I can't be arsed to take this discussion any more serious than I do until you come up with some more insightful comparisons than "Bitcoin = pets.com". Same idea as the claims that "Bitcoin = tulip bubble" or "Bitcoin = beanie babies".
There's really no point in arguing with someone who equates a major technological achievement that has half of the computer science world and a few percent of the economical world excited with an online store for pet food, even if both of them underwent a speculative mania phase.
I don't see why not, the analogy works as a distinction between a bubble and the actual revolutionary technological advancement (which is not "bitcoin VS the blockchain" but "bitcoin VS a distributed ledger technology that makes sense"). "major technological achievement that has half of the computer science world excited" Not sure about that claim. There are a lot of computer scientists who are either bashing it or at least acknowledging its big limitations (while admitting that the underlying idea behind the technology is worth it and actually revolutionary, but the blockchain implementation might not the the best one). Same with the "few percent of the economic world". Are you sure you are not biased with these claims? I'm not saying crypto or distributed ledger technologies are a fad. I'm saying that the bitcoin blockchain implementation and especially the idea of a stand-alone currency that is needed in the system is probably a fad. |
|
|
|
Bid & ask sums can be easy manipulated. It is the worst indicator ever.
No. They can be manipulated but you can see it in the big spikes that drop sharply in either the bid sum or ask sums graph. Manipulators don't just leave their walls forever. They put and pull their walls, so their influence on Bid sum and ask sum can be perfectly seen. If you ignore the noise and spikes you get a good picture of demand and supply on exchanges. Bid and ask sums have been reliably used by traders in this forum since forever and they work as a very good predictor for uptrends and downtrends. Every price crash started when ask sum was at minimum. You do not see stop orders in order book. The less orders in order book the more hidden(stop) orders. Again if you ignore the rapid fluctuations you get the picture. I guess a rapid decrease in asks as soon as a crash starts is due to traders panic cancelling their buy orders en masse, and then gradually putting them back up over time. Still, my thread wants to point to the constant, relentless decrease in bid sum over time. And it's NOT getting better right now even if all the bulls here scream "capitulation, new bull market incoming!". That's what I am am mainly talking about here. How can you say this is "all manipulated"? Visible order book is 1-5% of all trades. and > 50% of orders are fake. Dude, do you know that traders here have been using bid/ask sum ratio but especially bid sum as an indicator of new money coming in exchanges that was able to reliably predict uptrends and starts of new rallies (or the end of fake ones)? |
|
|
|
Bid & ask sums can be easy manipulated. It is the worst indicator ever.
No. They can be manipulated but you can see it in the big spikes that drop sharply in either the bid sum or ask sums graph. Manipulators don't just leave their walls forever. They put and pull their walls, so their influence on Bid sum and ask sum can be perfectly seen. If you ignore the noise and spikes you get a good picture of demand and supply on exchanges. Bid and ask sums have been reliably used by traders in this forum since forever and they work as a very good predictor for uptrends and downtrends. Every price crash started when ask sum was at minimum. You do not see stop orders in order book. The less orders in order book the more hidden(stop) orders. Again if you ignore the rapid fluctuations you get the picture. I guess a rapid decrease in asks as soon as a crash starts is due to traders panic cancelling their buy orders en masse, and then gradually putting them back up over time. Still, my thread wants to point to the constant, relentless decrease in bid sum over time. And it's NOT getting better right now even if all the bulls here scream "capitulation, new bull market incoming!". That's what I am am mainly talking about here. How can you say this is "all manipulated"? |
|
|
|
Might be time to go home gents
Someone just cleared the ask on Stamp (> $250), some 2400 coins, in one go. Just getting the engines started still IMO Looks like a high number of coins are being bought and sold back and forth, check the price history on bitcoinwisdom. Here's how I imagine you saying that...  Since you prefer trolling, I'll have some fun myself: Was the $475 November bulltrap "a trend" when you posted this? fap fap fap~
sigh *unzips* fap fap fap |
|
|
|
Might be time to go home gents
Someone just cleared the ask on Stamp (> $250), some 2400 coins, in one go. Just getting the engines started still IMO Looks like a high number of coins are being bought and sold back and forth, check the price history on bitcoinwisdom. Here's how I imagine you saying that... Nice trolling. You still haven't answered my post here: Especially the second part. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=931714.msg10236780#msg10236780 |
|
|
|
"Short interest". Again, this is not short interest. And again, shorts are not that incredibly high considering the decrease in their USD value and especially considering the quantity of longs.
LOL never said double digits were gonna come overnight or without prolonged bulltraps.
I know you are trying to sound clever. But you really aren't. http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/shortinterest.aspAight, you win on this one  Never heard of the expression "short interest" for "number of shorts" or "BTC swaps". I would have used "short interest" for the actual interest you get on coins (just checked, it's 0.033%, the flash return rate on bitfinex). But yeah it appears you are right with the term then. Still, number of shorts don't seem that high to me. Until strong signs or reversal, the bearmarket is not over, and longs have to be sold exactly as the shorts have to be bought back... |
|
|
|
Might be time to go home gents
Someone just cleared the ask on Stamp (> $250), some 2400 coins, in one go. Just getting the engines started still IMO Looks like a high number of coins are being bought and sold back and forth, check the price history on bitcoinwisdom. |
|
|
|
bulltrap probably already over, I thought btc could do better. Might be time to go home gents  |
|
|
|
I don't know why you keep talking about the number of shorts. 18k is not high at all considering that their USD value is a lot less what it was when price was at $500 or $400.
Longs are still A LOT higher, as always...
And technically what you are referring to is not "short interest" but quantity of BTC swaps. The short interest is how much you are getting if you are lending your coins (0.005% or something, haven't checked that in a while), and that is not an bullish/bearish indicator whatsoever.
Because the number of short swaps are heavily correlated with the price movements. Please look back through the finex all time chart and find higher short interest than the last three months, thanks. I know you have to be pedantic because you have been wrong about double digit coins now for 61% and counting from the low. "Short interest". Again, this is not short interest. And again, shorts are not that incredibly high considering the decrease in their USD value and especially considering the quantity of longs. LOL never said double digits were gonna come overnight or without prolonged bulltraps. |
|
|
|
Bid & ask sums can be easy manipulated. It is the worst indicator ever.
No. They can be manipulated but you can see it in the big spikes that drop sharply in either the bid sum or ask sums graph. Manipulators don't just leave their walls forever. They put and pull their walls, so their influence on Bid sum and ask sum can be perfectly seen. If you ignore the noise and spikes you get a good picture of demand and supply on exchanges. Bid and ask sums have been reliably used by traders in this forum since forever and they work as a very good predictor for uptrends and downtrends. |
|
|
|
|
I don't know why you keep talking about the number of shorts. 18k is not high at all considering that their USD value is a lot less what it was when price was at $500 or $400.
Longs are still A LOT higher, as always...
And technically what you are referring to is not "short interest" but quantity of BTC swaps. The short interest is how much you are getting if you are lending your coins (0.005% or something, haven't checked that in a while), and that is not an bullish/bearish indicator whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
The idea is that a reduction in the supply side can attract an increase in demand, similarly to what happened back when the ASICs hit us: Profit margins increased dramatically and people suddenly were able to afford to hoard the daily mined coins.
You mean the decreased asks on Stamp? I'm pretty sure it's just because traders got their coins out of the exchange after the hack and moved their coins to other exchanges. That decrease in asks is not necessarily observed in other exchanges (some of them show an opposite picture like BTC-E and BTCChina), not in that magnitude anyway and not without a bigger decrease in bids. What if that new fiat is waiting for a proven uptrend to start? Not much new money would invest now with the possibility to loose 50+%. Once we get a "yep this is a bull market" sentiment, we will see a rise in the market cap. Right now, there isn't, which your charts show.
Yes it's possible but if you look at the start of the $1000 bubble you can see that big injection of fiat actually came first while price was relatively stable, then after a while price was catching up. So basically the raise in bids preceded the price increase. Sure, it's possible people are waiting. But still, demand constantly and gradually decreasing and not FOMOing after temporary bottoms is troubling news for the bulls. That means a lot of people are not convinced that the bottom is in and that a new bull market will follow. How do you expect to reach new highs if there is no new fiat coming in guize?
Comments on the quick analysis are appreciated.
Well, technically you don't need no FIAT in order to reach a new ATH. Coins get sold and bought over and over again and again! It's effectively a never ending cycle. Sure, new FIAT helps, but it's not necessary. That being said, I don't think we won't see new FIAT hitting the exchanges very soon, i.e. next week. If the rallies are not supported by a new injection of big money being sent to exchanges and volume is not big enough the uptrends are not sustainable and traders (whether you like it or not they mostly set the price and provide liquidity, not the permabulls  ) will dump because they will se lack of strength. Exactly as it happened with the rally that we had in 2014 that topped at $680 in the middle of the bear market. It was a "fake" recovery with mostly margin longs and low volume, no real actual money flowing in. That's why it failed and price crashed again. |
|
|
|
|
How do you expect to reach new highs if there is no new fiat coming in guize?
Comments on the quick analysis are appreciated.
|
|
|
|
I'm not going to waste my time with your shitty arguments, because you'll come up with some other stupid answer that makes no sense and still think you're right. Arguments should speak for themselves, looks like you don't have any. |
|
|
|
|
computer/internet were a revolution, yeah.
Pets.com, wasn't.
Same with bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
Actually the CHINEESE were not the only sole cause of the price jump. The Silkroad was BOOMING at that time. Another "silkroad" 3.0 is coming soon and it will drive the price up again just watch.
SilkRoad was busted in early Oct/2013. Some (not me) claim that the bust actually helped the price, because it dispelled the perception of "currency of drug users and criminals". But SilkRoad may have been responsible for the famous Mar/2011 bubble. I gather that SR started operating on Jan/2011, so the timing seems compatible. If that was the case, it would be useful to understand why that bubble deflated almost completely through the rest of 2011. Understanding that decay could perhaps help us understand the downtrend of 2014, which is often compared to it. Bitcoin allows things to happen that were not before possible. I'm still surprised that you, as a person who was involved with the early computer/internet revolution, do not see the value in this. Not really, he understands how it's mostly a fad, unlike others here who are just pumping their investment. If you think what you just said, I would appreciate you answer the points I raised in my post here. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=931714.msg10236780#msg10236780 |
|
|
|
Actually the CHINEESE were not the only sole cause of the price jump. The Silkroad was BOOMING at that time. Another "silkroad" 3.0 is coming soon and it will drive the price up again just watch.
SilkRoad was busted in early Oct/2013. Some (not me) claim that the bust actually helped the price, because it dispelled the perception of "currency of drug users and criminals". But SilkRoad may have been responsible for the famous Mar/2011 bubble. I gather that SR started operating on Jan/2011, so the timing seems compatible. If that was the case, it would be useful to understand why that bubble deflated almost completely through the rest of 2011. Understanding that decay could perhaps help us understand the downtrend of 2014, which is often compared to it. 2011 was a penny stock pump&dump, that's the reason it deflated. But still, marketcap was still nothing and it could easily be pumped a lot higher after some time. Now situation is different. To pump this thing a lot more funds are necessary. Inflation at $500-$1000 is insane so nobody in his right mind would pump this shit knowing that it won't go anywhere anyway. So it probably won't happen. |
|
|
|
Actually the CHINEESE were not the only sole cause of the price jump. The Silkroad was BOOMING at that time. Another "silkroad" 3.0 is coming soon and it will drive the price up again just watch.
SilkRoad was busted in early Oct/2013. Some (not me) claim that the buts actually helped the price, because it dispelled the perception of "currency of drug users and criminals". But SilkRoad may have been responsible for the famous Mar/2011 bubble. I gather that SR started operating on Jan/2011, so the timing seems compatible. If that was the case, it would be useful to understand why that bubble deflated almost completely through the rest of 2011. Understanding that decay could perhaps help us understand the downtrend of 2014, which is often compared to it. The main reasons for the $1000 bubble right after the SR 1.0 seizure were Willy bot and China. |
|
|
|
Nobody answered my question tho.
Why should the average Joe buy bitcoin? For what purposes?
Back when Bitcoin was in the low single digits, I argued that the average Joe who could afford to might pick some Bitcoin as a long-shot bet just in case because the pay-off, in the relatively unlikely event that there was one, could be large. Also for the reasons of reward size, that the actual amount of BTC need not be very large in order to make things pay off in a moderate to good scenario. At $1000, we were approaching what I considered the 'moderate win' scenario. I took some profits and re-balanced my portfolio there which was in-line with the plan I made when I was buying. Different times now. I'd not make any suggestions at this point. Personally I would still probably make a modest bet today if I had a strong desire to diversify. That is still "speculative reasons". The average Joe wants something that is useful, that has a purpose, if the only purpose is "I will get more dollars when I will be able to sell it higher" (IF it goes higher), that is not gonna work to bring "world adoption" to bitcoin. As I explained, there really isn't any point for the average joe to actually use bitcoin as a currency or as a store of value, aside from illicit activities. The only real reason seems to be musical-chairs speculation as an end in itself, and that is not exactly something the average joe might know how to do profitably or be interested in in the first place. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
