$4.21 'wall' has gone..
didnt really notice it much myself. the resistance between 4 - 4.20? anyway, i bought back in at 4.22 about 10 minutes ago i win? |
|
|
|
sorta makes me wonder why ppl are selling at 10 cents below latest buy price, considering someone has bought like 20,000 in the last 10 minutes
Because a guaranteed profit sometimes beats placing an order and hoping the trend continues. if you mean 'sometimes' as in '95% of the time you'll make less'... this isn't a sell at $4.69 after a buy at $4.70. it's a sell at $4.60 after tens of thousands have been bought over a period of 30 minutes... well above the $4.60 mark. Sometimes bitcoin prices are quoted using the lower exchange rate, and when the bitcoins are received they are sold with a market order. Some services do this automatically. That doesn't make any sense. But I guess it's possible someone may have been using a buy stop, if such a thing exists somewhere (bitcoinica?). I have no clue, since I only use mtgox. |
|
|
|
sorta makes me wonder why ppl are selling at 10 cents below latest buy price, considering someone has bought like 20,000 in the last 10 minutes
Because a guaranteed profit sometimes beats placing an order and hoping the trend continues. if you mean 'sometimes' as in '95% of the time you'll make less'... this isn't a sell at $4.69 after a buy at $4.70. it's a sell at $4.60 after tens of thousands have been bought over a period of 30 minutes... well above the $4.60 mark. |
|
|
|
|
sorta makes me wonder why ppl are selling at 10 cents below latest buy price, considering someone has bought like 20,000 in the last 10 minutes
|
|
|
|
What rally? traded flat trend ...
yeah, i suppose in terms of bitcoins, going up 7% in the last 12 hrs isnt really a rally |
|
|
|
There are some bots on mtgox continously executing microtrades (often less than 0.01 BTC). Either buying or selling to make sure last price is either to the upside or to the downside of spread. Those may manipulate the charts, depending on how you make them. Will your charts be influenced by such bots, or do you take care to remove those microtrades before generating the charts?
Using a bot to manipulate technical analysis, and play mind games on people making trading decisions just from watching the charts, is a neat trick if it works. :-)
They don't manipulate technical analysis. The spreads are often very tiny, so the price won't change more than a few pips by this strategy. They also don't generate any meaningful volume to influence certain indicators. So they aren't a problem at all. Besides, using technical analysis, bars represent a lot longer time frame than a few seconds, so you won't see the movements caused by those micro trades either.
In fact, the bitcoin market has been quite straightforward to predict over the past 1.5 years - as it displays great "textbook-like" patterns.Do you think Economics professors might use examples from the Bitcoin network in their teachings?  Might be a win-win, since these are such "textbook" patterns. I wonder, what other commodities / markets have shown such textbook-like patterns in the past? not a bad idea. In fact, the triangle I was predicting is currently almost perfectly forming. even though I was predicting it, I could not believe my eyes how mass bitcoin psychology really works so perfectly Which update contains the triangle you're talking about? I can't seem to be able to find it. Or are you talking about the triangle in the attachment, which was send in a separate email on February the 18th? To checking if I'm looking at the correct one  Thanks! Edit: Hmm, wait. That triangle isn't valid anymore. Which triangle are you talking about? Could you help me out please? Thanks! Over the past several days a symmetrical triangle pattern has been forming. Here's my sketch:  looks like it broke out to the upside on your symmetrical triangle pattern bitcoin technical analysis owns, need some more benzos |
|
|
|
|
I tried it for a bit, getting about 2.5% reject rate as opposed to 1% or so on EMC (and probably half of these occur after a block is solved). Not too keen on paying for the 'mining monitor', either.. ah..
|
|
|
|
triple bottom off the real resistance level
Surely you mean support? No, I mean resistance They're interchangeable. lol. |
|
|
|
|
triple bottom off the real resistance level
or someone just wanted some adderall
|
|
|
|
We charge a fee because we work hard on a daily basis and often including the weekend to provide state-of-the art technical analysis. Our purpose is to equip people interested in bitcoin with tools to be on the right side of the market more often than on the wrong side.
Technical analysis that doesn't hold any meaning really in regards to bitcoins. Though I will concede that you must have enough followers by now that you're able to sell or buy some stash before issuing your next newsletter, w/ whatever technical indicators best suit your intended position. But if you want to speak of it as a stock, primary resistance levels would be in the 3.9-4.2 range, many times stronger than any "resistance" in the ~$4.70 area. Too much emphasis on just a few indicators. I'm just waiting for a press release about how there are lots of drugs for sale on silk road. Oh, I guess I should mention that I took a position at ~$4.21-$4.22 several hours ago. |
|
|
|
Here is a new bitcoin mid term chart analysis and forecast http://blog.bitcoinwatch.com/
And also, for new people interested (i) to receive bitcoin price forecasts and (ii) trading advice and training:
You can get a -40% trial offer for 3 BTC if you subscribe until Feb 22:
http://bit.ly/qJDsYw
Why would you even charge a fee? More sheeple in the herd = easier to manipulate to maximum profit. People have to buy their drugs at some point, though.... and it takes a lot more bitcoins than it used to. |
|
|
|
-guide- So i followed the guide and everything worked out, except i have 3 GPU's in this machine and now it's only recognizing 2 of them (the one's in crossfire) when i disable crossfire it will only 'see' one of the GPU's, also using Phoenix 1.7.x -k phatk2 VECTORS BFI_INT AGGRESSION=11 worksize=128 FASTLOOP=false & -k phatk VECTORS BFI_INT AGGRESSION=11 worksize=128 FASTLOOP=false are 20MH/s slower than using SDK 2.3/CCC 12.1 per GPU (The onyl 2 it can see), in the device manager all of the GPU's are directed towards that folder. I'm going to unfortunatly have to revert back and continue with 12.1/2.3 12.1/2.3 = 301MH/s 11.6 = 287MH/s The third GPU is recognized in MSI Afterburner/Sapphire TRixx/GPU caps viewer/Windows Devices, but not GUIMiner as a usable device, i'm going to start up a thread quickly to see if i can get some information on CGMiner. You have the wrong settings for your GPU for 11.6/2.4, and you were likely using 12.1/2.6 before, since 2.6 comes with that driver, gets installed in windows, and overrides whatever you thought you were running, and work OK with a smaller worksize. -k phatk2 VECTORS AGGRESSION=12 worksize=256 FASTLOOP=false, plus underclock your GPU memory to 300Mhz or so. Remove the crossfire link if you are going to mine, and make sure each video card has a monitor connection (or dummy plug) plugged into it. ..or Just install 12.1 (which installs it's SDK 2.6 runtimes), use the stock memory speeds, and with the latest Phoenix use: -k phatk2 VECTORS4 AGGRESSION=12 WORKSIZE=64 FASTLOOP=False On my computers running 3 cards (both CPUs are underclocked, one is a single core and one is a dual core with one core disabled) if I set the aggression higher than 10, the CPU usage jumps to a sustained ~50-60%... @ aggression level 10, it's less than 5%. Aggression level 11 is slightly faster in terms of mhash, aggression level 12 actually degrades performance. Probably depends on your CPU. Don't see why you'd want to waste a lot of extra $ running a high power CPU, though... the diff between agg 10 and agg 12 is probably a percentage point. |
|
|
|
$4.21 'wall' has gone..
didnt really notice it much myself. the resistance between 4 - 4.20? anyway, i bought back in at 4.22 about 10 minutes ago |
|
|
|
|
Better to look at electricity costs in the US by state. There are places in Texas where you can get (residential) elec for less than .08 per kwh (and some even cheaper, like Utah, Wyoming, Idaho... maybe .06c)
|
|
|
|
To the post above me, diapolo kernel is still slower than phatk 2.2 by phateus in all versions of sdks.
In any case, this is an intriguing problem; it's something I'd like to fix hands on (or remotely). I'm wondering if gpu activity is 100% when mining and not something like 60%.
Uh, in SDK 2.6 the optimum settings are about 1% faster.... which won't allow you to underclock your memory... which will either a) cost you more in electricity than performance gained in the first place, or b) cause your card to fail much sooner. Care to prove me wrong, or just spout more BS? |
|
|
|
|
the 'technical analysis' guy over at bitcoin watch probably sold all his bitcoins & posted vry indepth analysis involving bollinger bands and the MACD. just has to wait for it to go low enough for him to buy some more, and then tell people how his prediction was true again , and now he's bullish
|
|
|
|
I find it funny how everyone sort of ignored me there. If you're going to test the kernels, test them to the fullest extent of their capabilities. I would like to see how they measure up completely. Which means include VECTORS8 with the GOFFSET=false
Slower, on all worksizes (ed: well, cpu was faster) |
|
|
|
I finally got a 5870 to mess around with, and, yeah, the "best" memory setting on that is diff than the 5830.
At 1000/395, it gets 440mhash, at 1000/310, 448mhash, etc.
1/3rd core speed is considered the rule. So, in your case, 1000/333. Small test size, but results were similar to 1000/310. I know if I set my 5830 to 1000/333 instead of 1000/395, it drops it quite noticeably (agg 9, ~316mhash @ 395 to ~305mhash @ 333) |
|
|
|
|
I finally got a 5870 to mess around with, and, yeah, the "best" memory setting on that is diff than the 5830.
At 1000/395, it gets 440mhash, at 1000/310, 448mhash, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
