No wonder cypherdoc has almost 3k posts, he accounts for almost half the posts in this thread  All hail cypherdoc, king of FUD! if i'm spreading FUD, why don't you step up and answer some of my questions in detail and prove it. i'm just trying to sort out whats going on here so everyone understands what's happening. |
|
|
|
|
thanks for bringing this up. i hadn't looked at that for quite a while. it really broadens ones perspective and makes me remember just how much potential Bitcoin has.
|
|
|
|
Now you can. Some people got zhoutonged just now…
classic even zhoutong uses the term zhoutonged it even rolls off his tong. |
|
|
|
There's always people waiting to sell that don't want to put up walls and affect the price til the last second.
same with buyers. |
|
|
|
|
those are not all my quotes and i'll agree to stop saying you're doomed b/c its quite possible for you to stay quite profitable at your customers expense.
anyways, please answer my specific questions above since you last posted.
edit:
1. does this mean Bitcoinica is going to take more risk by reducing margin capabilities or are you just going to flat out assume more risk? by taking more risk (aka buying the btc that the shorts need to cover out of your own funds) isn't this what you mean when you say "trading against your customers"?
2. its still possible to get a Bullseye event.
3. if i as a new customer deposits $50K and doesn't open a position, will those USD's get added to the shared pool and get lent out to longs to buy or shorts to cover? as a result, is it possible for a new customer to be prevented from opening a position at all in the case of a Bullseye event?
4. i'm still not clear on a buyer who hits a displayed ask @$4. is he guaranteed to get that price but just after 4 sec or can you refuse to honor it if we get a spike on mtgox?
|
|
|
|
Cashing out isn't an issue because its impossible to go into debt. Your force liquidated when your loss approaches the value of your deposit.
Not impossible and in fact it is very common. The loss can increase past the value of your deposit in the short window of time before liquidation. resulting in a loss for Zhou. |
|
|
|
spoken like a lawyer.
All the lawyers disappeared. The National Lawyers Guild adds its voice to the many others who oppose this legislation (NDAA). Our opposition is not based solely on the fact that this bill allows indefinite detention of US citizens and residents or that the presumed “battlefield” encompasses the entire globe. We oppose indefinite detention without trial because it is immoral and cruel and because it violates the U.S. Constitution and international law. The NDAA was signed into law. The BTC price in USD went up. Therefore, when legislation is signed into law the price of BTC in USD goes up. oh so encouraging. i especially liked this part: "If President Obama were committed to Constitution and international legal norms, he would veto this bill. Instead, he seems more concerned about consolidating the power of the Executive Branch at the cost of our legal and human rights. As “terrorism” and “radical Islam” have come to replace “Communism” in the federal government’s lexicon of fear, the United States continues its spiral toward a new era of McCarthyism. The NDAA is one more step down that road." Buy more Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
I entirely agree - it's very hard to show causation when any given correlation could be the side effect of a near-infinite supply of other factors.
Nonetheless, it is not a logical fallacy to suggest that there are causative relationships in the market. They're there! They're just hard to prove. The best we can do is theorize, then see how well our theories predict the future. That's the whole basis of analysis.
Difficulty clearly correlates strongly with price. It's not direct due to all the other factors I mentioned, but there is a causative relationship.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc. I am going to isolate the relevant sentences and bold the key part so you can read and hopefully understand since you missed it the first time. Different individuals value the same things in a different way, and valuations change with the same individuals with changing conditions. . . .The impracticability of measurement is not due to the lack of technical methods for the establishment of measure. It is due to the absence of constant relations. We are talking about economics with human action and not physics. But I will concede that despite the complexities and unknowables we can know something and from that something derive tendencies. spoken like a lawyer. probably Bill. welcome. |
|
|
|
what happens if i as a new customer of Bitcoinica deposit $50K right now? does it just sit there until i decide to do something with those USD's or will they be siphoned off to allow shorts to cover or other longs to buy?
I think they will be siphoned off. you better hope not b/c that would be a total ass rape for customers. not being able to buy in a Bullseye situation with your own money? why do you tolerate this? you're losing money by not being allowed to participate in an uptrend. thats just as bad as the shorts not being able to cover. you need to be able to make those gains now so as to cushion the downswings which will inevitably come. Since i can't get an answer to this question, i might as well ask an even more difficult question assuming ineedausernames answer above is correct: why is Zhou giving preferential treatment to the shorts? as in giving them USD's before longs who may in fact have gotten their long bid orders in first and who missed out on this last ramp? since when should Bitcoinica be choosing the winners vs. the losers? its just as much of a loss for a long to not have been able to climb on board this train a few days ago as it is for the short who wasn't able to cover. Summary: any trading platform that prevents its customers from trading when (4 sec or more after they initiate an order which may or may not execute at the displayed price as well as forcing Bullseye situations) and how they want (forcing limit vs market orders) is no trading platform at all; its a rigged game. |
|
|
|
Do you have any evidence to the contrary?
You both seem to be off in the weeds arguing a logical fallacy concerning correlation and causation. Ludwig von Mises: There are, in the field of economics, no constant relations, and consequently no measurement is possible. If a statistician determines that a rise of 10 percent in the supply of potatoes in Atlantis at a definite time was followed by a fall of 8 percent in the price, he does not establish anything about what happened or may happen with a change in the supply of potatoes in another country or in another time. He has not "measured" the "elasticity of demand" of potatoes. He has established a unique individual historical fact. No intelligent man can doubt that the behavior of men with regard to potatoes and every other commodity is variable. Different individuals value the same things in a different way, and valuations change with the same individuals with changing conditions. . . .The impracticability of measurement is not due to the lack of technical methods for the establishment of measure. It is due to the absence of constant relations. Trace Mayer or Bill Rounds? Welcome to the World of the Gold/Silver Replacement: Bitcoin. edit: don't miss this ramp Trace. this time it isn't coming back. |
|
|
|
i stopped reading after the 2nd paragraph in which you mention "digital drugs" preferentially over other more useful products to be bought with Bitcoin. why does everyone have to always first mention this usage?
"In April 2011, Forbes Magazine’s Andy Greenberg wrote an article describing the qualities of Bitcoin: it cannot be forged or double-spent, controlled or inflated by any government; it is not impeded by international boundaries, and some digital drug-dealers have started accepting it."
even Greenberg in the article cited mentions other uses before talking about drugs. in the paragraph immediately preceding the mention of drugs he says this:
"About $30,000 worth of Bitcoins change hands every day in electronic transactions, spent on Web-hosting, electronics, dog sweaters and alpaca socks."
Good point. Is this better? In April 2011, Forbes Magazine’s Andy Greenberg wrote an article describing the qualities of Bitcoin: it cannot be forged or double-spent, controlled or inflated by any government, it is not impeded by international boundaries, and has a geek-friendly economy of $30,000 per day, and some digital drug-dealers have started accepting it.
|
|
|
|
We'd be at $6 without Bitcoinica failing twice.
oh yes, but think of all the shorts being Zhoutonged! |
|
|
|
Bitcoinica keeps giving me the * when trying to buy... sure sign of a bull market.
**************************************************************************************** Hey what exactly does that asterisk mean? That bull's eye is winking at my long position too; is that good? :-D Seriously though, what does it mean? |
|
|
|
wow, you have a very active imagination. |
|
|
|
And if I sell instead of short-selling, will still someone take my money?   Nice crystal ball. I'll stick to a mixed strategy though, we've had "Bitcoin will rise forevaaa" before.  @Bitcoinica they will take your USD and give them to the shorts to cover! don't bother trying to get them out! |
|
|
|
Bitcoinica keeps giving me the * when trying to buy... sure sign of a bull market.
**************************************************************************************** |
|
|
|
look how far UP we have to go:  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
