Proudhon is a strange duck.. or donkey or whatever he is.

We were talking about a possibility of 15 bitcoin billionaires possibly reading and/or participating in this WO thread.  I was considering the we might not yet have 15 bitcoin billionaires who are potentially following this thread, but even though proudhon comes off as a bit of a dweeb, he likely would be a candidate for being either amongst the first 15, or if that does not work, at least amongst the 1st 150 bitcoin billionaires who are actively reading or participating in this thread...... another 10x this cycle may well put that duck/donkey into contention...

I was not going to get into naming any names for potential bitcoin billionaires, but we did have a member named Loaded who at one point had 40k bitcoins, but hey maybe those kinds of guys do not participate in or read this thread.. and wasn't there a member named Goat, too.. who purportedly had a lot of coins.. .some people might not want to say their number of coins.. and sometimes members go AWOL.. like one of our most famous of all members satoshi, and surely we are not completely confident about how many coins satoshi had, even though we get some sense that he may well have donated his coins to the community in terms of limiting the BTC supply by something close to 1 million coins... which would be in the neighborhood of $46 Billion in value as I type this post...

For sure there are some forum members, other than satoshi, who even engage in some kind of conduct to make us wondering about their real lives.. and surely none of us live too long.. so in that regard, some members stop participating in the forum and we can wonder if they have health issues or if they are no longer amongst us current earth dwellers....and sometimes they come back to the forum at later dates, and other times we might wonder what is happening in their real lives.. they had been active for so long on the forum and then suddenly... poof... no more participation... so we should hope that they have either been able to enjoy some or all of their coins along the way or had been able to express some kind of successorship in terms of their coins being passed down.. even if some of their heirs might not deserve the coins.. but hey, who knows.. and hey, if they end up NOT passing down their coins, then their coins become a community donation in terms of creating greater scarcity..  

Well... Keep up your streak. Save theRF.  I had been speculating that it could have been possible for you to have had made two comprehensive posts in a row.. but your above post surely relieved me from having to witness lucidness twice in a row.

Congrats... you make no senses (at least not twice in a row)... and you're not even funny.  


 

The royal "he"

The other...


it's kind of like a sir


I am sure that there could be worse.

Last time that I checked, there's a new block right around every 10 minutes.. Seems amazing to me, depending upon how you look at the matter, of course.


There's an expression about bitcoin is for enemies.. which surely there is some truth to that because we should hardly give any ratt's asses about who's getting into bitcoin, so long as they are... except surely, the sooner some of your enemies get in, then they are going to surpass you in wealth (if they don't already)...

No win situation, right?


WRONG.

In some sense, so long as each of us is looking out for ourselves and trying to figure out how to best accumulate our own bitcoin stash without going overboard of course, then matters should work themselves out and our involvement in bitcoin should give us more options rather than fewer...

Surely, there are plenty of both friends and enemies who are going to be entering into bitcoin way later than us.. and for some of them it is going to be way to late to catch up to some of us relatively earlier adopters.

Some of us might be thinking:  "holy fucking shit, it costs nearly $10k to get a mere 0.21BTC.. how the hell am I going to get up to that level?"  Yeah, maybe you are going to be able to do it, and maybe not.

Not to be arrogant, but I have already asserted that I have gotten more than 0.63 BTC, so in that regard, there are a lot of folks (both friends and enemies) who are likely never, ever, ever going to get up to my level of BTC.  

Sure, I am not presuming that I am going to be able to stay above 0.63BTC, and life happens, but still my stash has given me more options than a lot of other people have or will ever have.  Not wishing ill on anyone.

Another angle is that there are a fuck ton of folks who can just buy straight out my quantity of BTC or even more, and some of the late entrants will come into the bitcoin scene and buy 140k BTC over a year and a half (like relatively newbie Michael Saylor/and his company did)... and surely, it is going to be difficult for any richie-status person to top that level of BTC accumulation performance... and part of the reason that I am saying this is to point out some of the relative nature in terms of what level of BTC that any of us might be able to accumulate.. and the options that such accumulation might give to us relative to our current status or our status if we had not engaged in BTC accumulation.  

Each of us has to make choices (an an assessment.. and non-action is also a choice) regarding our own level of accumulation and to maybe recognize and appreciate that some people will just be getting into BTC 4-10 years from now, and I have quite a few doubts regarding the ability for normies to easily accumulate something like 0.21BTC in 4-10 years from now (even though it is not really easy to know or to have any guarantees regarding what is going to happen).. even though currently, 0.21BTC is somewhat reachable for a lot of normies currently (at least for now, even though I do not want to presume that everyone can invest $10k-ish into bitcoin - even if such newbies to bitcoin were to have 1-2 years to spread out such investment into bitcoin based on their cashflow(s), so in that regard, each of us should be attempting the level of BTC accumulation and maintenance that is reasonable, practical and doable for us based on our own situation(s) and our own assessment of our situation(s), even if we might need to tweak our assessment of our situation(s) from time to time).

That's a good way of phrasing the matter....

We do seem to want to keep knocking on the $45k-ish.. and yeah? how long is it going to last before something else happens?  or does something have to happen?  I remain of the opinion that bitcoin does not tend to do flat very well for very long, even when sometimes it can seem like we are at flat for an eternity.. at some point, she breaks.. just hope that we do not need 3-9 months before the break comes.. because sometimes that length of time will feel way too awkward.. and sure we have already been around our current price arena (let's call it $45k to $52k) for about a month.. December 3, remember that red candle?  I know.. I know.. I don't really like it either.. but it is what it is... and we have had plenty of whiners and naysayers coming out of the woodwork for this event and our consolidation that has followed so far... Some shakenings seemed to have been successful too.. so far.. how many more need to be shaken?  Are there any left? to be shaken?



Another rare find...

Save the RF making senses.

I cannot really disagree with anything that you say, including the motives of the bankers to NOT let people self-custody their coins... and so surely in the early days of Banks getting into bitcoin, they are not likely to make self-custody easy  - but I also have some senses that many Banks are going to be forced through competition to become more flexible with various systems that they have in place, that is if they want to continue to serve people or to have developed enough confidence for people to want to use their services (otherwise they will extinct themselves).

Another point seems to be that we should not necessarily be claiming that incumbent bankers who are entering into the bitcoin space are the ones who are NOT sufficiently innovating... because largely they are getting somewhat forced to get involved in bitcoin, and in that regard, some of them might end up developing systems that are not totally hostile to people - even though surely many bitcoiners realize that there are a lot of risks in holding custody of assets/currencies with third parties, whether banks or otherwise, but there are a lot of difficulties, even these days in being your own bank... and even some experienced bitcoiners remain quite nervous on a regular basis about some of the evolving technologies around bitcoin wallets and even concerns that there might sometimes be some vulnerabilities in some of their holding practices.. including even some experienced bitcoiners erroring on the side of too much security that causes their lil selfies to lock themselves out of their own coins... which surely would not be a good feeling, even when the amounts might sometimes be relatively small in terms of total BTC portfolio size.

Currently, entry-level billionaire status is just shy of 22k BTC, and there are some of us who consider that BTC has another 1,000x to 10,000x to go from here.. so of course the billionaire status level will be coming down in terms of the quantity of coins required for billionaire status for folks who are ready, willing and able to hang onto or to continue to build that many coins.. and sure could be some of us who might not quite be there but willing to continue to HODL and/or BUIDL up to such a status....

Just consider that amongst the more optimistic of scenarios of the 10,000x from here, would put 22 coins at billionaire status. Might take more than 50 years to get to that kind of 10,000x from here...so are many of us still going to be alive and have any vigor at that point?  

By the way, 10x from here puts bitcoin at about parity with gold, and so many of us assess bitcoin to pretty easily be 100x of gold.. and likely 1,000x of gold (which would be a 10,000x from here scenario), but getting bitcoin's price 10,000x up from here to 1,000x of gold could take a bit of time...and also put bitcoin at about a quadrillion dollar market cap.. which seem like even a bit more than total storage of value/currency asset classes in existence yet  even bitcoin reaching 10x gold could take more than a couple of cycles .. but not impossible... and also there are a few justifications for bitcoin reaching a quadrillion dollars in today's value (yes no need to assume the value of the hyperinflated currencies to get there) - and one of the ideas would be that value that is in existence can continue to increase outside of inflationary practices because new value is created with new technologies (even though there could be some limits on the value that can be created.. but there are likely some pretty high exponential aspects to such value creation that comes through technological innovations and network effects from that too).

Just back to your assessment aesma of 15 current billionaires reading this thread.. there seem to be quite a few folks in bitcoin that could reach our current 22k coins status to make them a current billionaire.. but not sure if they are coming to this thread... there could be some 1,000 coiners participating in this thread..not sure if names are necessary... but currently that is ONLY a mere $50 million value status.


I don't completely agree with the level of your being turned off friends1980, even though I get what you seem to be stating regarding how much overemphasis many of us sometimes place on the rich and famous.... so surely a lot of us have been into bitcoin for several years before many of the billionnaires who are now coming into BTC... no problem with front-running those folks.. but they are likely richer than us and likely to continue to be richer than us if they are coming into bitcoin fairly BIG these days, but likely not going to really hurt us.. what do we mind if a number of billionaires start to both show how big their dicks and status are and try to hoard all the bitcoins.... It should not really hurt us longer term HODLers too much..so long as some of their games (including that dweeb Elon) might start to play in their coin hoppenings.

On another note, we used to talk about millionaires in the way that billionnaires are currently talked about, but gosh does anyone below $100 million matter anymore?  So it well could be that the billionaire has become the new millionaire.... and surely in the next 4-10 years, we are likely going to have at least a quadrupling of the billionaire class... and surely are many of the new entrants going to be bitcoiners?  Fuck the shitcoiners, but some of them will be in there, too.

Tradingwise is all over the place in terms of timelines, so not really easy to play those waves with any kind of reliability, but I do get what you are saying that it seems that bets should be long when we are within a kind of 35% correction arena.. but who knows? who knows?

If you already have a lot of bitcoin, then it might not really matter too much, if you have a decent stash and you are still DCA'ing you might not care too much (except feeling that you might be getting some bargains currently), if you are buying the dip, it feels good in terms of probabilities, but again, who knows for sure.  Of course if you do not have any coins or if you are decently under-exposed to BTC, then it should seem that these prices are good places to stock up decently well, even if we might have more corrections from here.. and surely  a 4-10 year timeline or more should seem that this is a good buying place, too.

Another way of thinking about if we are talking about longer term view and even medium term view then we should be able to appreciate that we have had quite a bit of ongoing up... ...   Again shorter term would likely be more ambiguous, unless we are talking about the doldrums that we seemed to have had been in May/June and July, so from those lower $30ks and even dipping into upper $20ks on a few occasions in May/June/July, we had our more than 2x, if we look from $30k to $69k and then back down to $46.5k-ish we still have 1.5x-ish UP, and even if we look down to our lowest correction to $41,967, we will had 1.4x UP from the $30k-ish.... so even with some of the mediocre framings of our level of UP from $30k-ish in July 2021, we still should be able to appreciate that our odds for going UP from here are not bad at all.. I am thinking well into the 50%s. probably supra 55%.. but that also depends on how framing the numbers and the timeline too.. in spite some of the pessimism we have been recently hearing regarding which direction some folks consider that we might be going short to medium term..

There are a few locations that folks can end up getting reckt, and sure one of them is selling too much on the way up.. but another one is either selling on the way down (after already having had a 39% correction) and/or failing refusing to buy on a decent dip, such as this.. Of course, you do not get reckt as badly if you just HODL or just ongoingly DCA, so one of the dilemmas about buying on the dip remains the questions about whether we are dipping more.. and we know king daddy is not against surprising even though most loyal of HODLers.. hahahahaha.  ...

causing me to frequently assert that DCA is way the hell more superior to buying the dip, even though some buying the dip can supplement DCA so long as you keep on DCAing.

Sure, who's to say if we might not be revisiting either the lower $30ks or even dipping into the $20ks - yet several of us seem to have decently optimistic senses that the coming several months or perhaps even expanding into 2-3 quarters have good chances for resuming up, and really matters would seem to play out weirdly if $69k were to end up serving as our top for this period/cycle .. and no one here would be poo-pooing the exponential nature of the about 6.5x price rise from September 2020 to April 2021 (even though it is quite a bit smaller than earlier exponential price rise periods in bitcoinlandia), but we have so far had two decently large corrections from that.. and sure there are bearwhales who would like to foil additional toppenings from happening... but what are the odds?  What are the odds?

I am actually kind of wishing that some entities that are not sufficiently covering their exposure to bitcoin by engaging in some kinds of fractional reserve practices (meaning that they are not holding as much bitcoin as they are betting against it.. and yeah maybe it is not the entities not holding the bitcoin but their empowering of their clients to use dollars to bet against bitcoin without anyone buying any bitcoin), I hope that they get reckt as fuck.. and it seems that their practices in that regard does give them a lot of exposure to bitcoin moving up... which would reck them because they are betting against such UP - even if it seems that they have infinite supplies of cash to spend in those kinds of practices..  

Will they get reckt, as they deserve, is a kind of related question, and I am hoping that I am not the one in the fantasy looking forward to them getting reckt if it were to not end up happening..  

We will see.. we will see...  I still say that the next 1-9 months are critical^tm.

Edited (about 3 hours after original post):  cleared up some phraseology and added a few supplement ideas therein.

I don't know how we would give any shits about if the model might be anywhere close to 100% valid for 50 years in the future, when I surely have never said either of those things.  For example, I said that it was currently amongst the strongest of models when accompanied by concepts of the 4-year fractal and the consideration of exponential s-curve adoption based on network effects and Metcalfe principles.. so in that sense I am not even asserting such stock to flow model to be even close to 100% accurate even in the near future and so inferentially we likely would need to see how a variety of matters play out if we are using various models in the coming 50 years.. yet with any model, surely we can have a frame of reference that might take us out 50 years or more, but need to adapt along the way too... based on how new facts play out along the way.


It seems that I already addressed this, but maybe I can try to frame my answer in a different way?

I think that the model is currently valid and amongst the best of explainers, so I am not sure how much need there is going down potentially BIG ass assertions, and maybe you should come to your own assertions regarding what points might either make the model invalid or needing to be tweaked.   I see a whole hell of a lot of people in the last month or two wanting to completely throw out the model as if it does not mean anything so those kinds of determinations seem way too premature.. but whatever, do what you like. 

PlanB had already asserted that he expects that the model is setting forth an expectation of a $100k average price for this whole halvening period, and we are just short of half way through the period.  So if there were to be underperformance within the halvening period, or maybe when we get further down the road, we might see that $100k is not going to be met... but at this point, we are ONLY less than half way through the period, so why is there any kind of need to get too excited about invalidating the model.. and maybe some might use the model to project a lower expected average, and would reaching a $40k average?  or a $60k or a $80k average invalidate the model or just cause it to need to be tweaked in some way?  There may be some variance in thought on that, but still seems a bit premature when we are less than half way through this period and there is no real reason to conclude that we are not on track, even if there seems to currently be some underperformance in terms of expectations where the price should currently be or even underexpectations in the average price for the halvening period so far to be underperforming.   


I don't have any strong opinions on any of the macro-issues that you are mentioning pooya87, and I am not sure how many shits I give about details of how long various systems and reactions to systems are sustainable.  I do retain some assumptions that even though there is a lot of bad policies regarding unsound monetary powers, how money is used for sanctions (as you mentioned) and even variations in individual actors making matters better or worse, that the USD is going to remain strong for longer than we expect that it should be sustainable... and of course, there are all kinds of waves along the way, while at the same time value is going to continue to flow into bitcoin through all of this time.. and so how it all plays out is way beyond my paygrade or even any desires that I want to speculate upon.

On individual levels we largely continue to need to determine how to allocate our various risks, including how helpful we consider bitcoin to be as a hedge, and surely I don't plan to abandon several of my dollar based investments or even my holding of value in the dollar or various dollar based investments while projecting out my expenses and even my potential drawing from those kinds of accounts into the coming 10 years or longer.. and even though all of those accounts for me are tending to be less than 10% of my value because of bitcoin's ongoing higher performance levels... so whether they stay around 10% or they fluctuate between 5% and 25%, I am not really planning any radical measures in terms of feeling that my own hedgings are sufficiently good.. even though heavily skewed into bitcoin as already mentioned.

Of course, individuals who are just coming into bitcoin might need to consider their allocations matters a bit differently, and surely many of us bitcoiners consider that having a decently aggressive hedge in bitcoin is going to be helpful for a large number of potential future scenarios... Only in the past week or so, I had considered upgrading my recommendation to bitcoin newbies to consider their investment allocation into bitcoin to be anywhere between 1% and 25%, and I used to recommend 1% to 10%, but I don't have any problem to increase my recommendation, and I take absolutely no responsibility over the investment choices of others.. they have to be responsible for what they do an how much they choose to allocate, even though I am comfortable to say that I have increased my recommendation and you decide for yourself where you want to fall in the allocation spectrum.. if you are whimpy then 1% and if you are aggressive, then 25%, and of course, you are even free to go beyond what I am recommending as a starting range to consider.. and of course, the more anyone studies bitcoin, then s/he is no longer going to fall in the bitcoin newbie category.

It seems to me that I laid out the issues pretty damned clearly, and you get caught on nonsense about my supposed failings.

You made at least two outrageous statements regarding BTC staying between $30k and $65k for the next year.  You also stated that BTC prices only had a 1% chance to get over $200k within that same time period.  I was attempting to get you to somehow stand behind either or both of those statements, and I thought that perhaps a bet may well be a good potential way to attempt to suss out the terms in which you might be willing to stand behind some kind of variation of that, but instead you waffle way the fuck in regards to wanting a bet about my statements, instead, which are pretty damned tame in comparison and way less extreme than yours, including that they are mostly (but not completely) contained in my December 16 post about timeline and price top probabilities. 

Some of our later posts in this thread were seeming attempts to try to figure out bet terms, but you hardly even stand behind shit while attempting to blame me for your lack of any kind of spine regarding your assertions.

I would not mind continuing to try to work something out, but we seem to be way the fuck too far apart, and largely that is because you hardly even came close to sticking to your assertions or wanting to focus any kind of bet on those, which I would have been more than willing to bet upon if we could have stuck to that rather than switching to betting on my relatively modest assertions... at least relative to your nonsense that you seem to know to be nonsense since you are not even wanting to stand behind some variation of what you had already asserted.


You are not adding anything new or of value to whatever you are wanting to argue with these three points, which makes little to no sense from my perspective.. but hey, you do you.  You are pretty good at making little to no sense. Keep it up.


Glad to hear that you have feelings.. but what about your assertions regarding the BTC price staying between $30k and $65k for the next year, and what about your assertion that there is less than a 1% chance for BTC prices to go above $200k in that same one-year period.  Do you still stand behind either of those assertions?  Or are you moving off of those as well? 

Anyhow, you do not seem to be willing to bet on anything close to those earlier assertions... so there's that.  Or at least, that is what I am getting out of this whole thing besides your seeming desires to get distracted into other areas or even talking personality about how you don't like me or trust me.. blah blah blah (as if I give less than two ratt's asses about that) rather than some kind of semblance of substance... .

The question might need to be different.

I could hardly imagine a top that is so close to $69k.. in part because once we get to surpa $62k (if we get there?) we are likely to pass right through that and up to $92k... I know, my theorizing of noman's land did not work out to well the last time around, but I doubt that we can really give up upon the dynamics that tend to exist when we approach previous ATHs.. especially if we spend a decent amount of time correction before revisiting.. and this time around we are going to have at least 2 months from visiting $69k and revisiting it again.. and maybe more likely we could be in the 3-4 month arena.. again, that is if we get back above $62k... which many of us likely still conjecture to be the case, even if some of the bitcoin naysayers, no coiners, uninformed and shitcoiners may well have already written off revisits of our current ATH of $69k.


Of course, I appreciate your point regarding some of the baggage that may well come from the label "early adopter," but from my perspective, such label has way more positives than it does negatives, so in that regard, I have a hard time to do anything but embrace it.. furthermore, we are not really going to get people from saying things that are inaccurate or just coming to faulty and ill-informed conclusions.

Something like this could be decently good blanket response:  "You too can become an early adopter, but it takes action rather than sitting on the sidelines."

I got a little bit of a chuckle out of your posting about the topic fillippone, because in some sense, I am not even sure if Dave Gorman, the comedian in that clip, is that concerned about the truth of the matter asserted, but instead harping on both how frequently the expression is used, and than also a bit of questioning about how well people appreciate what they are saying when they use the sentence.. and sure sometimes there could be some truth of the matter asserted within the expression... but also having had listened through the whole clip, we may well start to pay more attention when someone actually uses the expression.. because surely there might be some attempts at humor when using the expression, but it might not exactly be funny for the reasons that was originally intended. 

I doubt that I am personally going to stop using the expression (and I cannot really recall using it recently), but having had watched the clip, I might be a wee bit more intentional in my use of the expression.. just for funzies.

By the way, sometimes depending on your audience, let's say talking with your grandma or an older relative, sometimes you might NOT want to use such an expression, just like you might NOT want to slip in that "they call me Italian Stallion for a reason" even though it seems to play pretty well with the WO audience.. #justsaying....

Can you imagine fillippone in a conversation with grandma of fillippone, and then grandma of fillippone says, "oh and the door was shut right?" or "you had clothes on right?" or "what were those imprints on the beach?" and fillippone responds:  "they call me Italian Stallion for a reason."  I am thinking that the expression might not play to well with grannie.

I am a little confused about the point that you are making Rath_.

Of course, I don't run a node, so I am attempting to live somewhat vicariously through some of these lightning thread topics... at least this node one.  So maybe your point would be more clear for someone who is actually more interactive with some kind of personal node running.

You say this month, but we are January.

Of course your attached chart seems to show December information.. presumably the whole month.... in which it looks like you had a lot of activity in the first two days and then on the 7th but other than that you did not have a lot of activity.  Can you elaborate upon the meaning/interpretation a bit more?

Nice one Richy_T.


I hardly know what you are talking about.  We were in the preliminary stages in talking about various terms of a possible bet, and surely it appears that we did not get close to agreeing, and I stated my reasons why I was not willing to enter into a bet, including that the terms did not even get close to addressing your ongoing outrageous claims.. in which maybe you are either backing down from your outrageous claims or just wanting to divert to some topic in which you want me to get behind some other bet that I am not interested in making for the reasons stated.. and surely those are not favorable terms for the reasons that I had already stated in my previous post, as well.



I did not watch that attached video because I have no understanding regarding how it is supposed to relate to matters that we had been discussing.


did not watch it, so I am not sure about what point that you would want to make with such video.


It seems to me that I was suggesting most likely that a blow off top, if it were to occur beyond our already $69k ATH would happen within the next 1-9 months, and in my December 16 outlining of timeline, I had given only 4.5% odds of it happening after 3rd quarter of 2022.  Of course, if such a top were to drag out either beyond the third quarter of 2022 or even into 2023, there may well be a question whether the cycle or four-year fractal would be an applicable framework... so we would have to see how it plays out and when it peaks before getting ahead of ourself, and of course, I am not even sure what kinds of ways that you are even describing the matter because you expressed high expectations that we do not even get back to $69k for another year... so who the hell even knows what random ass framework that you are applying right now, except for your assertion that the four year cycle ended in April and the November peak was some kind of an aberration.  

Anyhow, it seems that I likely already explained enough about my various assignments of probabilities quite a bit more thoroughly than you have and also willing to stand behind my assertions and describe various parameters that I might be willing to consider bets, contrary to uie-pooie not even want to stick to fleshing out any of your earlier somewhat conflicting assertions of either the BTC staying within $30k to $65k for a year, but not assigning any probabilities to that while at the same time asserting that you believe that there would ONLY be a 1% chance for BTC's prices to cross above $200k in the next year.  We may well be getting a bit repetitive on some of these points and what seems to be some of any of your attempts to flesh out some of your own points or to figure out if there might be some kind of bet terms that might be agreeable.... even while I clearly stated various ways that the terms that you outlined are unacceptable to me, at this time.


The poll seems like a teaser.. at least so far.  I would like to cast my vote too.. even though it is a tough question to really attempt to lock into an actual number.


The article seems to be behind a paywall for me.... and yeah... from the title (billionnaires embracing crypto in case money "goes to hell' " ) and the link caption, I am a little annoyed by the juxtaposition of terms Crypto, bitcoin and ethereum, but I was not really able to look at how the article might flesh out specifics beyond that.

Most of your descriptions are fair, and so maybe there is not as much room for disagreement to proclaim that the projection describes many of the more likely scenarios, even though I continue to have some concern about how some of the attempts to place this kind of bitcoin performance matter in terms of math does ascribe way more certainty to a variety of scenarios than they likely deserve.. as I believe I already attempted to outline in my earlier description of an outlier out performance situation that could end up playing out, but I concede it to be an outlier and the model seems to nearly completely negate it.. even your own description of the model and possibilities seems to negate it.. until it were to happen (if it did), then you say.. o.k. we will adjust the model to account for the new data.

By the way, as I already mentioned the $232k max for the beginning of 2023 does seem to have some inadequacies, as I had already outlined in my earlier response, and maybe the beginning of 2027 has similar limitations with its $1.29 million number, but even I am not going to attempt to proclaim how the next cycle might play out until this cycle progresses further along.. but I surely already mentioned scenarios in which that $1.29 million could end up getting exceeded in this particular cycle, so it would be silly considering $1.29 million as a limit for the beginning of 2027... and sure, going through BTC price performance that underperforms the various lower limits such as through 2022 and even into 2023 could also end up causing some similar kinds of concerns regarding what numbers (for the next cycle) are still seeming reasonable... and sure, there can be some value in terms of having those numbers projected into the future, but the playing out of each cycle can end up causing reconsiderations and even adjustments to the curve whether from my own attempts at modeling or your asserted mathematical and scientifically correct approach... so yeah, at some point, it might no longer make sense to talk in terms of cycles, but I am not going to stop talking in terms of cycles until it becomes a wee bit more clear about how this cycle is actually playing out and wether we might call cycles as dead if we do not end up getting a blow off top in the next 1-9 months.. or soon thereafter if a kind of outlier scenario were to play out that still might be considered to fit within a kind of "cycle" framework.

Regarding March 2020, for sure we could have ended up having a 6-12 month sticking at the bottom of the range and below the range.. and then all kinds of shit could have happened to either cause the BTC price to either quickly bounce back into its previous range or go above its previous range or even go into a lower orbit of a range.... so yeah, maybe that could have ended up like a shifting of the curve.. and the model has difficulties accounting for those various scenarios so in that regard, there may well end up being less utility in terms of needs to be prepared for extremes, even if there may end up being scenarios where we revert back to the mean... but in the meantime, everyone of those who had relied upon the model are dead because they did not adequately prepare for a scenario or set of scenarios that were foreseeable but almost completely not contained in the model.


I already stated my various concerns, way better than your various absolutisms.  You are not even close to trying to stand behind your previous BTC price assertions for the coming year, which was largely the issue that I was challenging... You don't even seem to believe what you post.. not even close.

I never came out with such bold-ass bullshit like you, even though I am more than willing to stand behind my numbers within the variance that I had already stated..... but I had never made bold assertions, as far as I can tell... anyhow, part of my motive had been to attempt to hold your feet to the fire a wee bit moar better in terms of some of the outrageousness that you were proclaiming, and you are not even close to being willing to stand behind your nonsensical claims of 1% odds that BTC crosses over $200k in the next year or even some variation.. which I attempt to give you some wiggle room to get out of.. but like any of the disingenuine trolls, you try to put the whole burden on me.. which again, I don't consider myself to be making outrageous claims. even though I mentioned that I would likely need to have a 50% variance for myself to feel comfortable in terms of taking a bet that is for me to stand by my numbers; however, it seems to me that you stubborn lil fucktwat only want to get a 25x variance on your earlier asserted claims or some thing that is way off into ridiculous land and shows that you have nothing even close to conviction regarding your earlier nonsensical assertions.

By the way, I do like my 25% numbers with a 50% variance.... and even if I took my earlier assertion of 29%-ish.. my 50% variance would still allow me a 14.5% to 43.5% range.. which helps me to think through what kind of a odds that I would want to have in order to feel that I am working through my variance too... so that makes my comfort even better regarding how to frame a bet with some dweeb like you that I would be willing to take. hahahahahaha.. so at least you helped me to think through that idea, you otherwise nearly worthless dweeb (#nohomo)... haahahahahahaha

 

Of course, none of us should be completely locked into our numbers, and surely I was attempting to consider my comfort levels with some of the numbers that had foundations on December 16 when I made the assignment of probabilities post for various price ranges and timelines... At some point I will be updating my numbers, and surely if we were to get close to framing any kind of a bet (which does not seem that we are even close to that), I might well want to update my numbers, even though in some sense I am tentatively thinking that my numbers have not really changed too much from December 16, even though I know there has been some deflating of bull bubbles since December 16 and even a certain amount of depression from some of the bitcoin bulls in regards to how the BTC price has been failing/refusing to get back above $52k since December 3... so some dispiriting short-term aspects have been developing, and there could be some needs for me to reconsider some of my December 16 projections at some point.

Thanks, but I am thinking that such phenomena is likely not sustainable.  

Happy New Year to you too.



Still irrelevant, even if you want to reiterate how you believe it to be important and that you are cheering for our own good..blah blah blah... does not cause it to become more relevant than its already irrelevant status.



Last I checked, 3rd quarter goes through the end of September not the beginning of September.  Aside from the amounts, which I already stated that I was not too excited about your earlier suggested amount of 0.31 BTC, I am not that much more encouraged about your reduction of that to 1/3 (on my end)...  

Your supposed charitable 4 to 1 odds are like around my break even odds, so why the hell would I want to engage in a break-even odds bet?  do people actually take bets with break even odds?. .. especially when you had been putting 99 to 1 odds on a similar framing of the thing... so uie-pooie want to place all of the potential surplus value of our differing perspectives into your hands..... and sure maybe I am feeling uncomfortable about the exactness of 25%, and so in that regard, I am more inclined to attempt to take advantage of some of the surplus that comes from your assertion of 99% odds that $200k would not happen within 12 months.. didn't you initially say you dweeb?...

So I think a lot of this whole matter, from my perspective, would be challenging the outrageousness of your assertion that the odds are ONLY 1% in a year, and then you are not even close to wanting to stand behind anything close to your own assertion but trying to get the best of the scenarios and surplus value from my quite likely way more reasonable assertions.. or if you really believe that I am being outrageous, then even splitting the baby in the middle of 1/20 odds or 1/40 odds should not bother you since you conceive the whole matter as less than 1% odds.. .. and surely if you were giving me 1/99 odds, you surely would be a whole hell of a lot less inclined to be wanting to bet .4 BTC on your end when 99/1 odds would cause me to only have to put up 0.004 BTC to cover such a 1/99 odds bet, right?  

So I already asserted that I may well be willing to compromise in terms of attempting to figure out ways to split the surplus value rather than your seeming to strive to take any such surplus value for ur lil selfie.

So, don't be trying to assert that you are trying to call my supposed "bullshit" when you are trying to shave all of the surplus value in seemingly three ways (maybe even four?)  regarding 1) the dates ( 1a) was that a mistake on the end of the quarter? and 1b) did you not originally assert 12 months for the BTC price not going above $200k?  not that an additional 3 months changes a whole hell of a lot for me, but you are the one who originally proclaimed no supra $200k for 12months.. originally you said "none at all" then later you downgraded that to 1%), 2) the odds of your wanting to harp on my 25% assertion when you are the one who stated 1%.. so there is a pretty damned big difference between 1% and 25%, last time I checked and 3) the amount of money at stake that I already suggested that I did not need any such bet to be a lot of money.. and you sticking with unnecessarily high bet amounts.. which you persistently showing yourself as a dweeb..

Just to flesh out the aspect of the money, like I already suggested, I may be willing to agree to higher bet amounts if the odds were to be more acceptable.. and even though I would not mind holding you to somewhere in the ballpark of your original proclamation of 99/1 odds.  Sure, I believe that I would be willing to compromise with your own assignment of odds in some kind of way.. and I am already saying that I am not that passionate to try to defend my own earlier assignment of 25%-ish odds.. because I do not consider my already existing odds to be outrageous yet, at the same time, I don't exactly feel passionate about if my assignment of percentages might be off by even 50% (such as having a variance in my odds of 12.5% or 37.5%), so probably in that regard, I would not start to feel inclined to even want to bet if I am not getting at least outside of some kind of a reasonable variance from my already asserted numbers.. such as getting more than 50% outside of my already assignment of probabilities.. and of course, it would be better to get even more than my variance.. especially since you had already stated numbers that I consider to be outrageous and that your own odds are ONLY 1% for a year for going over $200k.. how much variance off of your percentage do you need... apparently from your own harping on my assignment of 25%, you need something like  25x variance in order to feel comfortable.. or can you be a bit more solid in describing how much variance you might need, and then at that point, maybe we could split the difference from the point of figuring out our variance?

Anyhow, you are also easily just wanting to be stubborn about your supposed bet terms, even though I am going to attempt to try flexible about your own earlier stubborn assertions to keep open if we cannot figure out reasonable terms regarding the $200K question, then there still could be some room for your assertion that you believe that we are staying in $30k to $65k for the next 12 months, even though I can see that the differences in our assignments of probabilities to that seems to be quite a bit smaller, so we would not have as much to work with regarding that one, even though by definition supra $65k would end up playing out way sooner than any supra $200k question.

You can proclaim it as maths and sciences until you are blue in the face, but I see that your chart has upside limitations on king daddy of about $280k until the early part of 2023 and your more drawn out chart does allow the amounts to continue to rise, and it is not exactly easy to read what those limitations into late 2025 and even 2026/2027 would be, but those limits seem to be quite a bit more restricted than I would consider them to be.  One thing about locking in a chart would be that the chart is what it is at that particular time, but I imagine if our lillie fiend, aka king daddy, ends up performing too much at the top of the parameters in the chart, then such parameters will be shifted up in later charts.. and the same is true with the range that appears to be narrowing.. they can be tweaked to account for the subsequent data.    If you were able to zoom in on 2023 to 2027, I would be interested to see those numbers more clearly, and I will bet that my opinion of our range is broader and my opinion about the upside is higher, and I could give less than two shits about your supposed math and sciences that are supposedly driving your supposed version of truth.

By the way, just in regards to what appears to be your chart's only going up to $280k by early 2023, I will say that my latest rendition of probabilities and prices on December 16, does not contain $280k exactly because I have $220k to $440k as a range depicted therein, but you can add up the numbers, and I have my rendition of supra $440k to be 14.5% that would be before 2023.. but I have a bit of waffling that asserts a 95.5% chance that our top of this cycle plays out by the end of 3rd quarter 2022... so probably there would be some need to put my timeline in there too which would likely reduce my assertion of 14.5% odds for supra $440k before 2023.,. and if you look at my supra $220k numbers, I have an additional 14.5% added for that, so supra $220k has something like 29% odds before 2023.. with that same kind of percentage reduction to account for my 4.5% odds that the top of the peak could happen after 3rd quarter 2022.

My point is not to proclaim myself as any kind of guru, but just to highlight that my rendition of numbers have way smaller than non-zero odds to depict BTC's price going above the $280k that appears to be a ceiling that is in your chart for early 2023... and so maybe verbally, you might assert that there could be a spike above the chart limits or even on either side of the depicted range, which we do have some periods in which there are short-lived spikes that go outside of the range of your chart.. and so if BTC were to get stuck in the higher end of the range of your chart for longer periods, then maybe the range or the limits could end up getting adjusted... Maybe in the end we are not saying a whole hell of a lot differently because I would not even be proclaiming the really higher numbers to be sustainable?  For example my depiction of $800k to $1.5million and then my depiction of above $1.5 million for this cycle only add up to about 2.5% odds, so they would seem pretty unlikely to happen, and for sure I would consider something like that to not be sustainable and likely to have a 85%-ish correction.. but really does not seem to be within the parameters of acceptable within your chart at all.... so let's take the most extreme of something like a supra $1.5 million peak that ends up happening towards the end of 2022 and maybe early 2023, then within the next year we end up getting an 85% correction for a period of time would bring BTC prices down to something like $225k.. and then we go from there in terms of how long a recovery might take, and your chart does not seem to allow that, even though mine only puts such a scenario at less than half a percent, and so maybe in that regard, I am proclaiming difference and the defiance of your supposed maths and sciences that don't really seem to allow for something like that, even if it is a long shot scenario.

A false irrelevant and unimportant indicator that you would like to cause to be relevant, when it no doesn't mean shit.

It's not the first time you are setting forth irrelevant hurdles that king daddy supposedly needs to cross in order to be successful, when king daddy is already successful for those who are able to see it and appreciate it.  Apparently not uie pooie.  

What about our bet?  You abandoned the topic?   Focus ur lil selfie.. I have my doubts about whether you can afford to attempt to discuss more than one topic at a time.

 

I would agree that in a kind of abstract way there is not much difference between those numbers that you chose, but sometimes if you are trying to say something about what you believe happens at certain price points, then you might attempt to choose your numbers a bit less randomly.

I will admit that there was a bit of a strange quirk in October and November to get us a November 9 toppening that was $69k and merely $4k-ish higher than our mid April high of $64,895.... so that does create a bit of a dynamic... but there is also a bit of who knows, too.  Anyhow, I surely would claim that there hardly is any difference between $65k, $70k and $75k in terms of all of them falling into the new noman's land.. which I would now characterize to be between about $62k and $92k... and that ended up with my moving it up from my previous conjecture of there having had been a noman's land between $55k and $80k.. and that did not really play out too well in term of my having success in my expectations coming to fruition with a complete Bitcoin follow through...


It seemed like a noman's land of $55k to $80k was kind of working out, until it wasn't, and then we ended up kind of getting stuck only a wee $11k (or 14-ish% from the finishline).. and if we would have gotten our subsequent correction all the way back down through that perception of noman's land after reaching $80k, might have also caused me some pause in terms of my expectations.. while at the same time, like I mentioned in a very recent post, some of these kinds of frame works merely add a few percentage to ideas about momentum.. rather than really trying to proclaim that there is any kind of locking in what king daddy is actually going to end up doing.. because surprise seems to be a cherished pasttime of dee kingie.



Stock to flow is based on data, and still seems to be amongst the best of the BTC price prediction models.. so surely it makes quite a bit of sense as compared to the betty white has connections and karma mumbo jumbo theory.


That's the spirit.. keep supporting the bottom.. as it is currently landing.. I am hoping that you will not get any cheaper coins than that.. but hey.. who knows.. who knows... who knows? 

The next hours to days to weeks (and perhaps as far out as months) seem to be critical^tm.



What a bunch of moo ruiners!!!!!

Isn't that Biodom's price range talking point?  Or are you getting that price range from somewhere else?  How come you are picking the same price range as Biodom?  Am I missing something?

By the way, I can agree with a characterization that $30k to $65k could last for several months, but holy shit, not very likely to last a year.. or at least less than 50/50... if those kinds of probability numbers come off as bold to you.


Hello?  it is called war.. have you heard of that concept?

It is also called the largest wealth transfer in the history of man.  Of course, you have heard about that and maybe you don't want to be so dramatic about it?

Of course, the bitcoin price, which seems to be quite related to this, is not going to go smoothly during such a process/transition.. and surely there is likely some desperation in various fiat systems, even though aspects of fiat do seem to be in a kind of lull too with their various inflated prices that are fueled by ongoing dollar irresponsibilities.


You are not going to get any argument from me on that point.



Might as well.. there's no real reason to panic.

































Yet




















 

Would really suck to be out of power for a week... or intermittent power for that kind of duration.. Helps to remind some of us, including yours truly that some people do spend more time with some of the areas that some of us sort of take for granted, whether that is power or internet... or even food and water concerns.

Many of us realize that the internet is spreading more and more to locations that it had not been very accessible, so there are probably a decent number of people who had not had very good internet connections who might be learning about bitcoin for the first time.. and considering if it could somehow speak to their regular life conditions.. whether it is electricity or internet or even food supplies.. and of course, more affluent people will be able to afford generators, but sometimes people will not be in a good position to even have a generator.. or the generator might not be reliable....

Surely you remind us Shamm.. and happy new year to you, too... Does bitcoin resonate with some of the people who are having difficulties connecting to the internet for a variety of reasons?  I think that it can, but surely, there can be some hard sells in regards to the value of bitcoin when access to the internet/electricity might sometimes not be very reliable.


I could see doggie stable at $.001.. perhaps?  Don't mean to be spreading too many pleasant thoughts about a shitcoin that we probably should not be getting into any details regarding how shitty it happens to be.


For a second, I thought that you were talking about the various policy reactions to the virus.. which seem more important to be concerned about how crazy that shit is.. now social justice roles in films.. I suppose there might be questions regarding what people are willing to watch.. but who knows, some of it has already been going quite a long way.. so I am not sure how to go back on some of the crazy in terms of social role depictions and reiteration and people believing it.. It's like some of the other social justice issues around food that contributes to some people becoming vegan and really believing it.. or believing that energy usage is bad.. even though there may well be good arguments in there regarding how some companies might put costs on society through their behaviors whether pollution or not paying for some of their consumption... which all connects to bitcoin too... .. everything connects to bitcoin, even rambling thoughts.




Fair enough.  We may have to find someone else.,. that is if Biodom and I can even come close to agreeable terms on a bet.. sure we have some differences that seem like they could be bettable.. but are we going to be able to put those terms in a bet...

Just in regards to the $200k plus scenario in a 9 months or a year.. if I am placing it at between 1/4 odds and 1/3 odds, but Biodom is placing it at 1%, he might be willing to bet me something like 50 to 1.. and then either of us could profit.. because I end up having better odds than I believe to exist in reality and he would have better odds too because he puts the odds at 99 to 1.

In regards to getting back above $62k, I surely put that at greater than 50/50.. but I doubt that Biodom has really fleshed out his odds very well, even though he made some pretty strong statement about us supposedly staying in a $30k to $65k range for the next year.. so for sure it seems that we could have some room on something like that..  because he seems to be putting the odds way below  50/50.   I mean of course, I would proclaim that we are going to break above $65k at some point in the next year.. and maybe we could bet something like 1 for 1 on that, since I am putting it at greater than 50% odds.. .. so my placing it at somewhere between 50% and 55% odds in my December 16 outline of odds does seem to cause some room in which a 1 to 1 bet for me would end up being fair and profitable for me because it is allowing me to profit if I am right about the odds being greater than 50/50.. but just barely.. but still.. And, he would profit too because from his earlier statement he seems to believe that the odds are way lower than 50/50.. and sure I would like to here what kind of odds that he gives such a proposition of staying between $30k and $65k for the next year... that's kind of my most recent thinking on the topic.

$48k for you, and $42k for me, and surely for me $45k or sub $45k would start to get my attention more, merely because at that point, we would be getting close to my area of interest... so still seems like nothing to write home about, even though it would feel better for me to be higher in the $42k to $62k range rather than lower... right in the middle would be nice.. but bitcoin does not tend to want to do nice..

   


So we (royal that is) need to try to roll with the punches, whatever those might be.



Not a bad idea that we might have a wee bit of some stuckness in our current price arena.. and surely there might be some desires to try to get the BTC price to go down more, but realization that there might be some difficulties getting the price to go down lower.. so if you cannot get the price to go down lower, then you might engage in some accumulation while rethinking the matter..... so if you are wanting to focus on a smaller range of largely where we have been in the past 28 days-ish of mostly $46k to $52k, then sure there might be a question of whether we are going to be breaking up or down from there.. and for sure we are even in the lower end of that range in the past 3 days-ish....

more crying...  

Of course for me, if we were to be trying to calling odds for a break out then the smaller range $46k to $48k is most immediate then the $46k to $52k becomes a bit broader but still remains decently immediate.. so yeah, should these little mini-battles be all noise?  and can we get back into the middle of the broader $42k to $62k range in order to be able to relax a wee bit more?

For sure, I can see how this current range can become quite depressing for some folks, and surely could motivate the shaking of a few more weak hands.. and if enough week hands are shaken with some further hard pushes towards testing support, the bears might be able squeak out some additional victories.. whether it is in the cards, I am not sure, and surely since I consider the overall framework to be in a bull market, I am going to continue to assign any odds of breaking out for any of the ranges to the upside.. even if they might be slight and there is a certain amount of testing of the resolve for any of us when we continue to have movement within a price arena that continues to be so low on the various broader ranges and if we do end up getting serious testing of $42k-ish..... absent some kind of another quick wick..  I might have to re-jigger some of my own fleshing out of DOWNity thoughts....