Большинство альткоинов торгуются на биржах в паре с биткоином.Поэтому ход биткоина увлекает за собой остальные монеты.Так как биткоин является старейшей монетой и монетой номер 1.Как сейчас для многих валют доллар является ведущей валютой Это смотря про какие альты речь Если про топовые (ну там лайт, эфир), то они все торгуются в основном за баксы. Но в целом я согласен. Как говорится, мы с Тамарой ходим парой. Я прямо сейчас специально сделал скриншот с Феникса - того, чем лично я либо торгую либо за ценником чего слежу:  Как видим, основной движняк идет именно по долларовым парам. Я понимаю, что есть масса альтов, торгуемых только за биток, но они абсолютно никакой погоды не делают в общем объеме торгов |
|
|
|
Good day fellow traders, I'm thinking of using stop loss order in my trades, can you give me some advice how you use your stop loss order? In general, it is a good idea to use stop-loss orders But you shouldn't use them blatantly and thoughtlessly. To put it differently, you shouldn't force yourself to use them just because it is the right thing to do. They should come off sort of naturally and I'm not kidding. When you force yourself to do something even if it is technically a right thing to do, you will break sooner or later making a lot of foolish mistakes in the process. But when you use them with a deep feeling of doing the right thing without inner resistance, you won't hesitate to push it through when the time comes |
|
|
|
I believe everyone know about this sentence, "patience is the main key of success of trading platform". But I am realising that in practical. I have patience but not enough I think. Because you can see the trend of RVN, I was hold it and just sold almost in 20% profit. But I didn't wait even volume was increasing, I just missed my own logic. I had enough patience really. But who know RVN will touch 1400+ satoshi but I sold it 450 satoshi only. That's why I am realising patience is the main key if success on trading platform.
The truth is that patience (or lack thereof) should be irrelevant People become impatient (or feel impatient as in your case) mostly because they are unsure of their trading decisions. So instead of trying to cultivate more patience, you would get a lot farther by cultivating true knowledge and polishing your trading skills if that is ever possible in this market. Technically, if you know what you are doing, patience or its lack become irrelevant (read, impatience comes through ignorance). In other words, it is not your patience which is the key to success in trading, it is your knowledge and skills |
|
|
|
Любое казино вещь азартная, и нацелена в первую очередь на обогащение его хозяев, а ни как не его пользователей. Как настроят скрипт возврата, так и получается. Когда - то сам верил в подобное, но на собственном опыте убедился, закинул не большую сумму, сначала не плохо поднялся, а потом все слил, и как бы не старался нормально получить не получилось С казино есть два варианта В первом случае речь идет собственно об азартных играх. Понятно, что в этом случае ни о каком инвестировании говорить не приходится, поскольку выиграть у казино можно только в случае удачи. Ну или взломать движок и накрутить себе профита (и успеть все вывести). Во втором случае речь идет об инвестирование в bankroll казино, т.е. мы вкладываем в казино свои деньги, а затем получаем процент от прибыли. Здесь много всяких разных подводных камней, но в принципе это была вполне рабочая и прибыльная тема два-три года тому назад (как сейчас не знаю) |
|
|
|
Более перспективной монетой была бы монета обеспеченная энергией как одним из главных активов современного Мира. Что стоит золото на необитаемом острове? А энергия создает всё современное движение в этом Мире, все коммуникации, обеспечивают всю жизнедеятельность и экономику на планете Гладко было на бумаге, да забыли про овраги И как вы ее собираетесь обеспечивать энергией? Не, я в принципе не против, энергия вещь нужная и полезная в хозяйстве, и технически, если бы можно было бы выпускать "заряженные" монеты (ну типа батареек), то они бы, наверное, нашли какое-нибудь применение в качестве средства платежа. Но с другой стороны, в этом случае встает простой вопрос, чем такие монеты будут лучше обычных батареек (ну там, по мелочи что-то типа AA, для более крупных трат Крона)? |
|
|
|
It looks like there are no others
I mean significant and important others. It is the major world powers like the ones already mentioned that directly determine the world policies, either directly or indirectly via institutions like the IMF (in the latter case regarding financial matters). Also, I wouldn't overestimate that "mandate" that people gave to these governments.
Again, I am trying to avoid prescription, here. In other words, I am trying to talk descriptive rather than prescriptive, and in that regard, I believe that bitcoin brings a dynamics that will contribute towards various kinds of accountability and momentum that is truly bottom upThat sounds pretty ambiguous Of course, we are hardly likely to ever get rid of top down dynamics and top down attempts at manipulation and control Obviously, they consist of people, and it is this small group of people who took control over the governments (let's cut the crap about democracy here).
I am referring to dynamics that apply across all societies, of course, some are more top down than others and some can really deviate from public mandates in the way they behave and treat people This is an obvious catch-22 problem The top down is top down specifically because it succeeded at manipulation and mind control at some point in the past. And this will always be so. Well, at least as long as humans remain social beings and thus vulnerable as well as prone to manipulation. And no Bitcoin will be able to change that And if they keep their financial and monetary policies sane overall (read, they don't hyperinflate fiat), there is little to no threat to them from crypto I am not talking about "crypto" I am talking about bitcoin. Fuck all the various pump and dump bullshit I referred to crypto here more as a technology rather than a specific coin (but let it be Bitcoin, I don't mind) Anyhow, assuming that you were referring to bitcoin, and you just substituted the word "crypto," then I am still going to make the point that bitcoin is going to force accountability of governments, and of course, we likely do not disagree that more responsible monetary policies are going to compete better and perhaps even stave off some of what seems to be inevitable in the longer term, which is the gravitation of value into bitcoin. Of course, this could take 100 years to really play out and maybe even 10-30 years to witness powerful changes in the gravitation of value towards bitcoin Actually, I want to believe in that thing myself That Bitcoin, or rather the decentralized technology on which it is based, could force accountability on governments but I seem to be more pessimistic about its prospects in this domain. Really, Bitcoin has been around for 10 years already and so what? It was mostly a speculative asset 5 years ago and things didn't change much since then. Somehow, you wouldn't really expect miracles on making governments more responsible from something which people only use to profiteer. Give these people something else more rewarding or enticing to play with and they will happily abandon Bitcoin in the blink of an eye Even if many of us active in these forum threads could be dead or on our final legs before something like BTC world currency status becomes obvious, we are still likely to witness various kinds of little by little of signs moving in that direction... just as we already should notice today that there is little by little advancements in the adoption and the power of bitcoin, even if much less than 1% of the total world population has taken any kind of meaningful stake into bitcoin I think you are overestimating the potential benefits of Bitcoin and its advantages before fiat Indeed, fiat can be a pretty dangerous thing if misused and abused. But there is nothing with Bitcoin which can't be done with fiat as well, but the opposite is not true. Economically, Bitcoin (and other cryptocurrencies, for the record) are inferior to fiat. At max, Bitcoin is an advanced version of gold but without some of its drawbacks but not all of its drawbacks. And these other drawbacks (the largest being its rigid supply which doesn't follow the demands of an economy) are what make Bitcoin ultimately inferior (though it is definitely good as a vehicle for speculation) Bitcoin is a paradigm shifting asset, and less than 1% of the world seems to have a bit of an understanding of that From an economic perspective, Bitcoin is totally subpar to fiat done right |
|
|
|
Как нормализовать звук
На будущее. Есть отличная программа Audacity. Она весьма лёгкая, в плане нагрузки на систему, не сравнимо со всякими вегасами и премьерами. Обладает очень достойным функционалам. Когда по быстрому, там так и выбираете "нормализация" подтягивает самые тихие и подрезает самые громкие, в итоге уже более отчётливо Согласен про Adobe Premiere Pro Это что-то типа Фотошопа, только для аудио, как говорится, явный оверкил. Про Audacity я много раз слышал в сети (и даже почему-то вспоминал про него вчера). Эта программа вроде бы как даже есть и под Linux, который у меня в качестве основной системы (Windows у меня исключительно в виртуальном виде). Поэтому если возникнет еще раз такая потребность, то уже попробую ее Если запись совсем плохонькая, то ручками
Думаю, там бы как раз эта функция нормализации пригодилась |
|
|
|
Anyhow, now I am feeling like I am just repeating myself in various ways.. so I am not sure what points differ between you and me, except maybe different ways of framing the issues and the dynamics and likelihood that we do not really disagree about a lot of the underlying dynamics, motivations or distinctions, but we have differing ways of expressing such I still think there is a fundamental difference in our views And not on individuals (where we seem to agree), and not even so much on institutions (this is kinda a gray zone where the possible disagreement is vague and not defined) as on governments. My point is that major governments like the US, China, Russia will never accept crypto as a full-fledged currency (other than an economic weapon against each other and the rest of the world) That would mean undercutting their fiat currencies by letting the competitor in. In simple terms, this is not going to happen as this has little if anything to do with the "honey badger" (and more with politics, so they can't be forced). Some governments may in fact embrace crypto in due course (and that's good) but they won't matter in the grand scheme of things. In these circumstances institutions won't have a say I cannot disagree with any of that, and really if we are speculating about 1-5 years down the road, that is fairly immediate term, and we can only attempt to realistically predict for short periods at a time, because what large governments do next will in part depend upon what others are doing It looks like there are no others I mean significant and important others. It is the major world powers like the ones already mentioned that directly determine the world policies, either directly or indirectly via institutions like the IMF (in the latter case regarding financial matters). Also, I wouldn't overestimate that "mandate" that people gave to these governments. Obviously, they consist of people, and it is this small group of people who took control over the governments (let's cut the crap about democracy here). And if they keep their financial and monetary policies sane overall (read, they don't hyperinflate fiat), there is little to no threat to them from crypto If we are talking about what governments are doing now in respect to bitcoin, we can attempt to measure it, and likely they are not doing very much because bitcoin remains too small, and that is back to my point. On the other hand, even though I am proclaiming bitcoin to be so damned small that neither large governments nor large institutions are acting, they are composed of individuals and smaller entities that increasingly recognize bitcoin to be important These people have everything they need in life, and above everything else they have power, virtually unlimited power. Why would they care about Bitcoin other than it potentially being pain in the ass? Bitcoin is to take power from them, so why should they really think in favor of it? But as you say yourself, it is too negligible yet to be that pain for real |
|
|
|
If you say you can do on 30-50% shitty coins, then you don't have to have a large amount to change your life, the power of compound interest will easily help speed up the process
The funny thing is that he even knows that he’s trading shitty coins. How does someone expect to make good money by trading shit coins? Nothing good is ever going to come out from trading shit coins, you yourself already knows it’s a shit coin and being a shit coin means that a coin kinda worthless or worthless for real Well, that in fact remains to be seen If he has access to insider information (I mean real shit here) like close contacts with the developers (think drinking buddies here or whatever), he may jump in at the right moment before the pump and jump off right before the dump part. Obviously, if some coin gets pumped and then dumped, someone earns a pile of money (while someone else loses as much). Whether OP actually belongs to this select group of people is an open question though When OP is able to double his investment every day/month, why not make use of the same strategy and trade a bigger amount of money. Okay let’s assume he is trading around €50 like he has said, why not trade with 500 instead and using the same strategy to see if he can double it? Well, I’m just saying, it’s up to him to decide as per this long discussions It doesn't work that way. It is pretty easy to earn a handsome percentage with a small amount, but it becomes way more difficult with bigger amounts |
|
|
|
Anyhow, now I am feeling like I am just repeating myself in various ways.. so I am not sure what points differ between you and me, except maybe different ways of framing the issues and the dynamics and likelihood that we do not really disagree about a lot of the underlying dynamics, motivations or distinctions, but we have differing ways of expressing such I still think there is a fundamental difference in our views And not on individuals (where we seem to agree), and not even so much on institutions (this is kinda a gray zone where the possible disagreement is vague and not defined) as on governments. My point is that major governments like the US, China, Russia will never accept crypto as a full-fledged currency (other than an economic weapon against each other and the rest of the world) That would mean undercutting their fiat currencies by letting the competitor in. In simple terms, this is not going to happen as this has little if anything to do with the "honey badger" (and more with politics, so they can't be forced). Some governments may in fact embrace crypto in due course (and that's good) but they won't matter in the grand scheme of things. In these circumstances institutions won't have a say |
|
|
|
Скорей всего одного "абонента" не нужно заглушать, а просто "подтянуть" второго к уровню первого Понятно, что потом общий уровень можно громкостью отрегулировать Кто-нибудь подскажет простенький аудиоредактор с подобной функцией - чтобы не искать методом проб и ошибок? И вроде бы такую функцию несложно реализовать автоматом, т.е. весь тихий звук поднимаем до определенного уровня по нелинейной зависимости (т.е. более тихий сильнее, а погромче - слабее). Это примерно как в Фотошопе можно кривыми тени поднять - простая и понятная в принципе процедура Простенький GoldWave, но я в нём не работал. https://rsload.net/soft/editor/10617-goldwave.htmlСкачал я портативную версию этой приблуды. Как нормализовать звук я не нашел (ибо для меня это темный лес), но оказалось, что в моей аудиозаписи все в принципе и так нормально слышно. Я пустой край чутка подрезал и сделал стенограмму нужного куска, так что в принципе для моих целей оказалось достаточно имеющегося функционала (думаю, еще пригодится в будущем) Добавил пару меритов за полезную наводку |
|
|
|
"реальной" цены не существует впринципе - все относительно. Никто тебе не скажет: "продавай строго за х , покупай строго за у" Вернее сказать могут, но врятли угадают
На практике, это не очень удобная позиция Даже если технически она и корректная (типа у каждого своя цена и т.д). Вместе с тем, когда говорят про "реальную" цену (в английском варианте fair price), часто имеют в виду цену, которая бы сложилась, если бы не было спекуляций. И в этом случае такая цена соответствовала бы реальному использованию того же битка в повседневной жизни. Понятно, что спекуляция добавляет к стоимости актива за счет спекулятивной полезности, и такая "наценка" может составлять большую, если не сказать, почти всю цену актива |
|
|
|
А все эти Баффеты и иже с ними, меняют свое мнение как перчатки в зависимости от того что им нужно в конкретный момент
Вы его с кем-то путаете Возможно, с Димоном из JPMorgan, у кого семь пятниц на неделе. Баффетт же свое мнение о крипте высказывал еще в далеком 2013 году, и он его не менял (а спрашивают его постоянно). Но контингент подобный Уоррену Баффетту (например, его подельник Чарли Мангер) не склонен инвестировать в спекулятивные активы, что объясняется уровнем их инвестиций (миллиарды долларов). Это, кстати, отнюдь не исключает возможность потерь, как и потерю возможностей, но предполагает осторожность в выборе инвестиционного актива. Например, Баффетт в свое время проморгал Микрософт, а теперь он играет в покер с Биллом Гейтсом, а последний входит в совет директоров Berkshire Hathaway (конторы Баффетта) |
|
|
|
I was attempting to make a description of the status quo in terms of the reasons why bitcoin advantages regular people rather than institutions, and then you seem to have been making a prescriptive statement out of the subject.
Bitcoin doesn't give any shits about who you are, and you can enter into bitcoin. Similarly, "we" have no choice about who enters into bitcoin, so if BIG institutions want to come into bitcoin, then they can come into bitcoin.
I was just attempting to assert that many of them neither perceive a benefit to enter into bitcoin at this time, but with the passage of time, they are likely going to perceive various benefits to entering bitcoin and they will enter, whether "we" like, want, appreciate or disapprove their entrance into bitcoin or not I'm trying to draw a line between simple folks and financial institutions To put it simple, individuals are mostly not restricted by the government in their "investment policies", so to speak. So even if the government (any government, for that matter) frowns upon Bitcoin's use and possession (up to a point of imposing an explicit ban on crypto), people may not give a fuck about what the government would think ("my give a damn's busted") But this is certainly not the case with financial institutions even if they come to see a lot of benefits and potential in Bitcoin but their respective government is not so pro-Bitcoin as they might want it to be. Indeed, they could try to change such a rogue government, but this would be a different story |
|
|
|
Yeah sure it's not impossible, that price range can be easily attained with little time I meant it even surpassed that price range to a certain level which none would think of and the aggressive rate it has shown was not a thing that could comprehend easily. The thing is it will not settle for a price that is certain with long periods of time.
well, this time I'm also very sure that the price of bitcoin will really be above the price of $ 4000. now the price development is happening quite fast. even I feel that the price will continue to grow far above the price of $ 4000. We shouldn’t be talking about $4000 trend again, that one has already long gone in the history of Bitcoin for now and presently now, we are on the era of $5000 which I also will end very soon to give chance to more onward value Never say never I understand that we all want to believe in the further rise (well, let's at least hope that we won't tank but continue to stay over 5k). But if anything, I would never say that the "good old days" of the $4000 trend are long gone by now as it was only a couple of weeks ago that we we hovering a little over that mark. And it definitely won't take much (and long) to get back there even though this is not we could ever hope for |
|
|
|
Нет у битка реальной цены. Разве что 0. Цена будет прыгать от спроса на него. Большой спрос цена вверх. Нет спроса, цена вниз. Просто же Ну технически можно, наверное, посчитать какой-то ценник Биткоин же имеет какое-то реальное применение и помимо спекуляций. Ведь кто-то же им пользуется для отмывания бабла, скажем, ну или еще какой околокриминальной деятельности. И к тому же он обладает транзакционной полезностью, а любой ограниченный актив, обладающей определенной полезностью, неизбежно будет иметь и определенный ценник, определяемый балансом этих двух факторов (ограниченностью и полезностью) |
|
|
|
Also one of the major ASS propositions of bitcoin remains on the individual level to empower individuals in the retention and the movement of their value, and perhaps only a few BIGGER type institutions are recognizing some kind of concrete value in that kind of power and monetary sovereignty.. which is a BIGASS use case that is already here.. and not speculation Individuals are not the same as big institutions The latter have to play by the rules set of their respective governments lest they should suffer unfavorable consequences. So it is not so much about institutions, big or otherwise, as about acceptance of crypto by governments. But if there is such acceptance and embrace, will we ever want these big fish sticking around? In fact, I don't think they actually need crypto as they are cool with fiat being backed up by the government. This is not the case with simple people, though, as they are to pay the price for the government shenanigans with fiat money |
|
|
|
Ну, и ещё вопрос, а зачем вселенной бесконечно плодить наших "прошлых" и "будущих" клонов?..
Ну это как бы не совсем моя теория. Существует теория бесконечного числа связанных вселенных, которые в совокупности детерминированы (типа Бог не играет в кости). Каждая вселенная по отдельности при этом случайна, но если их рассматривать в совокупности, то, например, квантовая неопределенность (принцип неопределенности Гейзенберга) перестает существовать. Другими словами (в предельно упрощенном виде), если в одной вселенной выпало на красное, то в другой обязательно выпадает на черное А от этого уже совсем недалеко и до временных (т.е. прошлых и будущих) вселенных |
|
|
|
Demo trading can still not be compared to real trading, that is what real trading will always use to senior demo in all areas, most people who has practice with demo end up becoming great with demo but the moment they are faced with real trading, they tend to panic a bit It cuts both ways, actually Technically, demo trading allows you to learn how to trade, i.e. how to add orders, cancel them, and do most other things you would typically do with real trading. But the catch is that you won't feel real emotions in demo mode and that can be harmful along the road when you get down to real stuff. In fact, it can't possibly teach you not to panic Quite the contrary, when you start to panic for real, that will be a sort of scary discovery to you, an unpleasant revelation. I think that's one of the reasons why demo trading should be avoided when you can trade for real with small amounts and feel a bout of small panic now and then to change your ways accordingly |
|
|
|
Ко мне с Феникса в почту постучали, типа нахера я открыл короткую позицию по лайту, имея при этом перекрывающую ее длинную позицию (т.е. имея лайт у себя на балансе). Начали мне втирать, что практически то же самое можно сделать просто тупо продав часть лайта за баксы (а то я не знал, ага). Вроде бы какая на самом деле разница?
ну и чем кончилось, чем их-то это задело? Вроде как им-то такой вариант наоборот выгоднее - вот что и интересно, ЗАЧЕМ им-то это втирать?.. Тем более что "деталей" дофига - этого они тоже не могут не понимать Там не очень хорошая история приключилась Мне по ошибке на Фениксе принудительно закрыли маржинальную позицию (по сути, хедж). Поскольку я сразу же по максимуму попадал под рыночный риск, я ее был вынужден открыть вновь. Через несколько минут биржа мне восстановила старую позицию, и фактически теперь у меня оказалась двойная маржинальная позиция ("из огня да в полымя"). Здесь уже я был вынужден сам закрывать свою короткую позицию. Биржа в конечном счете таки признала свой косяк и компенсировала мне убыток в 20 баксов (торговые комиссии плюс проскальзывание). Но осадок, как говорится, остался |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
