|
Oh neeeein! Wieso hab' ich diesen thread erst jetzt entdeckt! Bin bestimmt schon zu spät um noch komplett einzusteigen und massive Profite heimzufahren, oder?
Falls du nochmal zurückkommst, LanMachine, hier mein Angebot: ich bin im Besitz einer *höchst* wertvollen, turmähnlichen, Eisenstrebenkonstruktion im Grossraum Paris. Deren Gegenwert in btc wäre ich bereit in deine fantastische Method zu investieren.
|
|
|
|
[snip]
Ach, und das Bullshitbingo wie z.B. "Heuristik" kannst du aufgrund des damit verbundenen Halteproblems vergessen.
AV Heuristik mit "Halteproblem" abzufertigen ist ungefähr so sinnvoll wie einem Grundschüler der die Grundrechenarten lernt davon abzuraten wegen "Gödel I und II". Der einzige der hier Bullshitbingo (deine Worte) spielt bist du. |
|
|
|
|
Quick, someone calculate the ratio price/(page no. of wall thread) over time.
|
|
|
|
no im saying that the unbanked masses main concern is access to food and water. people with bank accounts litterally take dumps in drinkable water. so just stop pretending that bitcoin will change those unbanked masses lives. What should change is the centralisation of the world's resources.
It is an incredibly narrow (and supremely arrogant) point of view to consider anyone who is not "taking dumps in drinkable water" to be so poor they must be starving, sub-Saharan Africa style. There are upwards of 2 billion people that could immensely benefit from BTC going mainstream, and, no, they are neither starving nor US/Euro level rich. i was more thinking of india slumb style since i've been there recently and felt quite ashamed. and sure about 2billion "medium poor people" could benefit from bitcoin.. but only after the first billion that we are make profit.. on their back... sadly as always. thats all im sayin. Well, I'd suggest to get this idea out of your head that BTC being a profitable investment and BTC being a tool for the greater good are mutually exclusive. We (the (relatively) early investors) are the liquidity providers BTC needs to make it work as a tool. We take a big risk, we are being "rewarded". Unless you subscribe to the Bitcoin = Ponzi hypothesis, which I really hope you don't, there is no contradiction between investing to see BTC succeed *and* see a decent ROI. |
|
|
|
no im saying that the unbanked masses main concern is access to food and water. people with bank accounts litterally take dumps in drinkable water. so just stop pretending that bitcoin will change those unbanked masses lives. What should change is the centralisation of the world's resources.
It is an incredibly narrow (and supremely arrogant) point of view to consider anyone who is not "taking dumps in drinkable water" to be so poor they must be starving, sub-Saharan Africa style. There are upwards of 2 billion people that could immensely benefit from BTC going mainstream, and, no, they are neither starving nor US/Euro level rich. |
|
|
|
It's trivially easy to buy and sell bitcoin face to face. Why should we care if bitcoin fails by your definition? If is is being used, it is succeeding to us.
If bitcoin is banned (again, an hypothetical scenario -- I don't think it will be), BitPay will close. You will not be able to use bitcoin to pay for purchases on internet stores lke Amazon and Overstock. You will not be able to pay for hotels, travel or entertainment,. You will not be able to use bitcoins to buy newspaper, coffe, groceries, pay the rent. You may be lucky to find a plumber or real estate agent that accepts bitcoin, but it will be risky (IRS etc.) Your salary will be in old money and you will not have any legal way to convert it to bitcoin. If you pay for something in advance with bicoin, and the other side does not deliver, you cannot complain to the police. And so on. So, what would you use your bitcoins for? knee-jerk deference to authority
Although many people (myself included) are unhappy about the government they have, the vast majority actually wants a strong government with effective laws, police and courts -- because they know what happens when those things fail. Your premises are absurd, which implies any conclusion can be derived, and hence all are possible.
Er, which premises are absurd? Agreed on the point you just made (if BTC is illegal, it will never take off the way it would otherwise), but disagreed on the entire discussion: It is extremely unlikely, imo, that Bitcoin will be outlawed entirely. Any country doing so faces the major risk of missing out on huge economic growth potential through BTC related jobs, industries, etc. Banning BTC won't happen in the Western industrialized nations (and Japan). Regulation, on the other hand, will come (and we will have to find ways to work around it  ) |
|
|
|
|
Hey. Nice model.
Care to calculate (and post) the R-squared value for it, so we can see how it compares to the conventional time-based loglinear models?
|
|
|
|
However, we are currently witnessing all the bears, even the pretty smart ones, going full retard. It kinda boggles my mind? Never seen anything like this before.
Care to give an example of what you mean? To me at least, the delusionally bullish posts ("that's it! trend reversal choo choo!") seem pretty balanced right now with the bear FUD ("Single digits, mark my words!"). But maybe i'm biased... |
|
|
|
He, almost had me for a second. Thanks for the link, though. This is (long term) pretty good news: Gavin is vastly overqualified as a glorified coding monkey, so him taking a more 'abstract' stance on Bitcoin development is long overdue, imo. |
|
|
|
I personally doubt that after fall to 100-200$ bitcoin will rise again. Just scare to think about all those people who newly bought all those gridseeds, dragons with THs of power, thinking they will get money back. But now, difficulty is still rising, and value is falling. This hardware will never ever get your money back. Is htere any other purpose for SHA256 ASICs? Can you hack protected files with it?  Where do people get this retarded idea from that "Bitcoin is dead if it falls below price x". Oh yeah, I know: from the same jumping-to-conclusions part of the brain that tells them "we never fell below the previous ATH, so it can't happen this time either"... 2) (More seriously) I see this as a dotcom crash scenario. Yes, the crash in price will convince a lot of miners and other companies to rethink (i.e. exit and try something easier). But few serious businesses expect to make money in the first year. The ones that will survive and provide value will have thought of this and realised that this is a long-term (meaning longer than 3 months) game. The fall just cleans up the landscape faster than otherwise would have happened. And I start thinking 2014 will be the year in which the market tests the resolve of those who hold that belief. Agreed on the rest, btw. |
|
|
|
Is this party still happening?
current status is still that daily average needs to be above 1000 for 30 days in a row on bitstamp to trigger the party. it is still alive.... tickets are cheap....  Glad to hear you got a reasonable system in place to determine the party can really take place... one small suggestion though... Your current system say daily EMA/SMA stays above 1000 for 30 days, right? That's still a bit dangerous, tbh. January saw a pretty stable daily (E/S)MA for about 30 days, and then it dropped like a rock nonetheless. A slightly more conservative choice would be: 30d (S/E)MA reaches 1000, and price doesn't close below 1000. ... anyway, I'm still hopeful we'll get there eventually. Might take another year, but eventually, we will have that party |
|
|
|
I personally doubt that after fall to 100-200$ bitcoin will rise again. Just scare to think about all those people who newly bought all those gridseeds, dragons with THs of power, thinking they will get money back. But now, difficulty is still rising, and value is falling. This hardware will never ever get your money back. Is htere any other purpose for SHA256 ASICs? Can you hack protected files with it? Where do people get this retarded idea from that "Bitcoin is dead if it falls below price x". Oh yeah, I know: from the same jumping-to-conclusions part of the brain that tells them "we never fell below the previous ATH, so it can't happen this time either"... |
|
|
|
It is as sad as this: it did not break the resistance at 460 so the 101 TA gamblers decided it must go down.
Brace yourselves again.
Eh. Maybe we're gamblers, but we're not the ones keeping the price down. I actually agree (to my own surprise) completely with billy: if we see such pathetic volume so close to the previously perceived absolute bottom of 400/380, then that can only mean one thing: it is no longer perceived as the absolute bottom. Everything else follows from that. /2cent |
|
|
|
...
PS. The point of the plot is to show the AVERAGE gain/loss PER YEAR over the last N days, rather than the accumulated gain/loss factor. Which, in an extremely volatile market like Bitcoin trading, is an abso-fucking-lutely pointless metric. |
|
|
|
|
Never mind the noise above, waveaddict.
In case anyone cares, I recently became a subscriber, and my first impression is that his newsletter is worth every cent.
|
|
|
|
Through the last week I have been buying in the 450-520 range (first time buyer). I am all in and prepared to throw more of my monies at BTC in a few days if we don't run into an upswing by then. I have been lurking for a month, many thanks to those whom contribute their knowledge to the thread. I will be keeping my mouth shut around here until I learn the ropes a little more.
HEY! Noob! Don't get out of line here! The accepted behavior is to immediately start 4 to 5 bullish or bearish FUD threads (depending on whether you sold or bought at the time). Get cracking. Also, insulting longtime members helps, throw those elbows around What the HELL is wrong with you, Mr. Hero member, huh? |
|
|
|
Through the last week I have been buying in the 450-520 range (first time buyer). I am all in and prepared to throw more of my monies at BTC in a few days if we don't run into an upswing by then. I have been lurking for a month, many thanks to those whom contribute their knowledge to the thread. I will be keeping my mouth shut around here until I learn the ropes a little more.
HEY! Noob! Don't get out of line here! The accepted behavior is to immediately start 4 to 5 bullish or bearish FUD threads (depending on whether you sold or bought at the time). Get cracking. |
|
|
|
Jetzt verstehe ich dich, allerdings sollte man zum Vergleich auch gleiche Bedingungen schaffen. ;)
Sollte das Beispiel mit den 1000 Coins auf dich zutreffen, dann wow. Dann bist du wirklich sehr frueh eingestiegen. Dann wuerde ich eventuell exakt genau wie du handeln, Fuesse hochlegen und wenig bis gar nicht aggressiv handeln. Obwohl, probier es mal mit sagen wir 10% zu spielen. Du wirst gefallen dran finden, da bin ich sicher. Der Kick und die Freude wenn man wieder richtig lag macht Spass. ;)
War nur ein hypothetisches Beispiel. Übrigens, gegen das "Füsse hochlegen" wehre ich mich :D Ist echte Arbeit zu versuchen, den Markt auf ein bis zwei Wochen im Vorraus zu "lesen". Aber es stimmt, aktives Handeln ist eher die Seltenheit, im Durchschnitt kaufe/verkaufe ich alle zwei bis vier Wochen. EDIT: Und, Respekt übrigens wenn, was du in 'nem anderen Thread geschrieben hast, stimmt und du dein Depot vervierfacht hast. Das ist dann tatsächlich die Ausnahme ("15%" oder so was hehe) |
|
|
|
1100% < 2000%, also so ganz egal ist das nicht. Es ist sicher gefaehrlicher, aggressiv zu handeln, ohne Strategie. Mit Strategie ist es allerdings nicht ganz so schlimm und relativ ueberschaubar.
Nein, da lag ein Missverständnis vor. Ich sage nicht dass deine "aggressive" Strategie auf die selbe Depotgrösse genau so profitabel ist wie die "vorsichtige". Dein Beispiel hat für den Fall natürlich gezeigt, dass aggressiv und häufig handeln mehr Gewinn bringt. Mein Punkt war, dass wenn z.B. Depot (a) 10 BTC ist (oder der Gegenwert in USD/Euro), und Depot (b) 1000 BTC ist (nur als Beispiel), dann ist aggressives, also häufiges handeln mit einem Volumen von 10 BTC für (a) profitabel, aber nicht für (b), weil es in Relation zur Gesamtgrösse kaum etwas verändert. Falls du dann als Konsequenz die "aggressive" Strategie mit dem gesamten Depot (b) fährst, dann frisst dir slippage deine Gewinne weg bei den häufigen trades, kommt also auch nicht in Frage. Die Konsequenz also: wenige, aber profitable trades machen, mit der Gesamtsumme (oder einem relevanten Teil der Gesamtsumme). Korrigier mich bitte, wenn wir uns immer noch missverstehen. |
|
|
|
Ja, wie gesagt, sorry für die Anmache. War unnötig meinerseits. Ich handle oefter in den Markt, und nehme kleine Gewinne mit. Wenn man die summiert kommt ordentlich was zusammen in 1 Monat.
Stimmt wohl. Aber man muss es auf das Gesamtdepot sehen, oder? Also: sagen wir mal ich handle mit ca. 10 BTC und macht wirklich satte 10% pro Tag, also 1 BTC -- das sind dann, nicht kumulativ gerechnet (weil sonst die Annahme mit "10 BTC Handelsvolumen" ja nicht mehr lange stimmt), 30 BTC pro Monat. Sicher nicht schlecht, aber je nach Grösse des Gesamtdepots reicht das eben nicht, um signifikant das Depot zu vergrössern. Wobei, im Durchschnitt wäre es glaube ich egal: ich könnte mit einem Teil des Depots "aggressiv" handeln, und würde wahrscheinlich ungefähr so viel Gewinn machen wie jetzt, da ich mit meinem ganzen Depot "vorsichtig" handle. Das Problem ist nur: wenn ich mit einem Teil meines Depots "aggressiv" handle, dann heisst das, dass der Rest in USD liegt, richtig? Und dann kann es sein dass ich, wenn ich den Einstieg verpasse mit dem Gesamtvolumen, dass mir satte potentielle Profite entgehen. Bzw. wenn ich alles buy & hold mässig nur sinnlos in BTC belasse, dann kann es sein dass ich mitansehen muss wie mein Depotwert in USD/Euro dahinschmilzt, möglicherweise auf Monate. Darum sehe ich selber nur die Möglichkeit so zu handeln. Eine Sache noch: ist übrigens vermute ich fast mal nur 'ne Frage der Zeit bis du selber vor dieser Entscheidung stehst. Ich sehe du bist seit Ende des letzten Jahres dabei, richtig? Ich sag mal, noch ein Jahr und dein Volumen ist ebenfalls nicht mehr so einfach handhabbar dass du per daytrading massive Profite fahren kannst. Wäre wirklich interessant dann nochmal auf diese Diskussion zurückzukommen. Nebenbei: das oben klingt möglicherweise arrogant, ist es aber nicht. Ich hatte einfach nur das Glück ca 9 Monate früher einzukaufen, also zu nem Bruchteil des Preises. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
