I ain't 'playing victim'. There is a wide gulf from permissionless innovation that you don't happen to care for, and outright lying in order to besmirch character.
I understood the first sentence, but I couldn't make sense of the second. Care to explain? Certainly. MoA stated that I engaged in spamming in order to cripple Bitcoin Segwit. Of course, I have done nothing of the sort. As might be deduced from the fact that MoA was unable to provide a single shred of evidence for such an accusation. Ergo, MoA was lying. Likely in order to besmirch my character. how about this ... just piss off you duplicitous tosser? This is no longer 'your' bitcoin after you have now pitched your tent at the Bcash shit-show circus along with Peter_R, the other daft thinkers and outright sociopath control freaks ... why do you really keep slinking back around here, to preach to us the error of segwit ways and straying from the One True Vision of Satoshi?? it's really kind of stalky and a bit creepy. "besmirch your character"  it's an anonymous internet forum you plonker, who cares about your non-existent character? .... and after all that I didn't say YOU specifically engaged in spamming just that you were from the cohort of Bcash idiots that were cheering on, encouraging and engaging in a myriad of despicable attacks on bitcoin, including spamming, to pump their shitcoin Bcash. The amount of half-truths, lies, misinformation-spreading, slander and personal attacks against people in real life the deluded 'hard-fork now!' cultists have engaged in is disgusting, maybe heal thyself physician? Or are you just projecting the worst traits of your Bcash partners elsewhere to ease your conscience? My conscience is clear. And your impotent railing at me is silly. You seem to be playing group identity politics here. If you want to call out some behavior of mine, then do so. But I am responsible only for myself. You cannot legitimately blame me for the actions of others. Our western systems of justice threw out that illegitimate anachronism centuries ago. Asshole. Incidentally, this is indeed 'my' Bitcoin to the full extent that it is 'your' Bitcoin. I might suggest you ponder upon the meanings of the words 'permissionless' and 'uncensorable'. Nincompoop. |
|
|
|
jbreher: I don't know if you response adequately outlines what you actually would do in such a extreme downwardly volatile situation. Are you suggesting that at certain price points you would stop buying, or do you just change the amounts and the increments?
Well, my standing buy orders go down pretty far, albeit not all the way down to zero. If faced with such a decision, i think I'd probably just sit and wait for the price to come back up to me. But I might be tempted to buy more. Hmm'm... Let's talk real world numbers and the extent of your plan past 70% down...
OK, I'll come clean. The price fell below the bottom of my system in recent memory, when my bottom buy executed at $6750 (though I have another range of orders below that-- after a gap -- as well). I waited it out. I didn't need to wait very long. If it dragged on, I may have re strategized. |
|
|
|
Hey Jbreher
What sort of a listing fee was paid by Bcash to Coinbase?
Does Brian Armstrong receive a regular payment in Bcash?
I would have no way of knowing. My reasoned guesses would be 'none' and 'no', respectively. |
|
|
|
Currently, I am thinking that I am shit out of luck until the GDAX support specialist communicates back with me, and maybe I won't be able to do much, until a few more days pass, and then I perhaps I can follow up by calling up support again to check on the status.
Anyone have similar circumstances to mine?
Anyone have any suggestions regarding possible ways to attempt to expedite the processing of my frozen GDAX trading matter?
Sounds like you are in limbo, yes. Sorry to hear. Never had such an issue myself. Then again, I've not had my account hacked. In retrospect, might you have asked GDAX to invalidate the hacked account? No suggestions to offer. Sux. Sorry to hear. |
|
|
|
Are they available at penisland.com ?  (actual website that sold pens, aka "Pen Island") Yeah. So, Second Life. The VR community. You can buy and sell virtual items. Other than you can buy them inworld, there is also an internet store. An exchange. The URL: slexchange.com . Tell me you don't see it. Incidentally, I would tend to think the URL you mention would be worth more as Penis Land than as Pen Island. Then again, with the pens you're talking about, maybe I'm leading a sheltered existence. Best hoity-toitiest I ever owned was a Mont Blanc. |
|
|
|
Oh, and according to Ver, Blockstream is run by the leader of the Bilderberg Group, which is actively preventing Bitcoin being used as money.
Stale, but plausible. Perhaps when wearing a tiny scrap of foil upon your head. Henri de Castries. Look it up. |
|
|
|
1) Neither Jbreher nor I were referring to chained orders because we manually set our orders after they fill. We were talking more about incremental order setting or step setting.
True dat. 2) ...
Yes. Buy low, sell high. At all times. Incrementally. 3) The whole system is not a wash because you are able to either buy more BTC with the same amount of money or accumulate more money by the size of your orders. If you keep the exact BTC amounts, then you accumulate dollars; if you keep the same dollar amounts then you accumulate BTC (or you can do some combination of the two).
Yes. 4) The larger your amounts that you are trading, the more that you can notice that you are making money, [see 4b below]. Of course, there is no free lunch because there is risk on both ends. The larger your amounts that you are trading the more likely you could end up running out of money or btc when the price over shoots
Yeppers. 4b) and the larger your increments, the more that you make money too.
No. In general, cutting your interval in half (with a corresponding BTC per interval cut in half) will result in better performance. This is because the volatility will result in additional trades that swing the smaller interval, but don't reach the larger interval. At the limit where volatility is small enough to result in zero additional trades for the smaller interval, the smaller and the larger interval will perform identically. The tradeoff for the smaller interval size is trade fees (none for maker on GDAX), and the amount of time required to manage the system. 5) I tend to recommend to folks to begin by setting your price increments really tight
Or really loose so you don't succumb to panic in the face of the occasional bout of ludicrous volatility. And there will be occasional panic when your are getting accustomed to the system. Your choice. 6) ...
7) Even Jbreher and i have had little skirmishes about the "right" practice
Meh. From what I can gather, we are using systems that are essentially identical, though we have chosen different values for the parameters. (Incidentally, 'skirmishes'? Far be it from me to tell you how to run your biz.) You remove the "other side" order at the point you just filled, otherwise they will cancel out for sure.
I don't think that "remove" is the correct word choice. I find that when I am playing this whole system and it is going smoothly, then I am never really removing anything, but I am just adding. Once a buy order executes, then I add a sell order at a higher USD price, and once a sell order executes, then I add a buy order at a lower USD price. Yes. With the underlined amplification above. Indeed, this is the reason for the aforementioned two-price-interval gap between your standing buys and your standing sells. On that same point, I tend to let the price come to me,
Yes. Note that on GDAX, trades are free to the maker. You really win on each one,
You win on each buy&sell pair (or sell&buy pair - however you want to think about it) and the bigger your amounts the bigger your wins.
Well, the larger each win. But you'll have less wins than if you are using a smaller increment. Indeed, the larger increment can do no better in any case than the smaller interval. See 4b above. However, I frequently describe this whole process as stacking and a kind of insurance that really takes a lot of stress out of downside volatility ...
it does not do service to the whole system if you increase the amounts too much in the beginning and you end up running out of money because you over did the situation
Yes and yes. |
|
|
|
After BTC dumped so hard, it was just a matter oft time until BCH started trying to overtake again. It is rather probable that this pump is just starting and could geht BCH close to 1:1 for BTC with current weakness and high amount oft free capital!
ignored Haha! wimp. XD |
|
|
|
You can tweak the amounts, and/or you can tweak the gaps (leaving two rather than one, for example).
You can realign the whole ladder by a few dollar points (under the $500 step size, in the example I made).
But right, if you don't do that, that's the way I understand it too - you harvest your latest top when you reach a bottom, and vice versa.
Thanks for helping me brainwrap that. It seems to be more of a risk management strategy than anything. Most of the transactions are cancelling out with zero risk while ensuring that you are right there on a reversal. The method I explained earlier harvests the volatility. True, in a monotonic move, your profit is minimal. Greater volatility however increases your quantity of profitable trades. Your only real risk is that it runs off in a huge move that exhausts your supply of one side of the pair.
That is possible, if you don't have sufficient assets to ride out any macro move. Which is why I have only a small percentage of my crypto in my trading stash. |
|
|
|
...chained orders...
I have been experimenting with JJG (and jbrher)s chained order strategy on the BTC/ETH pair. Perhaps I am being dense...but I am just not getting it. It goes down, I am buying ETH every 0.001, ok fine, then it goes back up and I am selling ETH at the exact same prices...it looks like a total wash to me. Did I miss something in the explanation? You remove the "other side" order at the point you just filled, otherwise they will cancel out for sure. Example: you have orders each 500$. Sell at 8500 on the way up, but remove "buy at 8500 on the way down". Next you'll buy will be at $8000. Same for the opposite direction, buy at $8000 on the way down, remove "sell at $8000 on the way up". That's why you have a gap between your top buy and your bottom sell that is 2x your base interval. The gap is where the profit is made. Admittedly, in my most comprehensive explanation, I explicitly left the reason for such 'as an exercise for the reader'. Perhaps I should have stated it. |
|
|
|
As to the particular case, I searched through jbreher's posts to find where he told us of his employment, but gave up because the deceitfulness was all too depressing.
Perhaps he'd honour us with the relevant quote alluded to in the part I underlined, and we can take it from there.
I didn't claim that I posted anything definitive about my employment. My post indicated that my previous posting history would make a mockery of the claim that I as a USG asset. Incidentally, what deceitfulness are you referring to? |
|
|
|
Roger pumping his shitcoin again? yuck
The timing is no surprise
Yep the BCH/BTC peg dropped a bit, so the pumpers have to pump to reassure their peeps that everything gonna be ok. Lol 'splain me some BTG pump? Lol |
|
|
|
Did you know after it went up towards 20k that within a month or so it would hit 6K? I didn't.
No. But given the history, I was quite confident that, after it went up a lot in a short amount of time, it would nearly certainly drop significantly. It's not like we've not seen Bitcoin do that before. Did I know $20K for the top? $6K for the bottom? No. Which is why I have a trading strategy that does not rely on guessing correctly at minima and maxima. |
|
|
|
I ain't 'playing victim'. There is a wide gulf from permissionless innovation that you don't happen to care for, and outright lying in order to besmirch character.
I understood the first sentence, but I couldn't make sense of the second. Care to explain? Certainly. MoA stated that I engaged in spamming in order to cripple Bitcoin Segwit. Of course, I have done nothing of the sort. As might be deduced from the fact that MoA was unable to provide a single shred of evidence for such an accusation. Ergo, MoA was lying. Likely in order to besmirch my character. On the other end of the statement, the leveraging of Satoshi client assets by the Bitcoin Cash project is part and parcel of open source. There is nothing untoward nor illegitimate about doing so. This is how open source technology progresses. |
|
|
|
Tera bera and Jbreher bera... look - we have just discovered that they are related.....
Only relative of mine that you are likely to be familiar with is my cousin from Boulder, CO, USA - Falling Bear. Tera bera is however an esteemed colleague. |
|
|
|
|
And with that, I have finally caught up with the tip of the thread. Jeeze. Gotta try to remember not to go offline for a week and a half. Especially when the price is being all dramatic'n'shit.
|
|
|
|
I do indeed work in standards as my day gig. However, ones of a very different nature. Without the standards I work on, none of this shit would even start working. I thought you were too crypto rich to have a day job. The picnic bear works because he "like it..". hahahahahhaha  He works for the enemy, the USG. In his spare time he volunteers for their asset, Ver, and the corresponding chicom asset, Wu. Your assertion that I work for USG is simultaneously laughable on its face, and truly deserving of ridicule. It is quite apparent you are speaking of things of which you have zero knowledge, despite the fact that the open record in this very venue provides all required to see how truly laughable the assertion be. What asset is the USG's? You mean the Federal Reserve Note? No. No volunteering on its behalf. Oh you mean Ver is the USG's asset? First, I find the assertion that Ver be a USG asset ludicrous. You do realize he has at times been denied entry visa, right? Do you assert that as part of his 'plausible cover backstory'? Second, while our visions of the best means to free humanity from fiat slavery seem largely aligned, I certainly do not 'volunteer for Ver'. And I suppose you mean that Wu is a chicom asset? I really have little direct evidence to say yea or nay here. Never met the man. Nonetheless, I might point out that Bitcoin Segwit is dominated by Wu in any sense that Bitcoin Cash is dominated by Wu. Further, I certainly do not 'volunteer for Wu'. You should probably keep your vomitous crapulation to yourself. You are only serving to make yourself appear stupid. Actually, Jbreher. I had thought that Last of the V8 had no fucking basis at all for his shot in the dark last grasp at a USG govt assertion, so I totally shrugged off his claim. However, now that you so vehemently defended various angles for why you are in "no way" affiliated with USG in any kind of way whatsoever, I am becoming more convinced that there has to be some kind of a USG connection there, somehow... someway. New tentative theory has gotta be that picnic food eating bear is not really in the food stealing business, but instead part of dee gubmint.  and we better alert Torque to this new tentative theory, because surely he would be skillful at getting at the bottom of it... A problem with Torque, though, is that he prefers to come up with his own theories  .. You get a merit. For making me laugh. LOL even. |
|
|
|
I don’t hold with the level of racism in this thread either.
A ban of Roach would be a good start. His noodlings on physical silver don’t bring sufficient value to justify his other bullshit. I don’t give a flip if he has has been here since day 1.
Who has mod powers on this thread now ?
infofront. Don't go all entitled special snowflake on us now. While the first amendment doesn't apply to the situation here, the principle does. Handle it like a founding father would. Just ostracize him. |
|
|
|
I appreciate it, but I'm the kind of fellow that likes to be way above-board with the IRS. Zero aspiration to tempt the fates in that regard. What makes you think that taking advantage of the specifically-congressionally-created special tax treatment for Puerto Rican residents is in any way 'below board'? Perhaps because he lives in Montana. I just assumed that coinosphere.tk was talking about reading the article with the thought that BobLB might choose to live in Puerto Rico for at least 183 days out of the year in order to take advantage of aforementioned specifically-congressionally-created special tax treatment for Puerto Rican residents. I mean, as long as he's contemplating a move anyhoo. I know I've been thinking about it -- hard -- for over a year. Buy a citizenship in the South Pacific archipelago of Vanuatu for about about $280,000. The country also has no income, inheritance, or corporate tax. It’s not even customary to tip there, according to the Vanuatu Tourism Office. Use its passport to spend half the year in the USA, and half the year somewhere else. You don't even need to live there to retain your citizenship. Unfortunately, you don't get to 'check out' of the US with significant assets. Unka Sam extracts his due at the border. You could try lying about your holdings. But the truth has an annoying tendency to out. Most countries will just hand you over when Unka Sam asks. Not sure about Vanuatu. But this would be exactly one of the purposes for which 'extraordinary rendition' was created. For those not familiar, Puerto Rico is part of the US, and therefore conveniently sidesteps any such drama. |
|
|
|
But man i wanted more of This DIP first thing gonna do back in belgium is sending more fiat to Exchanges So i can BITE When needed too .............
Ferenghi Rules of Acquisition #whatever: Be judicious in choosing the proportion of your holdings that you allocate to your trading stash. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
