Huobi!

The pump was a bit stronger but a correction is very probable now.

Sure, 1 satoshi!

Sell the news! 

3718.9 Now 3730

This is a trade that was provided for free so you have no excuse for not having to pay my fees! 

See CLAMs as an example - people with BTC and DOGE could claim CLAMs too...

Bounce. Retest up to 3725 probably and fall at 3600.

Then no idea.

Spread double bottom. Temp stop here.

We should all thank this stupid fucking white man for pumping the price:

https://twitter.com/dan_pantera


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz4a_ipi1eA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12cFyTOypVc

3225, 3100

3500 might hold too.

As for resistances 3625-3800.

BTC currently needs to spike 3820+ and/or close at least 15m above 3800.

ICOs always buy with an amount you really don't care losing (like throwing them in the toilet) so you don't sell a dump first days and can keep them even if it doubles, triples etc. Point is to go at least x10, average x100, or even x1000.

I usually invest 50-100$, unless it is something I really think is innovative (waves is not IMHO).

XVC I need to see the charts but it is not on my radar now because of low volume and relatively expensive (with DGB, Qora, SC etc you can make more profit because they are below 100 satoshi).

I like Fibo and RSI too. If TradingView was correctly displaying indicators (eg SMA, BBands, Donchian Channels, SAR etc) on top of PnF, I would used them too (implementing my own solution on CryptXO charts that will be offered as an independent service in the future or as a bonus for the Slack subscribers).

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDao/comments/4ljzic/can_the_split_dao_reward_token_mechanism_be/d3ociic

"Let me try to frame the problem now in an abstract fashion. I may be totally wrong in this analysis, but hope this produces a useful conversation for the DAO community:

"The measurement of 'investment done by a DAO' as the 'outflow of funds from the main DAO contract' might be bound to be fraught by troubles. If this is indeed what the DAO 1.0 framework does, then it will reflect itself in a wide range of attacks / community fights when DAOs split

Some examples:

    1) Not every investment is revenue generating; some are maintenance oriented:

    Examine the Slock IT security proposal and one realises that if the DAO accepts it, then it is not producing a 'return generating asset'. It is producing a 'maintenance cost' for the DAO. Hedge funds and VC firms have a distinction between 'maintenance costs' (cost to analyse investments, maintain funds, communicate with LPs etc. and 'actual investments that can produce returns' (for example an investment in Uber). Hedge funds and VC firms logically strive to minimise 'maintenance costs' and maximise 'actual investments that can produce returns'.

    The current method of DAO accounting lumps 'maintenance costs' and 'actual investments that can produce returns' into just one bucket i.e. 'investments'. This is fine as long as the DAO has never been split.

    If the DAO splits, the child DAO obviously will not want to treat the maintenance costs of the parent DAO as 'investments' made by the parent DAO. They will want their own reward tokens to be diluted only when the parent DAO makes 'actual investments that can produce returns'. After all, why should the child subsidise the the maintenance costs of the parent when it has split?

    I see no mechanism making this distinction between 'maintenance cost' and 'actual investments that can produce returns' in Framework 1.0.

    2) The firing and rehiring of contractors:

    The DAO framework explicitly encourages the firing and re-hiring of contractors incase quality of work produced is sub-par, ether volatility changes project economics etc.

    So, assume the DAO commits 1 million ether to a contract today. This is the first and only investment it has done. Reward tokens corresponding to these million ether are generated (106 * 1018). Now, the DAO splits and the childDAO must receive 40% of rewards from the contract and the parent 60%. The contractor spends 0.1 million ether and then is fired returning 0.9 mil ether back to the parentDAO. The parent then renegotiates the same contract for 0.1 million ether but with a different address controlled by the same contractor (maybe the price of ether has jumped 10x). How does the reward token managed account upgrade to reflect the new reality? Who gives it this new information?"

The reasons why an asset goes up or down and finds support/resistance are irrelevant in P&F.
For some reasons price always moves, either it is pump & dump, news etc etc.

From TA point of view, 50s is strong support here.
In order to break from BTC rise, the latter will have to go above 600 at least.

This may happen of course but I suspect BTC will consolidate some time before it moves higher..

Time will tell!

I am accumulating in the 48-52 area, people wanting lower prices will probably buy in the new brutal bounce:



This is very strong support because:

1) Weekly
2) CLOSE
3) 10% reversal
4) TWO bullish support lines (green lines)
5) Horizontal support at the spread double bottom at 48

The green lines are in fact the main bullish support for the asset, whenever we hit this support we buy the asset with both hands, both feet AND a dick (with the boobs if you are a girl) 

Not sure I understand the question

We hit the horizontal resistance and will probably fall back in the double resistance cross



Very typical CLOSE chart behavior.

Quote:

02:05
Huobi hit 3944 for f@ck's sake
02:05
What do you expect?
02:05
If it was to break 4000 it would have happened in this spike...
02:06
If it does break it, all bets are off...