew it. So we can not be sure of the counting , that small difference is inaccurate thing. Besides crypto currencies or bitcoins users could Help Facebook and Vice versa. Maybe when crypto Will be introduced well to the people and Its growth Will continously for the next generation to come, it might overtake also the value of Facebook. It might as well have additional kind of social media at that time.
Entirely different, it's why they're so incomparable. If bitcoin can ever get close to the number of users that facebook has then it would probably be the most used currency in the world and $8000 would look like an absolute bargain. I'm sure eventually facebook will integrate some form of cryptocurrency but I suspect it may be their own. |
|
|
|
|
Am I missing something here, they can be worth billions and already are. Facebook's market cap is about 450bn and cryptocurrencies as a whole is at about 300bn, that's only a 1.5x difference. I think comparing crypto to facebook is a strange choice because they're very different but if I had to I would argue it actually shows cryptos to be a little overvalued just based on numbers. It's very incorrect to draw such conclusions because they function so differently and so their values should be very different.
|
|
|
|
So then what point is it that you are trying to make? That bitcoin will be killed by the US government or by large corporations because it is attempting to compete with them?
All those talks about Bitcoin killing banks, US dollar, gold etc.. and Bitcoin $1 to $10,000 in 9 years. All the signs of giant scam. I guess you don't care to have a logical discussion and instead just want to make connections from nothing as long as it ends with fudding bitcoin. To clarify, bitcoin was much less than $1 initially, in fact under $0.01. It would not rise so high if it was simply a scam, nor would it last for 9 years. If it does not replace banks or the US dollar it is not because it is a scam, it's just because it didn't reach such heights. |
|
|
|
I don't know what to think about the economic relationship between the united states and china. I do wonder how much of china's recent economic success can be measured in china pirating patented american technology and media. China pirates everything from gaming consoles to CD's/DVD's, to technology and industrial processes which are copyrighted intellectual property which in theory should be protected under international law. China has even gone so far as to counterfeit ferraris, luxury automobiles, car parts and other brand name products.
The chinese like to take a lot of pride in their history and culture. They had to undergo subjugation during the modern times because of falling behind in the race for technology. With centralized leadership, they have given a whole new model of governance. A shrewd, whatever-works-goes model. They stamped out dissenters mercilessly and now spread propaganda by making people chauvinize over South-China Sea, One-china policy etc. etc. They often raise issues with India just because they want to keep the "nationalism" issues burning. Despite it being clear that India poses no danger whatsoever to them. They are just too big. They have shamelessly copied and reverse-engineered most western technologies. They have invested heavily in their millitary and are now well on their way to establish the silk-route lead supremacy of the old world. They are motivated by clear selfish interests and the Chinese government acts like a selfish, shrewd individual. Normal democracies like USA, India on the other hand have to spend much more time in managing internal differences and trying to arrive at a consensus. In terms of consensus, Chinese are like single-majority PoS while our democracies are like fairly decentralized PoW. Despite all the platitudes offered by China regarding having no intentions to replace America, it's only a matter of time before they make the moves. It seems that China and the US are constantly at war with one another when it comes to politics and trade but the truth of it is that they each need one another. The US needs to be able to import many things from China for its continued success and China needs to export to the US. I see that it will continue like that for some time, until perhaps China feels that they can generate enough in sales nationally or from exports to other countries that they can play hard ball a little more so with the US. It reminds me almost of a larger bigger and a hungrier smaller brother. USA being the big brother who right now can win all the fights but once the little brother grows up it won't be the same story. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
